报复性侵犯与公开道歉的修辞分析

IF 0.3 0 PHILOSOPHY
Gary McCarron
{"title":"报复性侵犯与公开道歉的修辞分析","authors":"Gary McCarron","doi":"10.1386/ejpc_00006_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article provides a rhetorical analysis of a public apology that was issued by conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh in response to criticism of on-air comments that he made in February 2012. I argue that Limbaugh deployed his apology as a plea for moral\n exoneration, not as a formal admission of misconduct. Hence his apology was meant to absolve Limbaugh from blame by offsetting acknowledgements of wrongdoing (along with expressions of remorse) with an appeal to truth as a force for exculpation.","PeriodicalId":40280,"journal":{"name":"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conciliatory aggression and the rhetoric of public apologies: A rhetorical analysis\",\"authors\":\"Gary McCarron\",\"doi\":\"10.1386/ejpc_00006_1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article provides a rhetorical analysis of a public apology that was issued by conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh in response to criticism of on-air comments that he made in February 2012. I argue that Limbaugh deployed his apology as a plea for moral\\n exoneration, not as a formal admission of misconduct. Hence his apology was meant to absolve Limbaugh from blame by offsetting acknowledgements of wrongdoing (along with expressions of remorse) with an appeal to truth as a force for exculpation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40280,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1386/ejpc_00006_1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Empedocles-European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ejpc_00006_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文对保守派脱口秀电台主持人拉什·林堡在2012年2月发表的公开道歉进行了修辞分析,以回应对其广播评论的批评。我认为,林堡的道歉是为了寻求道德上的开脱,而不是正式承认自己的不当行为。因此,他的道歉旨在通过呼吁真相作为开脱罪责的力量来抵消对不法行为的承认(以及悔恨的表达),从而免除林堡的责任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conciliatory aggression and the rhetoric of public apologies: A rhetorical analysis
Abstract This article provides a rhetorical analysis of a public apology that was issued by conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh in response to criticism of on-air comments that he made in February 2012. I argue that Limbaugh deployed his apology as a plea for moral exoneration, not as a formal admission of misconduct. Hence his apology was meant to absolve Limbaugh from blame by offsetting acknowledgements of wrongdoing (along with expressions of remorse) with an appeal to truth as a force for exculpation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信