2 The Theoretical Framework

2.1 A Review of Critical Discourse Analysis

In the 1970 s, Discourse Analysis began to focus on the social power of the language phenomenon. After ten years of development, to the late 1980 s, Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis becomes more mature. "Critical linguistics" advocated revealing the language which is used to discriminate, bewitch, manipulate and control, and enhance people's "language consciousness" through Critical Discourse Analysis in order to improve people’s language application ability of appreciation and criticism. The main theoretical origin of Critical Discourse Analysis is western Marxism. Western Marxism which emphasizes the social culture function thinks that the capitalists mainly rely on culture (of course including ideology) to establish and maintain (or representation) its social relations. They think that too much emphasis on the role of the economic foundation in the past is not correct. Although Critical Discourse Analysts do not always say that they belong to western Marxist school, but indeed the west Marxism have a great influence on their research.

Critical Discourse Analysis connects language and language use with its ideological meaning analysis. Language is not only an objective media, but also a kind of social practice. Language not only reflects the social reality, but also becomes the intervening power of social process. Therefore, Critical Discourse Analysis is a social analysis to discourse especially the public discourse and official discourse, in order to improve the readers' sensitivity to language, make them realize that there is a subtle relationship between language and the modern social life, language use and social power relations of inequality between complex connection, urge readers to realize the critical reading, enhance their control consciousness of the public discourse.

2.2 Theoretical Foundation and Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis文献综述

As a tool of linguistics, Critical discourse analysis has not formed its own complete methodology, it mainly adapt to bringism (Xin Bin, 2005). In fact, the CDA leading scholars in the world respectively represented two different research methods and direction of CDA: the first one is Norman Fairclough who is much influenced by Michel Foucault and M.A.K.Halliday, the second one is Ruth Wodak who study from the point of view" a discourse and historical research method ". Its theoretical difference lies in Ruth Wodak and VanDijk is mainly from the perspective of ideology and cognition on explaining “text planning” model; but Fairclough mainly adopts Halliday's systemic functional linguistics theory, starting from the utility theory," see language as a form of social practice, trying to let people find out that interactive dialectical relationship had never realized before, which between language and social structure". (Tischer, 2000; Stefan, 2000)

The existence of the society and cultural shows the growing appearance and sublimation of words. As a tool, language has lots of advantages and characteristics that other elements do not have. When we do the research on Critical Discourse, we must contact with society closely, and make it integrate into the society. So, the following eight principles outline the Critical Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 1995; Kress, 1991; Hodge&Kress, 1993; van Dijk, 1998a; Wodak, 1996):

1. Language is a social practice through which the world is represented.

2. Discourse/language use as a form of social practice in itself not only represents and signifies other social practices but also constitutes other social practice such as the exercise of power, domination, prejudice, resistance and so forth.

3. Texts acquire their meanings by the dialectical relationship between texts and the social subjects: writers and readers, who always operate with various degrees of choice and access to texts and means of interpretation. 巴马政治演讲的批判性话语分析(2):http://www.751com.cn/yingyu/lunwen_74327.html