【作者】 程中兴；

【导师】 陈新汉；

【作者基本信息】 上海大学 ， 社会学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 谣言、流言与人类的文明一样古老。这样一个亘古而常新的社会现象随着人类社会的发展,其发生的概率不是变小了,而是变大了,其所折射的社会问题不是减少了,而是增多了,因而研究它的现实意义不是减弱了,而是增强了。那么,又该如何对这样一个社会现象进行研究呢?在本文中我们把谣言、流言视作一种人们之间社会互动的过程及其结果,只不过这种互动的纽带既不是人类学意义上的“血缘”、也不是经济学意义上的“利益”,而是语言哲学意义上的“话语”。换句话说,我们认为,谣言、流言的逻辑是籍由话语而展开的,因为离开了人们的话语,谣言、流言就失去了存在之基和能量之源。这样一来,本文对谣言、流言的解读其实是一种以话语为中心的社会互动分析。那么,本文又是如何分析的呢?我们重点考察了谣言、流言中人们话语互动的四个方面:首先,互动离不开主体。在谣言、流言中究竟是谁在说话呢?由于真实生活中的人总是处于不同的话语圈之中,由此形成了一个复杂性的话语主体,所谓“见人说人话,见鬼说鬼话”其实就是对话语主体复杂性的一个通俗描述。我们认为,话语主体的复杂性意味着主体从来不是同一的,而是分裂的。这种分裂主要表现在两个维度:内在维度和外在维度。内在维度中除了“有意识的自我”外,还包含了“无意识的他者”,因此,仅仅停留在传统认识论所说的笛卡尔意义上的“我思”的维度是不够的,我们还要看到谣言、流言主体在互动时受到无意识力量的左右;外在维度中除了在场的“说话者”外,还存在着不在场但出场的“他者”,一般来说,“在场的说话者”通过“不在场的他者”来表达自己的意向性,“不在场的他者”通过“在场的说话者”强化了话语的力量。此外,作为一种“社会人”,话语主体在互动时深受所居社会“圈子”的影响。其次,互动不能没有焦点。在谣言、流言中,人们的话语互动总是围绕着某个人或某事来进行。我们在第四章通过历史(中国26史和西方9史)和现实(Google和百度“新闻”)两个维度对谣言、流言的焦点人物和焦点事件进行了统计分析,分析的基本结论是,谣言、流言焦点人物主要分为两大类:一类是那些有着极强社会资源控制能力,因而说话很有份量的人,这部分人占绝大多数;另一类是那些被社会边缘化的失语人,这部分人占极少数;普通人一般不会成谣言、流言的焦点人物。无论是拥有强势话语的人,还是失语的人,在谣言、流言中他们都是通过“否定”的方式来凸显其存在的,只不过前者一般来说是被动的“否定”,后者一般来说是主动的“否定”罢了。因此,谣言、流言中的人物往往在横向上折射出了那个社会的结构的两极,在纵向上则折射出了不同时期的社会结构变迁。谣言、流言中的事件大部分要么是一种对现实的曲解,要么是一种对未来的预言。在这中间“真理”成为一种修辞,因为真实性与话语群体紧密地联系在一起,话语群体认为是真实的就是真实的;在这中间谣言、流言还成为一种指引人们行动的自我实现的手段,有些本来是子虚乌有的事,结果被说成了谣言、流言中的那个样子。无论是焦点人物的分析还是焦点事件的分析,似乎更能让我们远离意识形态的干扰,更能让我们感受到真实、细致、多样的社会结构的力量。此外,在对焦点的分析中,我们发现很多谣言、流言总在历史中能找到它的影子,这表明一个群体的社会记忆的作用突出。再次,互动总是表现为一定的形式。依据谣言、流言内容在话语互动过程中是否发生变异,我们把谣言、流言的话语形式分为变异性的话语形式和非变异性的话语形式。为什么有的发生变异了,有的没有发生变异呢?我们认为,媒介的偏向性不可低估,从话语的维度来说,口头媒介最易使话语发生变异,因而具有变异性偏向;印刷媒介最不易使话语发生变异,因而具有非变异性偏向;电子媒介则显得有得“中庸”,居于两者之间。在探讨谣言、流言话语变异性与否的主要原因后,我们还运用社会网络分析法对美国历史上最大的校园枪击案中“凶手是中国人”的讹传个案进行分析,发现谣言、流言的话语形式背后的社会结构同时具有小世界和无标度的特征,其中还存在着两个重要的引爆点,没有这两个引爆点,谣言的传播速度和能量将大为削弱。此外,我们还探讨了谣言、流言话语形式中的社会场景作用。最后,互动总是有原因的。我们在第六章探讨了人们为什么造谣的话语之因。从话语的维度来说,所谓造谣其实包含着一个心灵与世界(社会)间双向话语投射的过程。为什么是双向投射而不是单向投射呢?依据塞尔的言语行为理论,这是因为在心灵和世界(社会)间存在着相互适应的需求,谣言、流言就是人们获得心灵和世界(社会)间相互适应的手段之一。那么在什么样的情况下人们会选择谣言、流言这样的手段呢?我们认为,存在着两种情况:“过于有序”和“过于无序”,而无论是“过于有序”还是“过于无序”,它们往往使人们以言行事的能力进一步受限,进而在“言”与“行”两个向度之间形成一种更强大张力,当达到一定的临界点时,如出现极权或社会暴乱,心灵和世界(社会)间严重失衡,与此同时人们以言行事能力却被进一步削弱,这时候谣言就成为一种有效的平衡手段之一。此外,由于意识形态的基本倾向是维护既有社会秩序的,因此我们在很多谣言的个案中都会发现它的作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Rumor is as old as human civilization. As the development of human society, both the probability of its occurrence and the problems it reflects are not decreasing but increasing. Therefore, the practical significance of its research is not weakened, but strengthened. Then, how can we do our study about such a social phenomenon? In my study, the rumor was taken as a process and result of social interaction between people. However, the ties of this interaction is not "consanguinity relation" viewing from Anthropology or "interest" viewing from Economics, but "discourse" viewing from Philosophy of Language. In another words, the logic of rumor is presented by discourse. Because the rumor would lose its foundation for existence and source of energy, if there’s no longer people’s discourse. Therefore, the interpretation of the rumor in this study is actually a kind of discourse analysis of the social interaction. Then, how do perform this analysis?It is mainly investigated from four aspects of the people’s discourse interaction of the rumor:Firstly, no subject no discourse. It must be studied that the subject who is speaking in rumor? Persons in the real life always exist in the different networks of discourse, thus forming a complex group of subjects. The so-called "Kind words to gentleman, wily words to evil" is a popular description of the complexity of the discourse subject. Moreover, the complexity of discourse subject implies that the subjects are never the same, but the split. This split is presented in two dimensions: internal and external dimensions. The internal dimensions include "the self-conscious" and "the other-unconscious". So we must pay our attention not only to understand the subject viewing from "I think therefore I am", but also to the impact of unconscious when subject interact with discourse. The external dimensions include "The Presence of the ’Speaker’" and "The Absent Existence of the’Other’". Generally, the former express their intention by the latter, the latter strengthen their discourse power by the former. In addition, as the persons in the society, the subject of discourse is hardly influenced by the social network when they interact with each other. Secondly, discourse interaction must have focus. In a rumor, people’s discourse interaction is always around a person or a matter. In chapter four, focus people and focus events of rumors, which existed in the history and reality are analyzed with statistical methods. The references about history is coming from 26 history books in china and 9 history books in western, and the reference about the reality is coming from the news website of Google and Baidu(1.1-6.13/2007). And the basic conclusion of this analysis is that the focus of people and event in rumor can be divided into two categories: One is those who have a strong ability to control social resources and thus have enough discourse power. Those people are majority of the focus in rumor. Another is those who were marginized by society and thus they have no discourse power. And they are minority of the focus in rumor. The ordinary people are hardly the focus of rumor. Either those who have enough discourse power or have no discourse power, they all present themselves by negative way, which is generally passive for the former and active for the latter. Therefore, the focus people in rumor always reflect the bipolar of the social structure from the horizontal dimension and the social change in different periods from the vertical dimension. And the focus event is either a distortion of reality or a prediction of the future. In this condition, "truth" becomes a rhetorical method in rumor. Because the truthfulness is close together with discourse groups and the truth is actually what the discourse groups take as. In this condition, rumor is also as a kind of self-fulfilling means. That is to say, something which does not exist becomes a reality by rumors. Either the analysis of focus people or focus event can make us be far form the disturbance of ideology and feel the power of the real, detail and various social structures. In addition, during the analyzing the focus, we find a lot of rumor that its "shadow" can be discovered in history. This indicates that the social memory of a group is very important in rumor.Thirdly, discourse interaction always manifests some forms. According to the standard whether it has variations in discourse, the rumor form can be divided into two types, which are variant form and non-variant form. Why there’re variations and non-variant? We think that the media bias should not be underestimated. From the view of discourse, spoken media is easiest to make discourse vary, so it has variant bias. On the contrary, printing media is hardest to make the discourse vary, so it has non-variant bias. And, the effect of electronic media is between the spoken media and printing media, its bias is the average. After discussing the main cause of variation of discourse in rumor, A typical rumor case of "Chinese is murder", which spread during the largest campus shooting in American history, is analyzed with the social network analysis method. We find that the social structure behind the discourse form of rumor has the characteristics of "small-world" and "scale-free" simultaneously. And we also find there are two important "critical point". If there’s no the two "critical point" in a rumor, the speed of spread and energy of rumor will be badly weakened. Moreover, we also discuss the importance of social situation in the discourse form of rumor.Finally, discourse interaction is always initiated by some reasons. The discourse reason of rumor spreading is analyzed in chapter six. We find rumor spreading has a bidirectional discourse projection processes from the perspective of discourse: one is from the mind to the world (society); the other is from the world (society) to the mind. Why it is not unidirectional but bidirectional? Because there is an adaptation between the world (society) and the mind according to the theory of speech acts raised by Searle, the rumor is just the means for people to acquire the adaptation between the world (society) and the mind. When do people use the means of rumor? We think that there are two special conditions: "over-order" and "over-disorder". Both of them usually restrict the ability of discourse for people, and then form a strong tension between speech and action of discourse. When it reaches a critical point, such as totalitarian authority or social rebellion, serious imbalance occurred between mind and world (society), and the ability of discourse was further weakened simultaneously, people have to use rumor to acquire a balance between mind and world (society). In addition, we found that ideology is important in a lot of rumor cases, because the basic trend of ideology is to maintain social order.更多还原