摘要
“妇女人权话语”研究长久以来是批判话语分析和社会学研究领域的热点话题。同时该话题也是国内外妇女生育问题研究的症结所在。但由于妇女人权标准的不一致性,国内外学者在该问题领域一直出现百花齐放、百家争鸣的特点,同时关于该问题的研究也缺乏一整套合理的体系指导(张晓玲1998；张峰2010；苏美玉2012)。就国外研究趋势而言,主流的妇女人权研究仍旧延承了美国女性主义民族中心主义的特点,跨文化的意识没有得到足够的彰显,主要表现在：(1)女性主义者以白人妇女人权的定义作为普适性原则,从而忽略了发展中和不发达国家妇女的其它“受压迫性”特征,比如后殖民主义影响下的压迫、种族压迫、宗教压迫、阶级压迫等；(2)由于非西方国家的重大妇女事件没有受到西方学界的重视,所以第三世界国家的本族妇女研究往往不能与西方学界平等对话；(3)大部分女性主义学者以西方中心主义自居,误解或部分曲解第三世界国家的妇女人权现象严重,容易以偏概全,使结论往往与事实背道而驰(Tripp2000；Mullally2005；Ferree&Tripp2006；Viterna&Fallon2008；Wood2008；Girard2009；Cho2013)。而国内“妇女人权”研究更是存在明显的滞后性：1)妇女问题研究的学科分界过于明显,社会实际问题的解决和妇女理论研究出现断裂；2)妇女人权话语研究多集中于法学、妇女学和政治学领域,作为关注语言本体的语言学界虽与话语形式直接相关联,但却鲜有涉猎,性别语言差异研究仍是当下语言学界的主流,缺乏学科对话；3)研究疆界的地域局限性使得国内妇女人权研究缺乏比较性视野,较于印度、非洲等第三世界国家妇女发展而言,本国学者不擅长比较研究,这种劣势造成我国妇女人权发展的狭隘性和不可知性。(陈雁2004；邵华2010；顾家祖、张豫1998；李建盛1997；乔以钢、刘堃2010；苏美玉2012)。
除受以上学界围堵以外,中国的妇女人权话语也受到现实生活的打击。这种打击主要来源于美国因中国实行计划生育的国策而引发的一系列中美争端。中美关于妇女人权发展的观点始终存在差异。一方面,中国计划生育经常被美国媒体报道为“强制性操控”,大量中国妇女“被迫”堕胎和“残害”的报道频频出现在美国历年的国别人权报告中,使得中国妇女形象长期被扭曲、误解。另一方面,美国国际开发署利用这一控诉,长期干涉中国内政,并借此调离其在世界人口基金组织的所有捐助,致使中国妇女生育服务机构的国际援助受到严重损失,中国妇女的发展因此也受到严重阻碍。这种西方学术的围堵和现实的挤压,迫使中国妇女研究在国际学术的舞台上不断被扭曲、歪解抑或排斥在“主流”标准之外。作为新生代妇女研究学者,我们有责任、也有义务关注本族妇女发展、扫清各种影响本族妇女进步的障碍,同时这也是本项课题研究将妇女生育问题作为个案的出发点所在。
本研究将“妇女人权话语”界定于“女性主义话语研究”范畴体系之下,是基于话语分析和社会性别相关联的宏观与微观结合的社会语言学研究视角。“女性主义话语研究”(feminist discourse analysis)主要指对性别、社会性别关系同权力的交织,以及各种蕴含性别意义的社会重大事件的批判性分析,包括贫困、性别歧视等热点问题(Wood&Kroger2008:215)。其研究方法分门别类,具体包括：女性主义的会话分析(feminist conversation analysis)；女性主义的批评话语分析(feminist CDA);女性主义社会心理学的话语分析(feminist discursive analysis in social psychology)；女性主义后结构主义(feminist poststructuralism)。这些方法与相关理论都无不产生于西方,并受到西方功能主义的语言观的影响,所以研究者无法正视妇女问题的文化或历史语境,从而忽略了某些女性主义话语所对应的地域、时空性(孙中欣、张莉莉2006)。一言以蔽之,目前女性主义话语研究存在三大问题和难点：(1)研究对象的片面化和普遍化,使得中国女性的特殊发展不断被边缘化；(2)研究方法的陈旧化,会话分析和叙事分析作为女性主义话语学者的主要研究方法过于单一,不能有效将评价研究与民族志研究、跨文化研究、语料库研究等相结合；(3)研究问题缺乏与西方女性主义民族中心主义的对话性,中国的女性组织或个人在国际舞台上无法或很难得到重视。
基于以上各种原因,我们认为我国本族妇女人权研究亟需从以下三方面加以扩展：(1)从历史—文化的角度来研究妇女人权发展：通过跨文化、跨历史的比较分析,合理化解释不同政治语境下民族妇女身份构建的异质性,对以往西方中心化模式的美式人权结构进行彻底颠覆和挑战,以便于更加全面、系统和批判性地认识第三世界国家妇女人权的发展和进步；(2)研究需注重东西方对话：加强比较性研究将有助于促进中美关于妇女人权发展的跨文化交流,为妇女人权的国际争端事件解决得到有效话语应对策略指导；(3)立足本国妇女现状和本民族理论的指导：发现并解决本族妇女压迫性的各种源头,澄清各种扭曲性事实,努力提高中国妇女的正面国际形象。
鉴于上述研究现状和趋势发展,本研究结合文化话语分析的理论,拟提出一套跨文化交际视角下的妇女人权话语应对策略研究框架。我们希望运用文化话语分析的策略和手段,来重构妇女人权研究的框架体系,以弥补妇女人权研究长期存在的西方中心主义化的理论缺陷。以下我们将分别从研究对象、研究问题、研究方法和研究发现上展开介绍。本研究以关注中国妇女人权的文化性为出发点,是将话语分析和社会学相结合的跨学科研究。首先,我们以中国妇女人权的国家话语为研究对象,以中美双方在中国妇女人权发展中的计划生育争端为突破口,展开具体的交际事件分析,反思妇女人权发展的文化斗争性及其中美外交语境下的特殊复杂性。其次,我们立足于中国国家政府群体如何利用话语策略协商并处理各种妇女生育权争端这一研宄问题,观察该群体在生育权问题解释中所采取的各种应对话语方式,其中包括各种国内外应对话语特征、原则和策略。本研究目的就在于帮助中国或政府机构今后能更加有效应对国际妇女人权发展纠纷事件,同时使西方更好地理解中国特殊语境下关于妇女生育发展的话语言说方式。
基于以上研究目标,我们将研究问题设计如下：(1)中国妇女的生育问题是以何种话语方式被美国政界所传播,即美国政府是通过哪些话语行为和修辞策略来传播?这种言语行为背后的目的是什么?(2)中国政府又以怎样的话语方式来应对国内外因生育问题引发的各种危机?在对外宣传中政府精英使用了哪些话语策略和技巧?存在的问题是什么?3)双方在相互交流中存在哪些误区、文化冲突?4)对中国政府精英的话语策略的研究对中国妇女人权发展有哪些启示?
鉴于此,我们认为：中国关于妇女人权的话语不应只局限于国家、政府或机构对相关妇女人权的定义、解释和规范,还应包括国家机构对各种权利争端事件处理的应对性话语,比如计划生育争端中国家政府群体的话语策略机制。因为这部分话语作为一种文化现象的表征,由本民族内部妇女人权发展的社会实践所决定,同时也反过来影响着该民族妇女人权的发展、进步和前途。本研究将从地理位置的区域性进行划分,以妇女生育问题为案例,将中国妇女人权的国家话语概括为：对内妇女人权政治话语和对外妇女人权政治话语。(1)对内话语：包括本国自1949年以来现当代关于妇女人权的一切法律、规章和制度；妇女发展报告(指导纲领和发展效果报告)；国家新闻办公室发表的各种发布会；以及国家政府官员为妇女生育问题所做的各种宣传活动(包括正式的座谈、谈话、政治讲习和各种非正式的宣传活动)；(2)对外话语：中国就美国国际开发署抨击我国计生政策发布的公开信、政府新闻、政府白皮书。本研究试图通过对内和对外两个层面的研究,来发现政府精英群体在处理妇女生育问题争端中的各种得失利弊、问题和不足,以便国家、政府和相关组织采取更为有利的话语策略来应对各种因妇女人权产生的交际危机。
就研究意义而言,本研究立足将理论与实践相结合的原理,希冀从理论上和实践上对我国本族妇女的人权研究添砖加瓦。理论上,(1)我们对中国妇女人权发展的理论构建进行梳理并弥补多年来国内在妇女人权发展领域的理论缺陷；(2)我们将文化话语分析(CDS)和妇女人权研究相结合,试图从话语生产和理解的视角建立一套妇女人权的文化话语分析框架；(3)突破传统的女性语言研究的内容分析法,将妇女问题研究与跨文化交际相结合,使用跨文化比较法、历史文献法厘清中美妇女发展上的不同文化政治；(4)使用话语学与社会学研究相结合,也是当下社会学研究的前沿方向,它不仅可以弥补国内社会学的研究不足,同样对跨文化的女性主义研究也是一次全新的阐释。实践上,(1)本研究通过剖析美国政府机构的对华妇女人权外交策略,重解其话语动机,使美霸权主义的特征暴露无遗；(2)中美比较分析可以促进妇女在国际传播中的全面发展,具有十分重要的现实意义,有利于营造国际妇女发展工作的互动性舆论环境；(3)对中国国家政府精英群体就妇女生育问题的各种话语特征的分析,有助于帮助我们发现更多交际的问题、缺陷与不足,以便我国媒体和相关党政机关群体建立更加快速、有效的话语策略,以应对本族妇女发展在国际舞台上碰到的各种争端和误解。
研究方法上我们主要使用定性研究的方法,将文化话语分析与交际民族志相结合,分析中国政府精英群体就解决妇女生育问题所涉及的一切国内外应对话语中的话语特征、原则和策略。为此,我们根据妇女人权话语本身的文化性特征,设计了一套适合人权话语研究的理论框架结构——双“G”模型(Grand-frame analysis and Ground-based analysis)。该模型以人权话语的文化交际性为主轴,提出分别从人权话语的文化斗争性(cultural struggle)和文化异质性(cultural diversity)两方面进行自上而下的研究思路。自上,我们通过对中美话语的跨文化、跨历史的对比分析,凸显中国政府精英群体就生育争端对外应对的话语策略和行为；至下,我们立足田野调查,通过访谈和参与性观察的方法来描述和再现政府群体在处理国内妇女生育问题中的具体言说方式。这种自上而下的整合性研究最大的好处就在于便于研究者从文化批判的视角更全面、整体地分析研究对象。在上述整合性理论结构的前提下,我们将研究内容具体分为话语策略分析和框架分析两个方面。在话语策略分析上,我们分别从话语修辞、语用策略多个方面出发,对在妇女生育问题的一系列交际事件中出现的话语主体所表达的一切言语和非言语行为做出有效的微观语言分析。在话语框架分析上,我们注重分析话语主体如何从整体交际结构上将这些话语策略系统化、合理化、内省化,即说话人在交际过程中所采用的描述性或表象性结构特征。话语框架分析的具体范畴包括五大要素：交际主体(包括说话人和听话人)、内容与形式、主体间交往关系、交际渠道(包括媒介使用)、交际目的(和结果)。
全文就结构而言,共分为六个章节。这六个章节分别从属于三大板块：1.研究的目的、问题、理论和方法(第一、二、三章)；2.研究主体和过程(第四、五章)；3.研究的结果和启示(第六章)。第一章主要简要交代本课题研究的背景、研究的动机、原则和策略、研究的目的和研究问题的提出,以及本课题研究的全文书写结构。第二章作为文献综述,主要完成两大任务：一是对本研究中所使用的关键词条和术语进行解释说明(包括妇女人权的定义；言语行为；话语策略)；二是妇女人权话语的国内外研究现状和反思。第三章从理论和研究方法上对妇女人权的文化话语研究框架做出梳理,阐释了人权话语研究的“双G”分析结构,分析了文化话语研究和交际民族志研究相结合的理论依据。其次,全文定性研究的数据搜集和整理过程也在这一部分有所介绍。第四章和第五章我们分别从中国国家政府群体对内和对外两个层面的应对话语进行剖析,归纳和总结了该群体在言说妇女生育问题中的话语策略和规则。第六章介绍了本课题研究的发现、结果和启示,以及研究中的不足和对后续研究的意见和建议。
通过妇女人权的文化话语研究,我们发现“人权”修辞不是中国国家关于妇女生育问题的主要话语表述方式。它作为西方中心主义原则下的特殊界定概念,无法也不能准确解释非西方国家(特别是第三世界国家)的特殊妇女问题。我们的研究表明：中国国家政府群体以“和”话语的特殊方式来协商国内外各种“权利”危机,在这种“和”话语的原则和文化心理暗示下,“权利”逐步被转嫁为“发展”。所以关于妇女“计划生育”的政府话语呈现出激励性、鼓动性、文化塑造性和文娱性的复杂特征。要理解中华语境下妇女人权的特殊意义,我们就必须要理解政府机构关于妇女人权的各种话语言说方式和原则(包括“和”原则、“无为而治”原则、“正名”原则、“关系”原则、“象”原则),以及这种言说方式背后隐藏的中国文化心理性。总而言之,这种基于文化话语分析的新型研究思路,不仅能从学术上对妇女人权研究的理论体系进行完善,为当下立足本族妇女研究的研究者们提高更宽阔的研究视角；同时,它也能从现实上关照妇女群体,给广大政府精英群体制定提供一定的启示,便于决策制定者们制定更为合理、有效的传播方式。
This dissertation is utilizing a cultural discursive perspective into women's right studies. By integrating methods of Cultural Discourse Studies (CDS) and the Ethnography of Communication, it aims at exploring into how the Chinese political elites negotiate the rights conflicts in the family planning issue through discursive strategies. Based on a suggested theoretical framework of "Double-G" model (Grand-frame and Ground-based analysis), this study makes a full-grained analysis of the discursive properties, strategies and principles of the Chinese political elites in talking about women's reproductive rights and family planning conditions. In responding towards the external conflicts with the U.S. over Chinese family planning conditions, Chinese political elites preferred shaping family planning within a discursive framework of cultural heritage, social development, and domestic equilibrium; however, the U.S. counterpart does a favor in constructing the issue within a universal rights discourse. In responding towards the internal conflicts with the indigenous people, the elites speak more cooperatively and considerately for the sake of strengthening the relationship between the government and the people. By exploring into both the externally and internally responding discourses of Chinese political elites in dealing with women's rights conflicts, we find that the elites negotiate the conflicts in the family planning issue through certain discursive strategies under the principles of "equilibrium","non-interference","rectification", "guanxi", and "image". We also conclude that such Chinese discursive principles in talking about women's rights are rooted from the cultural psychology of "equilibrium" of indigenous Chinese people. Though such an "equilibrium" discourse against rights fails to be as argumentative, eloquent, and persuasive as the western rights rhetoric, it is more effective in helping the political elites negotiate the conflicts between the government and the people, which is encouraging, inspiring, educating, and entertaining—namely, others-oriented.
引文
1 http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/index.htm
http://www.china.com.cn/policy/txty/2007-03/08/content_7926312.htm
4 1980.9.10,《中华人民共和国婚姻法》第二条规定“实行计划生育”。第五条规定“结婚年龄,男不得早于22周岁,女不得早于20周岁。晚婚晚育应与鼓励。
6 "Vienna Declaration on Human Rights 1993", Vienna,14-25 June 1993, U.N. Doc. A/CONF.157/24 (Part I) at 20 (1993).
8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Congress_in_relation_to_the_president_and_Supreme_Court
9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAID
0 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_memorandum
12 The same description of Family Planning Conditions in China appears in August4,1999; May17,2001; December20,2001; February13,2003; May26,2005; Junuary26,2006.
16 www.jzjsw.com/ReadNews.asp?NewsID=1588
17 樊迟问仁。子曰：“爱人。”问知,子曰：“知人”。《论语·颜渊第十二》
Aird, J, S. (2004). China:Human Rights Violations and Coercion in One-Child Policy Enforcement. http://wwwc.house.gov/International_relations/108/airl21404.htm (accessed 12/05/2006).
Alexander, M. J.& Mohanty, C. T. (eds.) (1997). Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures. New York:Routledge.
Anderson, R., Baxter, L. A.,& Cissna, K. C. (eds.). (2004). Dialogue:Theorizing Differences in Communication Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage.
Askehave, Inger & Holmgreen, Lise-Lot Te (2011). "Why Can't They Do as We Do?": A Study of the Discursive Constructions of "Doing Culture" in a Cross-border Company, Text & Talk 31(3):271-291.
Augoustinosa, M. (2013). Discourse Analysis in Psychology:What's in a Name?, Qualitative Research in Psychology 10(3):244-248.
Austin, J. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (ed.) (1984). Rabelais and His World. Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
Bakhtin, M. M. (ed.) (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Barton, E. (1999). Informational and Interactional Functions of Slogans and Sayings in the Discourse of a Support Group, Discourse & Society 10(4):461-486.
Baxter, Judith (2003). Positioning Gender in Discourse. Macmillan:Palgrave.
Baxter, L. (2006). Communication as Dialogue. In Shepherd, G. J., St. John, J.& Striphas, T. (eds.). Communication as...:Perspectives on theory. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage,101-109.
Billig, M.& Schegloff, E. (1999). Critical Discourse Analysis and Conversation Analysis:An Exchange between Michael Billig and Emanuel A. Schegloff, Discourse & Society 10(4):543-82.
Blommaert, J. (2001). Context is/as Critique, Critique of Anthropology 21(1):13-32.
Bloommaert, J. (2005). Discourse:A Critical Introduction. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Blount, B. G. (2009). Anthropological Linguistics. In Senft, G., Ostman, J.& Verschueren, J. (eds.). Culture and Language Use. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company,29-40.
Brady, Anne-Marie. (2002). Regimenting the Public Mind:The Modernization of Propaganda in the PRC, InternationalJournal (Canadian Institute of International Affairs) 57(4):563-578.
Brewer, J. D. (2000). Ethnography. Buckingham:Open University Press.
Brewer, Rose (1989). Black Women and Feminist Sociology:The Emerging Perspective, American Sociologist 20(1):57-70.
Brooks & Woolen (1979). Modern Rhetoric. TX:Harcourt College Pub.
Brown & Yule (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Brush, P. S. (1999). The Influence of Social Movements on Articulations of Race and Gender in Black Women's Autobiographies, Journal of Discourse & Society 13: 120-137.
Burke-Ravizza (1999). Human Rights Language and the Liberation of Women. Ph.D Dissertation. Boston:Boston College.
Bystydzienski, J. M.& Sekhon, J. (1999). Introduction. In Bystydzienski J. M.& Bloomington J. S. (eds.). Democratization and Women's Grassroots Movements, Indiana:Indiana University Press,1-21.
Cao, S. Q. (2008). The Discourse of Chinese Literary Theory and the Dialogue Between Western and Chinese Literary Theories, Journal of Multicultural Discourses 3(1):1-15.
Carbaugh, D., Nuciforo, Molina-Markham & van Over (2011). Discursive Reflexivity in the Ethnography of Communication:Cultural Discourse Analysis, Cultural Studies/Critical Methodologies 11(2):153-164.
Celine, Germond-Duret (2007). Construction and Representation of Indigenous Peoples:The Contribution of Discourse Analysis. Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association.
Chang, Tsan-Kuo, Chen, Chin-Hsien & Zhang, Guo-Qiang (1993). Rethinking the Mass Propaganda Model:Evidence from the Chinese Regional Press, International Communication Gazette 51:173-195.
Chara, Saavalab, Kulmala (2010). Influence of Mothers-in-law on Young Couples' Family Planning Decisions in Rural India, Journal of Reproductive Health Matters 18(35):154-162.
Chen, Guoming (2001). Towards Transcultural Understanding:A Harmony Theory of Chinese Communication. In Virginia. H. Milhouse, Molef Kete Asante & Peter O. Nwosu (eds.). Transculture:Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Cross-Cultural Relations. Tousand Oaks, CA:Sage,55-70.
Chen, G. M. (2004). The Two Faces of Chinese Communication. Human Communication 7:25-36.
Cheng, Chungying (1987). Chinese Philosophy and Contemporary Human Communication Theory. In Kincaid D. Lawrence (ed.). Communication Theory: Eastern and Western Perspectives. New York:Academic Press,23-43.
Chilton & Schaffner (1997). Discourse and Politics. In van Dijk (ed.). Discourse as Social Interaction. London:Sage,206-230.
Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing Political Discourse:Theory and Practice. London & New York:Routledge.
Cho, S.Y. (2013). Integrating Equality:Globalization, Women's Rights and Human Trafficking, International Studies Quarterly 1:1-15.
Collins, P. H. (1998). Fighting Words:Black Women and the Search for Justice. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
Condit, C. M. (2006). Communication as Rationality. In Shepherd, G. J., St.John, J.& Striphas, T. (eds.). Communication as...:Perspectives on Theory. Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage,3-12.
Craig, R. T. (1999). Communication Theory as a Field, Communication Theory 9: 119-161.
Craske, N. (1998). Remasculization and the Neoliberal State in Latin America. In Randall V. and Waylen G. (eds.). Gender, Politics and the State. London: Routledge,100-120.
Davies, C. A. (1999). Reflexive Ethnography. London:Routledge.
Dittmer, Lowell (2003). Leadership Change and Chinese Political Development, The China Quarterly 176:903-925.
Dodge, P. Shaou-Whea & Suter, E. A. (2009). It's Okay to Have a Girl:Patronymy and China's One Child Policy, Journal of Women and Language 31(1):13-22.
Doherty, J. P., Norton, E. C.& Veney, J. E. (2001). China's One-child Policy:The Economic Choices and Consequences Faced by Pregnant Women, Social Science Medicine 52:745-761.
Duff, P. A. (2002). The Discursive Co-construction of Knowledge, Identity, and Difference:An Ethnography of Communication in the High School Mainstream, Applied Linguistics 23(3):289-322.
Duranti, A., (1988). Ethnography of Speaking:Toward Linguistics of the Praxis. In Frederick J. Newmeyer (ed.), Language:The Socio-Cultural Context. London: Cambridge University Press,210-228.
Eliasoph, N.& Lichterman, P. (2003). Culture in Interaction, American Journal of Sociology,108(4):735-794.
Englund, Harri (2004). Towards a Critique of Rights Talk in New Democracies:The Case of Legal Aid in Malawi, Journal of Discourse & Society 15(5):527.
Ertelt, S. (2005). China Encourages Couples to Have Girl Babies in New Program. http://lifenews.com (accessed 09/05/2006).
Fairclough, N.& Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In van Dijk (ed.) Discourse Studies:A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London:Sage,258-84.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell Publications.
Ferree, M. M., Gamson, W.A., Gerhards, J.& Rucht, D. (2002). Shaping Abortion in Discourse:Democracy and the Public Sphere in Germany and the United States. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Ferree, M. M.& Tripp, A. M. (2006). Global Feminism:Transnational Women's Activism, Organizing, and Human Rights. New York:New York University Press.
Fetzer, A. (2012). Contexts in Interaction. In Finkbeiner, Rita, Meibauer, Jorg & Schumacher, Petra B. (eds.). What is a Context?:Linguistic Approaches and Challenges. Amsterdam, Netherlands and Philadelphia:John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Fisher, J. (1993). Women and Democracy:For Home and Country. NACLA Report on the Americas 27:30-36.
Formann, L. (1995). Talking Claims:Discursive Strategies in Contesting Property. World Development 23(6):1053-63.
Friedman, Elizabeth (1995). Women's Human Rights:The Emergence of a Movement. In Julie Peters & Andrea Wolper (eds.). Women's Rights, Human Rights:Feminist International Perspectives. New York and London:Routledge,18-35.
Gavriely-Nuri (2009). It is Not the Heroes Who Need This, But the Nation"—The Latent Power of Military Decorations in Israel,1948-2005, Journal of Power, 2(3):403-421.
Gavriely-Nuri (2010a). If both opponents "extend hands in peace" —Why don't they meet? Mythic metaphors and cultural codes in the Israeli peace discourse, Journal of Language and Politics,9(3):449-468.
Gavriely-Nuri (2010b). The Idiosyncratic Language of Israeli "Peace":A Cultural Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (CCDA), Journal of Discourse & Society 21(5):565-585.
Gee, J. P. (1999). An Introduction to Discourse Analysis:Theory and Practice. London and New York:Routledge.
Geertz, C. (1973). The Interpretation of Cultures. New York:Basic Books.
Gibson-Graham, J. K. (1996). The End of Capitalism (as We Knew It):A Feminist Critique of Political Economy. Cambridge, UK:Blackwell.
Gillespie, R. (2002). Architecture and Power:A Family Planning Clinic as a Case Study, Journal of Health & Place,8(3):211-220.
Girard, A. L. (2009). Discourses on Domestic Violence Legislation in Ontario Backlash or Equality?:The Influence of Men's and Women's Rights, Journal of Violence Against Women 15(1):5-23.
Goddard, C.& Wierzbicka, A. (1997). Discourse and Culture. In van Dijk (ed.). Discourse as Social Interaction. London:Sage Publications,231-257.
Gregg, R. (1994). Rhetorical Strategies for a Culture War:Abortion in the 1992 Campaign, Communication Quarterly 42(3):229-240.
Grewal, I.& Kaplan, C. (eds.) (1994). Scattered Hegemonies:Postmodernity and Transnational Feminist Practices. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
Grewal, Gupta & Ong (1999). Asian Transnationalitites:Media, Markets & Migration, Positions:East Asia Cultures Critique 7 (3):389-421.
Gumperz, J. J.& Hymes, D. (1972). Directions of Sociolinguistics:the Ethnography of Communication. New York:Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Gumperz, J. J. (1984). Communicative Competence Revisited. In Deborah Schiffrin (ed.), Meaning, Form, and Use in Context:Linguistic Applications. Washington: Georgetown University Press,278-289.
Halliday, M.A.K & Hassan, R. (1989). Language, Context, and Text:Aspects of Language in a Social-semiotic Perspective. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Hames, M. (2006). Rights and Realities:Limits to Women's Rights and Citizenship after 10 Years of Democracy in South Africa, Third World Quarterly 27: 1313-27.
Heller (2001). Critique and Sociolinguistic Analysis of Discourse, Critique of Anthropology 21(2):117-141.
Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism. New York:Routledge.
Huang, Y.& Shahira, F. (2011). Same Events, Two Stories:Comparing the Photographic Coverage of the 2008 Anti-China/Olympics Demonstrations in Chinese and US Newspapers, The International Communication Gazette 73(8): 732-752.
Hymes, D. H. (1987). Communicative Competence. In Ulrich Ammon, Norbert Dittmar & Klaus J. Mattheier (eds.). Sociolinguistics:An International Handbook of the Science of Language and Society. Berlin:Walter de Gruyter,219-229.
Hymes, D. H. (1962). The Ethnography of Speaking. In Gladwin,T.& Sturtevant,W. (eds.). Anthropology and Human Behavior. Washington:Anthropological Society of Washington,13-53.
Hymes, D. H. (1970). Linguistic Aspects of Comparative Political Research. In Holt & Turner (eds.). The Methodology of Comparative Research. New York:The Free Press,295-341.
Jaquette, J. S.& Wolchik, S. L. (eds.) (1998). Women and Democracy:Latin America and Central and Eastern Europe. Baltimore:The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Jaquette, J. S. (1994). The Women's Movement in Latin America:Participation and Democracy. Boulder:Westview Press.
Jayawardena, K. (1986). Feminism and nationalism in the Third World. London:Zed Books.
Jedd, S. M. (2009). Reproducing Families:the Rhetoric of the Planned Parenthood Federation of America,1942-1973. Ph.D Dissertation. Madison:University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Jeffries, L. (2010). Opposition in Discourse:The Construction of Oppositional Meaning. London and New York:Continuum International Publishing Group.
Kaplan & Durham (eds.) (1999). Between Woman and Nation:Nationalisms, Transnational Feminisms, and the State. NC:Duke University Press.
Kim-puri (2005). Conceptualizing Gender-Sexuality-State-Nation:An Introduction, Gender & Society 19 (2):137-159.
Kipnis, A. (2003). Neoliberalism Reified:Suzhi Discourse and Tropes of Neoliberalism in the People's Republic of China, Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 13(2):383-400.
Kirmani, N.& Phillips, I. (2011). Engaging with Islam to Promote Women's Rights: Exploring Opportunities and Challenging Assumptions, Journal of Progress in Development Studies 11:87-99.
Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in Language:A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Oxford:Blackwell.
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva Reader. Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
Krzyzanowski (2011). Ethnography and Critical Discourse Analysis:Towards a Problem-oriented Research Dialogue, Journal of Critical Discourse Analysis 8(4): 231-238.
Kuo, Sai-hua (2001). Reported Speech in Chinese Political Discourse, Discourse Studies 3(2),181-202.
Ladegaard, H. J. (2008). Pragmatic Cooperation Revisited:Resistance and Non-cooperation as a Discursive Strategy in Asymmetrical Discourses, Journal of Pragmatics 41:649-666.
LaMacchia, E. E. (2003). Women, Abortion, Democracy:Defending Abortion Rights as Constitutionally Protected Political Rights. Ph.D Dissertation. Duke:Duke University.
Landolt, L. K. (2004). Norms, Population Control, USAID and Egypt. Ph.D Dissertaion. Arizona:the University of Arizona.
Lara (2004). Globalizing Women's Rights:Overcoming the Apartheid, Journal of Thesis Eleven 78:61-84.
Lazar, M. (2005). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis. New York:Palgrave Macmillan
Lee, Chin-Chuan & Yang, Junghye (1996). Coverage of a Chinese Student Movement Foreign News and National Interest:Comparing U.S. and Japanese, International Communication Gazette 56(1):1-18.
Lee, Yiu-fai D. (2002). Labor Supply and Family Planning Policy in Rural China. Ph.D Dissertation. Toronto:University of Toronto.
Leeuwen, Van (2008). Discourse and Practice:New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Li, D.X. (2009). Western Universalism Discourse & Asiacentric Proposition, China Media Report Overseas 5(3):21-26.
Litosseliti & Sunderland (2002). Gender Identity and Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Liu,Y. M. (1996). To Capture the Essence of Chinese Rhetoric:An Anatomy of a Paradigm in Comparative Rhetoric, Rhetoric Review 14(2):318-335.
Lowe, L.& Lloyd, D. (eds.) (1997). The Politics of Culture in the Shadow of Capital. Durham, NC:Duke University Press.
Lu, X. (1999). An Ideological/Cultural Analysis of Political Slogans in Communist China, Discourse & Society 10(4):487-508.
Macdonnell, D. (1986). Theories of Discourse. Oxford:Blackwell.
Magnusson, E.& Marecek, J. (2010). Sociocultural Means to Feminist Ends: Discursive and Constructionist Psychologies of Gender. In Kirschner, S.R.& Martin, J. (eds.). The Sociocultural Turn in Psychology:The Contextual Emergence of Mind and Self. New York:Columbia University Press,88-110.
Malinowski, B. (1923). Psycho-Analysis and Anthropology. Nature 112 (2818): 650-651.
Mantere, S. (2008). On the Problem of Participation in Strategy:A Critical Discursive Perspective, Organization Science 19(2):341-358.
Marchand, M.& Parpart, J. (eds.) (1995). Feminism/Postmodernism/Development. New York:Routledge.
Marshall, J. (1977). Acceptability of Fertility Regulating Methods:Designing Technology to Fit People, Preventive Medicine 6(1):65-73.
Martin, E. (1992). The Woman in the Body:A Cultural Analysis of Reproduction. Boston:Beacon Press.
Martinson, A. M. (2009). Identifying Gender Ideology in Web Content:Debates about Feminism. Ph.D Dissertation. Bloomington:Indiana University Press.
Mayer, A. E. (1995). Cultural Particularism as a Bar to Women's Rights:Reflections on the Middle Eastern Experience. In Julie Peters and Andrea Wolper (eds.). Women's Rights, Human Rights:Feminist International Perspectives. New York and London:Routledge,176-88.
Merli, M. G.& Smith, H. L. (2002). Has The Chinese Family Planning Policy Been Successful in Changing Fertility Preferences? Journal of Demography 39(3): 557-572.
Merli, M. G, Qian, Z.& Smith, H. L. (2004). Adaptation of a Political Bureaucracy to Economic and Institutional Change Under Socialism:The Chinese State Family Planning System, Journal of Politics & Society,32(2):231-256.
Mies, Maria (1986). Patriarchy and Accumulation on a World Scale:Women in the International Division of Labour. London:Zed Books.
Miike, Y. (2009). New Frontiers in Asian Communication Theory:An Introduction, Journal of Multicultural Discourses 4(1):1-5.
Mills, S. (1997). Discourse. London and New York:Routledge.
Moallem, Minoo. (2001). Middle Eastern Studies, Feminism and Globalization, Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 26 (4):1265-68.
Moghadam, Valentine (ed.) (1996). Patriarchy and Development:Women's Positions at the End of the Twentieth Century. Oxford:Clarendon Press.
Mohanty, C. T. (1984). Under Western Eyes:Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourses, Boundary 12(3):333-358.
Moller Okin, Susan (1999). Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?, Princeton:Princeton University Press.
Mullally, S. (2005). "As Nearly as May be":Debating Women's Human Rights in Pakistan. Journal of Social & Legal Studies 14:341-358.
Munir, K. A.& Phillips, N. (2005). The Birth of the "Kodak Moment":Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Adoption of New Technologies, Organization Studies 26(11):1665-87.
Naples, N.& Desai, M. (2002). Women's Activism and Globalization:Linking Local Struggles and Transnational Politics. New York:Routledge.
Narayan, Uma (1997). Dislocating Cultures:Identities, Traditions, and Third-World Feminism. New York:Routledge.
Nussbaum, Martha (1999). Sex and Social Justice. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Oberhuber, F.,& Krzyzanowski, M. (2008). Discourse Analysis and Ethnography. In R. Wodak & M. Krzyzanowski (eds.). Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan,182-203.
Okin, Susan (2000). Feminism, Women's Human Rights, and Cultural Differences. In Narayan, U.& Harding, S. (eds.). Decentering the Center:Philosophy for a Multicultural, Postcolonial, and Feminist World. Bloomington:Indiana University Press,26-46.
Olson, K. R. (2003). Methods of Control:An Anthropological Analysis of Fertility Regulating Technologies in Urban China. Ph.D Dissertation. Iowa:University of Iowa.
Osanloo, A. (2009). The Politics of Women's Rights in Iran. Princeton, NJ and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Oyewumi, O. (1997). The Invention of Women:Making an African Sense of Western Gender Discourses. Minneapolis:University of Minnesota Press.
Oyewumi, O. (2002). Conceptualizing Gender:The Eurocentric Foundations of Feminist Concepts and the Challenge of African Epistemologies. http: www.jendajournals.com (accessed 30/04/2011).
Parker, I. (1997). Psychoanalytic Culture:Psychoanalytic Discourse in Western Society. London:Sage Publications.
Penelope, A. (2003). Women's Human Rights and the Conversation across Cultures, Albany Law Review 67 (2):609-616.
Placone, R. J. (2009). Incivility in Written Discourse:The United States Supreme Court and Abortion. Ph.D Dissertation. Pittsburgh:Carnegie Mellon University.
Plummer, Mary L., Wamoyi, Joyce., Nyalali, Kija., Mshana, Gerry., Shigongo, Zachayo S., Ross, David A.& Wight, Daniel (2008). Aborting and Suspending Pregnancy in Rural Tanzania:An Ethnography of Young People's Beliefs and Practices, Journal of Studies in Family Planning 39(4):281-292.
Poonacha,V. (1995). Gender within the Human Rights Discourse. In Meera Kosambi (ed.). Gender and Politics. Bombay:Research Centre for Women's Studies, 65-75.
Potter, J.& Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology:Beyond Attitudes and Behavior. London, New York, and New Delhi:Sage Publications.
Puri, Jyoti (1999). Woman, Body, Desire in Post-Colonial India:Narratives of Gender and Sexuality. New York:Routledge.
Puri, Jyoti (2002). Concerning Kamasutras:Challenging Narratives of History and Sexuality, Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society 27 (3):603-40.
Rai, S. (1996). Women and the State in the Third World. In Afshar H. (ed.). Women and Politics in the Third World. New York and London:Routledge,25-39.
Rao, Arati (1995). The Politics of Gender and Culture in International Human Rights Discourse. In Julie Peters & Andrea Wolper (eds.). Women s Rights, Human Rights: Feminist International Perspectives. New York and London:Routledge,167-75.
Renwick, N.& Cao, Q. (1999). China's Political Discourse towards the 21st Century: Victimhood, Identity, and Political Power, East Asia:An International Quarterly 17(4):111-43.
Richards, Patricia (2005). The Politics of Gender, Human Rights, and Being Indigenous in Chile, Gender & Society 19 (2):199-220.
Robinson, J. (1985). Of Women and Washing Machines:Employment Housework and the Reproduction of Motherhood in Socialist China, The China Quarterly 101: 32-57.
Robinson, J. (1989). Family Policies, Women, and the Collective Interest in Contemporary China, Policy Studies Review 8(3):648-662.
Roman, D. (2001). Gendering Eastern Europe:Pre-Feminism, Prejudice, and East-West Dialogues in Post-Communist Romania. Women's Studies International Forum 24:53-66.
Rothwell, K.S. (1971). Questions of Rhetoric and Usage. Indiana:Little, Brown and Company.
Ruhl, L. (2002). Dilemmas of the Will:Uncertainty, Reproduction and the Rhetoric of Control, Signs:Journal of Women in Culture and Society 27(3):641-663.
Russel, A., Sobo & Thompson. (2000). Contraception across Cultures:Technologies, Choices and Constraints. New York:Berg.
Saavala, M. (2006). Sterilized Mothers:Women's Personhood and Family Planning in Rural South India, In Fruzzetti L, Tenhunen S (eds.). Culture, Power and Agency: Gender in Indian Ethnography. Calcutta:Stree Publishers,135-70.
Sampson, E. E. (1993). Celebrating the Other:A Dialogic Account of Human Nature. San Francisco:Westview.
Saville-Troike, M. (1989). Communicative Competence. In William Bright (ed.). Oxford International Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Saville-Troike (1982). The Ethnography of Communication. Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell.
Sbisa, M. (2009). Speech Act Theory. In Verschueren, J.& Ostman, J. (eds.). Key Notes for Pragmatics. Amsterdam:John Benjamin's Publishing House,229-245.
Scollo, M. (2011). Cultural Approaches to Discourse Analysis:A Theoretical and Methodological Conversation with Special Focus on Donal Carbaugh's Cultural Discourse Theory, Journal of Multicultural Discourses 6(1):1-32.
Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Searle, J.R. (2001). Speech Acts:An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press & Cambridge University Press.
Seidl, D. (2008). General Strategy Concepts and the Ecology of Strategy Discourses: A Systemic-Discursive Perspective, Organization Studies 28(2):197-218.
Shapiro, M. J. (1990). Strategic Discourse/Discursive Strategy:The Representation of "Security Policy" in the Video Age. International Studies Quarterly 34(3): 327-340.
Sharkanskya (2002). Slogan as Policy, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice 4(1):75-93.
Shi-xu (2005). A Cultural Approach to Discourse. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.
Shi-xu, Manfred Kienpointner & Jan Servaes (eds.) (2005). Read the Cultural Other: Forms of Otherness in the Discourses of Hong Kong's Decolonization. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Shi-xu (2007). Discourse as Cultural Struggle. Hong Kong:Hong Kong University Press.
Shi-xu (2009). Asian Discourse Studies, Asian Journal of Communication 19(4):384-97.
Shi-xu & Feng-bing (2010). Contemporary Chinese Discourse Made Understandable:A Cultural Psychological Perspective. In Bond, M. H. (ed.). The Oxford Handbook of Chinese Psychology. Oxford:Oxford University Press, 555-562.
Shi-xu (2011). Understanding the Chinese Discourse of Human Rights as Cultural Response. Journal of Asia Pacific Communication,21(2):196-212.
Shi-xu (2012). Understanding Contemporary Chinese Political Communications, Journal of Language and Politics,11(1):93-114.
Shi-xu. (2013). Discourse and culture:from discourse analysis to cultural discourse studies. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Shi-xu (forthcoming). Cultural Discourse Studies. In Tracy, K., C.Ilie & T. Sandel (eds.). International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction. Malden, MA:Wiley-Blackwell.
Silitonga, S. (2005). Researchers Urge China to Relax its One-Child Family Planning Policy. http://www,voanews.com/english/archive/2005-09/2005-09-26-voa6.cfm?CFID= 100098593&CFTOKEN=69590811 (accessed 24/05/2006).
Speer, Susan (2005). Gender Talk:Feminism, Discourse and Conversation Analysis. NY:Routledge.
Spivak, G. C. (1996). The Spivak Reader. New York:Routledge.
Stephen, L. (1997). Women and Social Movements in Latin America:Power from Below. Austin, TX:University of Texas Press.
Stubbs, M. (1983). Discourse Analysis:The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
Swidler, A. (2001). Talk of Love:How Culture Matters. Chicago and London:The University of Chicago Press.
Tanaka, Lidia (2004). Gender, Language and Culture:A Study of Japanese Television Discourse. Philadelphia:John Benjamins.
Tannen, D. (1994). Gender and Discourse. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Taubmana, G. (1998). A Not-So World Wide Web:The Internet, China, and the Challenges to Nondemocratic Rule, Political Communication 15(2):255-272.
Travis, C.E. (2006). The Communicative Realization of Confianza and Calor Humano in Colombian Spanish. In Goddard C. (ed.). Ethnopragmatics:Understanding Discourse in Cultural Context. Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,199-231.
Tripp, A. M. (2000). Women and Politics in Uganda. Madison:University of Wisconsin Press.
Van Dijk. (2008a). Discourse and Context. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Van Dijk. (2008b). Discourse and Power. Hampshire and New York:Palgrave Macmillan.
Van Dijk (2011). Introduction:The Study of Discourse. In van Dijk (ed.) Discourse Studies:A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi: Sage Publications,1-7.
Viterna, J.& Fallon, K. M. (2008). Democratization, Women's Movements, and Gender-Equitable States:A Framework for Comparison, Journal of American Sociological Review 73:668.
Viterna, J., Fallon, K. M.& Beckfield, J. (2008). How Development Matters:A Research Note on the Relationship between Development, Democracy And Women's Political Representation, International Journal of Comparative Sociology 49(6):455-477.
Walsh, Clare (2001). Gender and Discourse:Language and Power in Politics, the Church and Organizations. Britain:Pearson Education.
Wang, H. Y. (2007). Linking up with the International Track:What's in a Slogan?, The China Quarterly 189:1-23.
Waylen, G. (1994). Women and Democratization:Conceptualizing Gender Relations in Transition Politics. World Politics 46:327-55.
Waylen, G. (1996). Gender in Third World Politics. Boulder:Lynne Rienner Press.
Waylen, G. (2000). Gender and Democratic Politics:A Comparative Analysis of Consolidation in Argentina and Chile, Journal of Latin American Studies 32: 765-93.
Weatherall (2002). Gender, Language and Discourse. East Sussex and New York: Routledge.
Weatherall (2012). Discursive Psychology and Feminism, British Journal of Social Psychology 51(3):463-470.
Wilson, R. (1997). Human Rights, Culture and Context:Anthropological Perspectives. Pluto:Pluto Press.
Wodak, R. (1997). Gender and Discourse. London:Sage Publication.
Wodak, R. (2001). The Discourse-historical Approach. In Wodak & Meyer (eds.). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London:Sage Publications,63-94.
Wodak, R. (2005). Gender Mainstreaming and the European Union:Interdisciplinarity, Gender Studies and CDA. In Lazar M. (ed.). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis. London:Palgrave,90-114.
Wood, L.& Kroger, R. (2008). Doing Discourse Analysis:Methods for Studying Action in Talk and Text. Shanghai:Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press.
Wood, R. (2008). Should the Language and Legislation of Women's Rights be Implemented in the Arguments for Consecrating Women as Bishops in the Church of England?, Journal of Feminist Theology 17(1):21-30.
Woodward, Kath (2000). Questioning Identity:Gender, Class, Nation. NY:Routledge.
Wyrod, Robert (2008). Between Women's Rights and Men's Authority:Masculinity and Shifting Discourses of Gender Difference in Urban Uganda, Journal of Gender & Society 22(6):799-823.
Yang, J. (2003). Framing the NATO Air Strikes on Kosovo Across Countries Comparison of Chinese and US Newspaper Coverage, Gazette:The International Journal for Communication Studies 65(3):231-249.
Yang, N. (2011). Culture and Language Use. Language in Society 40(5):665-666.
Yuval-Davis, Nira (1996). Gender and Nation. London, Thousand Oaks, and New Delhi:Sage Publications.
Zhu,Y, Feng, T. Q.& Warner, M. (2009). The Recent Transformation of Chinese Trade Unions under the New Political Slogan of "Creating Social Harmony". Presented at the 15th World Congress of the International Industrial Relations Association (IIRA).
艾军、韩海燕(2011),从间接言语行为理论看隐喻的“言外之意”,《外语学刊》3：85-87。
曹顺庆(2001),《中国古代文论话语》。成都：巴蜀书社。
陈汝东(1994),言语行为理论的修辞学价值取向,《修辞学习》4：6-8。
陈汝东(2009),论人类传播秩序——一种比较修辞学视角。载牛大勇、郑晓瑛(编),《人类文明中的秩序、公平公正与社会发展》。北京：北京大学出版社,575-585。
陈丽江(2007),《文化语境与政治话语：政府新闻发布会的话语研究》。北京：中国广播电视出版社。
陈雁(2004),“百年中国女权思潮研究”国际学术研讨会综述,《妇女研究论丛》4：61—64。
邓如冰(2006),晚清女性服饰改革：女性身体与国家、细节和时尚——从废缠足谈起,《妇女研究论丛》5：48-54。
董云虎、张世平(1993),《中国的妇女人权》。成都：四川人民出版社。
高彦颐(2005),把“传统”翻译成“现代”：《女界钟》与中国现代性。载王政、陈雁(编),《百年中国女权思想研究》。上海：上海复旦大学出版社。
高元祥(1996),中国计划生育与西方节制生育的文化差异,《河北师范大学学报》19(1)：108—112。
顾家祖、张豫(1998),女权主义与语言,《外语研究》1：45-46。
顾曰国(1994), John Searle的言语行为理论：评判与借鉴,《国外语言学》3：10-16。
国家人口和计划生育委员会宣传教育司(编)(2005),《人口和计划生育宣传教育》。北京：中国人口出版社。
何莲珍(1996),论塞尔的言语行为理论,《浙江大学学报》4(10)：111-116。
蒋永萍(2012),“家国同构”与妇女性别角色的双重建构——计划经济时期中国社会的国家与妇女,《山东女子学院学报》1(101)：1-6。
金天翮(2003),《女界钟》。上海：上海古籍出版社。
金一虹(2006),“铁姑娘”再思考——中国文化大革命期间的社会性别与劳动,《社会学研究》1：169-193。
金正秀(2011),晚清女性传记与国族想象的形成研究,博士学位论文。北京：北京大学。
李建盛(1997),女权／女性话语：一种性别文化政治学,《北京社会科学》4：77-81。
李蕾蕾(2003),旅游目的地形象口号的公众征集：误区与思考,《桂林旅游高等专科学校学报》14(4)：43-47。
李祥云(2009),《离婚诉讼案话语中的权力和亲密关系的性别解读》。济南：山东大学出版社。
李小江、白元淡(2004),阶级、性别与民族国家,《读书》10：3-14。
李银河(2009),生育与村落文化。呼和浩特：内蒙古大学出版社。
刘亚猛(2008),《西方修辞学史》。北京：外语教学与研究出版社。
刘振聪、杨莉芳(2006),言语行为理论批判：传承与嬗变,《天津外国语学院学报》13(2)：25-31。
罗伊娜(2009),言语行为理论的语言哲学反思,《外语学刊》4：12-14。
齐晓安(2006),东西方生育文化比较研究。北京：中国人口出版社。
乔以钢、刘堃(2010),晚清“女国民”话语及其女性形象,《中山大学学报》50(1)：41-50。
邵华(2010),女权和人权,《华中科技大学学报》24(4)：117-118。
施旭、冯冰,(2008),当代中国公共话语的主体分析,《中国社会语言学》10：1-14。
施旭(2010),《文化话语研究》。北京：北京大学出版社。
苏美玉(2012),1993-2011年妇女人权研究综述,《法制与社会》9：162-163。
孙中欣、张莉莉(编)(2006),《女性主义研究方法》。上海：复旦大学出版社。
汪凤炎、郑红(2008),《中国文化心理学》。广州：暨南大学出版社。
王政(2010),创建社会主义女权主义文化阵地：《中国妇女》(1949—1966),《南京大学学报》6：1-19。
项成东(2006),言语行为理论在会话分析中的运用及存在的问题,《外语教学与研究》3：11-14。
薛国林(2012),《形象塑造与社会认同：正面人物宣传报道的社会效果研究》。广州：暨南大学出版社。
杨联芬(2009),晚清女权话语与民族主义。载复旦大学中国古代文学研究中心(编),《中国文学研究第十三辑》。北京：中国文联出版社,295-316。
杨娜(2011),话语视角下的高校女教师发展叙事性研究,《高教探索》6：121-127。
杨娜(2012a),“言不尽意”和语言含蓄论,《当代中国话语研究》4：27-40。
杨娜(2012b),女性主义研究的文化话语转向：试论女性主义话语研究的动因、原则与策略,《当代中国话语研究》5：99-108。
杨娜(2013),基于语料库的媒介话语分析——以纽约时报对华妇女报道为例,《国际新闻界》34(9)：48-58。
尹旦萍(2004a),中国计划生育的先声——论新文化运动时期的产儿限制论,《江汉论坛》5：68-70。
尹旦萍(2004b),女性自己的声音——新文化运动时期女性的女性主义思想,《妇女研究论丛》3：43-47。
张素玲(2007),晚清至五四时期知识分子的性别话语及其社会文化意蕴,《妇女研究论丛》3：26-32。
张晓玲(1995),关于中国的计划生育与人权保护问题的几点思考,《中国党政干部论坛》8：23-25。
张晓玲(1998),妇女人权概念的产生及其意义,《妇女研究论丛》2：27-31。
赵鸿雁、李金慧(2010),政治修辞：媒体外交的传播智慧——基于言语行为理论的框架分析,《国际新闻界》3：56-60。
周蕾(2009),国民政府对女性的塑造和训练——以抗战前新生活运动为中心的考察(1934-1937),《妇女研究论丛》93(03)：49-53。
庄渝霞(2009),资本与行动-生育决策的跨学科研究。上海：上海人民出版社。