中文博客语篇中的性别身份与认同：超女评论背后的身份认同研究
|
摘要
本文通过分析中文博客里的话语致力于研究在中国的社会语境下，男女博客者如何构建性别身份和认同性别身份。由于博客中的话题和语境各异，而身份在不同的社会语境下会不断的变化，因此在研究的过程中，我们选择了在确定的语境下研究性别身份。在本文中，“超级女声”被选做为特定的社会语境，而研究中的所有数据都是在这样的语境下收集的。我们选择超女作为研究的社会语境是因为“超女”的所有参赛者都是女性，而且受观众支持度最高而评出的冠军却不是唱功最好或外表最漂亮的传统意义上的美女。相反，冠军获得者一般有着中性化的外表。这些不寻常的冠军获得者的高支持度是否意味着性别身份的认同在中国已经发生了变化呢?另一方面，博客是一种新生的交流手段，里面的内容更新非常及时，因此，选择博客上对超女评价的文章作为我们的数据，可以有利于我们观察博客者如何在博客中构建自己的性别身份和认同其他人的性别身份。在研究框架上，我们选择了批评性语篇分析和评价理论。通过随机收集到的48个样本，我们首先分析了男女博客者在文章中代词的使用，对获胜者的称呼以及表感情的图释的使用情况，以此来发现男女博客者如何通过语言上的异同来建构自己的性别身份。接着，我们分析了博客者对外表具有男性特征的获胜者以及其他参赛者的态度。分析结果表明女博客者对她们有更正面的态度，而且在评论过程中，她们更着重对超女能力的评价，而不是像男博客者那样着重对超女常态的评价。最后，我们观察了男女博客者对性别身份的理解。我们也发现，男博客者对性别身份的理解偏向传统，而女博客者对性别身份的理解存在更多新的变化。我们通过社会变迁与性别意识形态的角度对结果进行了解释。
This study is an analysis of Chinese weblog discourse, aiming at understanding how gender identity is shaped and perceived in male bloggers' discourse and female bloggers' discourse. While the topics vary so greatly on the weblogs and identity keeps changing in different social contexts, it is plausible for us to study gender identity in a specific social context. Therefore, the Super Female Voice Contest is selected as the social context. The reason why this Contest is chosen is due to the fact that all the contestants in the show were females and that the winners or the persons who were mostly supported by audiences turned out to be females with masculine tendency. Researchers wonder if the victory of these 'tomboy' winners indicates the change in understanding gender identity in China. Since weblog discourse is a new means of on-line communication, it would be very interesting to study how bloggers construct their own gender identity and perceive gender identity on line. In this study, Critical Discourse Analysis and Appraisal Systems are applied in the analysis of the 48 samples that have been collected. The pronoun usage, the naming used to address the tomboy winners and the emoticons are compared between male discourse and female discourse so that the difference or similarity can be discovered. Then, male bloggers' and female bloggers' attitudes towards the female contestants are analyzed. By analyzing their attitudes, it has been found that female bloggers have a more positive attitude toward the winners and other contestants. Besides, female bloggers like to focus on the discussion of the ability of contestants, while male bloggers like to focus on the normality of contestants. Finally, the perception of gender identity is examined. It has been found that male bloggers' perception of gender identity tends to be traditional, whereas female bloggers' inclines to be new or non-traditional. Explanations from the perspective of social change and ideology are offered.
This study is an analysis of Chinese weblog discourse, aiming at understanding how gender identity is shaped and perceived in male bloggers' discourse and female bloggers' discourse. While the topics vary so greatly on the weblogs and identity keeps changing in different social contexts, it is plausible for us to study gender identity in a specific social context. Therefore, the Super Female Voice Contest is selected as the social context. The reason why this Contest is chosen is due to the fact that all the contestants in the show were females and that the winners or the persons who were mostly supported by audiences turned out to be females with masculine tendency. Researchers wonder if the victory of these 'tomboy' winners indicates the change in understanding gender identity in China. Since weblog discourse is a new means of on-line communication, it would be very interesting to study how bloggers construct their own gender identity and perceive gender identity on line. In this study, Critical Discourse Analysis and Appraisal Systems are applied in the analysis of the 48 samples that have been collected. The pronoun usage, the naming used to address the tomboy winners and the emoticons are compared between male discourse and female discourse so that the difference or similarity can be discovered. Then, male bloggers' and female bloggers' attitudes towards the female contestants are analyzed. By analyzing their attitudes, it has been found that female bloggers have a more positive attitude toward the winners and other contestants. Besides, female bloggers like to focus on the discussion of the ability of contestants, while male bloggers like to focus on the normality of contestants. Finally, the perception of gender identity is examined. It has been found that male bloggers' perception of gender identity tends to be traditional, whereas female bloggers' inclines to be new or non-traditional. Explanations from the perspective of social change and ideology are offered.
引文
1 Source: http://media.people.com.cn/GB/40606/4295903.html
2 source: http://it.sohu.com/20051009/n240505690.shtml
3 source: http://www.china.org.cn/chinese/zhuanti/chuanmei/924952.htm
4 source: http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=10113
5 source:http://it.sohu.com/s2005/blogdiaocha.shtml
6 Source and download for CIPP software: http://www.cipp.cn/down_view.asp?id=30 Argamon, Shlomo, Moshe Koppel, Jonathan Fine and Anat Rachel Shimoni.2003.
Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts [J]. Texts 23(3): 321-346.
retrieved Jan 10, 2007 from http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/～koppel/papers/male-female-text-final.pdf
Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bortree, D.S.. 2005. Presentation of self on the Web: An ethnographic study of teenage girls' weblogs [J]. Education, Communication and Information Journal (ECi), 5(1). Retrieved on August 25, 2006 from http://homepage.mac.com/paulcdowling/ioe/r&d/papers/bortree(2005).pdf#search =％22Bortree％2C％20weblogs％22
Bucholtz, M. and K. Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: a sociocultural Linguistic Approach [J]. Discourse Studies 7(4-5), 585-614.
Butler, C. S. 1985. Statistics in Linguistics [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd..112-136.
Constantin, C., S. Kalyanaraman, C. Stavrositu, & N. Wagoner. (2002a). Impression Formation Effects in Moderated Chatrooms: An Experimental Study of Gender Differences. Paper presented at the 88th annual meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, November. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www'psu'edu/dept/medialab/research/NeA.htm
Crystal, D. 2000. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language [M]. 2nd. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Crawfordand, M & Roger Chaffin. 1987. Effects of gender and topic on speech style [J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 16(1), retrived on Nov.16 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/t038w715025x53 g4/
Fairclough, Norman. 1989o Language and Power [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited. 1-50; 109-144.
Fariclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change [M]. UK: Oxford Polity Press. 1-26; 50-91.
Fariclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: the critical study of language [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited.
Fariclough, Norman. 2001. Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research [A]. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.): Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis [C]. London: SAGE publications.
Fith, K. L. 2005. Discourse Analysis [A]. In: K. L. Fitch & R.E. Sanders (eds.): Language and Social Interaction [C]. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 253-257.
Gee, J. P. 2000. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method [M]. Beijing: Foreign language teaching and research press. 1-13; 58-79, 129-148.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic [M]. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2000. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. 2nd. Foreign Languages Teaching and Research Press. 66-105.
Herring, Susan C. 2003. Gender and power in online communication [A]. In Jannet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.), The Handbook of Language and Gender [C]. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell Oulishers. 202-228, retrieved on Jan. 2, 2007 from http://www.europaforum.or.at/site/HomepagelTECHwomen/documents/Herring.pdf.
Herring, S. C., L. A. Scheidt, S. Bonus, & E. Wright. (2004a). Bridging the gap: A genre analysis of weblogs. Proceedings of the 37th Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-37). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://www.blogninja.corn/DDGDD04.doc
Herring, S. C., I. Kouper, L. A. Scheidt & E. Wright (2004b). Women and children last: The discursive construction of weblogs [A]. In L. Gurak, S. Antonijevic, L. Johnson, C. Ratliff, & J. Reyman (Eds.), Into the Blogosphere: Rhetoric, Community, and Culture of Weblogs [C]. University of Minnesota. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/women_and_children.html
Herring, S. C. and J. C. Paolillo. 2006. Gender, Genre Differences in Weblogs [J]. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(4), 439-459. Retrieved on June 20, 2006 from http://www.blogninja.com/jslx.pdf
Hornby, A.S. 1997. Oxford Advance Learner's English-Chinese Dictionary, 4th edition. Translated by Li Beida. Oxford University Press. P. 409
Hudson, R.A. 2000. Sociolinguistics, 2th edition [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Huffaker, D. A. & S. L. Calvert. 2005. Gender, identity, and language use in teenage blogs [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 1. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo110/issue2/huffaker.html
Hulsse, R. 1999. The Discursive Construction of Identity and Difference-Turkey as Europe's Other? Discussion paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Mannheim, 26-31 March. Retrieved on Oct. 10, 2006 from http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/mannheim/w22/hulsse.pdf
Ivanic, Roz. 1998. Writing and Identity: the discoursal construction of identity in academic writing [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 1-38.
Koller, V. and G. Mautner. 2004. Computer Application in Critical Discourse Analysis [A]. In Caroline Coffin and O'Halloran (eds.)Applying English Grammar: Functional and Corpus Approaches [C]. London: Arnold. 220-225.
Koppel, M., S. Argamon & A. R. Shimoni. 2002. Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender [J]. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17 (4): 401-412. retrieved Jan 10, 2007 from http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/～koppel/papers/male-female-llc-final.pdf
Lazar, M.M. 2005. Politicizing Gender in Discourse: Feminist CDA as political perspective and Praxis [A]. In Lazar, M.M. (ed.) Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology in Discourse [C]. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. 1-25.
Lakoff, R. Language and women's place [J]. Language in Society 1973(2). Lee, C. (2003). How Does Instant Messaging Affect Interaction Between the Genders? Stanford, CA: The Mercury Project for Instant Messaging Studies at Stanford University. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www.stanford.edu/class/pwr3-25/group2/projects/lee.html
Lu, Xiaofei. 2002. Discourse and Ideology: The TaiwanIssue in the Chinese and American Media [A]. In Candlin, Christopher N. ed. Research and Practice in Professional Discourse [C]. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press. Retrieved on December 20. 2006 from http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/～xflu/papers/2002.pdf
Malinowski, B. 1923. The problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. As the supplement in: Ogden and Richards: The Meaning of Meaning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. 306-310.
Martin, J.R. (1992). English text: System and structure [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Martin, J.R. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English [A]. In S. Huston & G. Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 142-175
Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause [M]. London: Continnum. 1-54
Martin, J.R., & P.R.R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: appraisal in English [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 1-35.
Meinhof, U. H. and D. Galasinski. 2005. The Language of Belonging [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 1-10.
Mey, Jacob L. 2001. Pragmatics: An introduction [M]. Beijing: Foreign languages teaching and research Press
Mieroop, D.V.D. 2005. An integrated approach of quantitative and qualitative analysis in the study of identity in speeches [J]. Discourse and Society 16(1).
Mortensen, T., & J. Walker. 2002. Blogging thoughts: Personal publication as an online research tool [J]. In T. Morrison (ed.), Researching ICTs in Context [C]. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://www.intermedia.uio.no/konferanser/skikt-02/docs/Researching_ICTs_in_context-Ch11-Mortensen-Walker.pdf
Nardi, B., D. Schiano & M. Gumbrecht. 2004. Blogging as social activity, or, would you let 900 million people read your diary? Proceedings of Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2004. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://home.comcast.net/%7Ediane.schiano/CSCW04.Blog.pdf
Philips, L. and M. W. Jorgensen. 2002. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method [M]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Saeed, J.I. 2000. Semantics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Speer, Susan A. 2005. Gender Talk: Feminism, Discourse and Conversation Analysis [M]. London: Routledge
Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis: the Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher Limited. 1-66.
Tabouret-Keller, A. 2001. Language and Identity [A]. In: F. Coulmas (ed.): The Handbook of Sociolinguistics [C]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 301-326.
Tarrant, M., A. C. North & D. J. Hargreaves. 2004. Adolescents' Intergroup Attributions: A Comparison of Two Social Identities [J]. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 33, No. 177-85. Retrieved November, 19, 2006 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/kg11271q41344531/
Thompson, G. 2000. introducing Functional Grammar[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 1-38.
Thoreau, E. (2006). Ouch!: An examination of the self-representation of disabled people on the Internet [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), article 3. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo111/issue2/thoreau.html
Trammell, K. D., A. Tarkowski, J. Hofmokl, & A. M. Sapp. (2006). Rzeczpospolita blogow [Republic of Blog]: Examining Polish bloggers through content analysis [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(3), article 2. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo111/issue3/trarnrnell.html
Viegas, F. B. (2005). Bloggers' expectations of privacy and accountability: An initial survey [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 12. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://jcrnc.indiana.edu/vo110/issue3/viegas.html
Wardhaugh, R. 2000. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Weatherall, A. 2002. Gender, Language and Discourse [M]. London: Routledge. 1-64.
Willett, Jerri. 1995. Becoming First Graders in an L2: An ethnographic study of L2 socialization [J]. TESOL Quarterly. Vol.29. No.3. 474-483.
Witmer, D. E, & S. L. Katzman. 1997. On-line smiles: Does gender make a difference in the use of graphic accents? [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2 (4). Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue4/witmer1.html
Wodak, R. 1996. Discourses of Discourse [M]. London/ New York: Addison Wesley Longrnan Limited. 1-15.
Wodak, R. & M. Meyer. 2001. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis [M]. London: Sage Publication. 1-30.
Wodak, R & G. Benke. 2001. Gender as a Sociolinguistic Variable: New Perspectives on Variation Studies [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 68-128.
Zhou, Minglang. 2002. Between us and them in Chinese: Use of lai (come) and qu (go) in the Construction of Social Identity [A]. In A. Zuszak (ed.): Us and Others [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Zheng, Chao. 2006. Introduction to Contemporary Linguistics [M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press.
毕竟，2006，传媒对男性审美霸权的两次颠覆，中国新闻研究中心。来源：http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=10113。
单惠芳，丁素萍，2006，用评价理论分析童话《丑小鸭》[J]。西安外国语学院学报14(3)。
宫宝龙，2005，超级女声事件的“李宇春困扰”。Retrieved Nov.15, 2006 from http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/44110/55469/4675428.html
纪玉华，2001，批评性话语分析：理论与方法[J]。厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)147(3)。
李素琼，肖敏，2005，性别身份在社会语言中的建构[J]。求索2005(6)。
梁鲁晋，2003，性别身份在英语广告中的构建[J]。解放军外国语学院学报26(2)。
万琼华 2006传统性别分工的现实存在与高校女教师的应对。Retrieved March 1，2007 from http://www.38hn.com/news.asp?id=288．
张斌，2005，媒体奇观的典型文本——对超级女声的文化批评。Retrieved Nov.15, 2006 from http://www.culstudies.com/rendanews/displaynews.asp?id=7233。
赵蓉晖，2003，语言与性别[M]。上海：上海外语教育出版社。
2 source: http://it.sohu.com/20051009/n240505690.shtml
3 source: http://www.china.org.cn/chinese/zhuanti/chuanmei/924952.htm
4 source: http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=10113
5 source:http://it.sohu.com/s2005/blogdiaocha.shtml
6 Source and download for CIPP software: http://www.cipp.cn/down_view.asp?id=30 Argamon, Shlomo, Moshe Koppel, Jonathan Fine and Anat Rachel Shimoni.2003.
Gender, genre, and writing style in formal written texts [J]. Texts 23(3): 321-346.
retrieved Jan 10, 2007 from http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/～koppel/papers/male-female-text-final.pdf
Brown, G. and G. Yule. 1983. Discourse Analysis [M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bortree, D.S.. 2005. Presentation of self on the Web: An ethnographic study of teenage girls' weblogs [J]. Education, Communication and Information Journal (ECi), 5(1). Retrieved on August 25, 2006 from http://homepage.mac.com/paulcdowling/ioe/r&d/papers/bortree(2005).pdf#search =％22Bortree％2C％20weblogs％22
Bucholtz, M. and K. Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: a sociocultural Linguistic Approach [J]. Discourse Studies 7(4-5), 585-614.
Butler, C. S. 1985. Statistics in Linguistics [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Ltd..112-136.
Constantin, C., S. Kalyanaraman, C. Stavrositu, & N. Wagoner. (2002a). Impression Formation Effects in Moderated Chatrooms: An Experimental Study of Gender Differences. Paper presented at the 88th annual meeting of the National Communication Association, New Orleans, LA, November. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www'psu'edu/dept/medialab/research/NeA.htm
Crystal, D. 2000. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language [M]. 2nd. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Crawfordand, M & Roger Chaffin. 1987. Effects of gender and topic on speech style [J]. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 16(1), retrived on Nov.16 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/t038w715025x53 g4/
Fairclough, Norman. 1989o Language and Power [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited. 1-50; 109-144.
Fariclough, Norman. 1992. Discourse and Social Change [M]. UK: Oxford Polity Press. 1-26; 50-91.
Fariclough, Norman. 1995. Critical Discourse Analysis: the critical study of language [M]. London: Longman Group UK Limited.
Fariclough, Norman. 2001. Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research [A]. In R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds.): Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis [C]. London: SAGE publications.
Fith, K. L. 2005. Discourse Analysis [A]. In: K. L. Fitch & R.E. Sanders (eds.): Language and Social Interaction [C]. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. 253-257.
Gee, J. P. 2000. An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method [M]. Beijing: Foreign language teaching and research press. 1-13; 58-79, 129-148.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as Social Semiotic [M]. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K. 2000. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. 2nd. Foreign Languages Teaching and Research Press. 66-105.
Herring, Susan C. 2003. Gender and power in online communication [A]. In Jannet Holmes and Miriam Meyerhoff (eds.), The Handbook of Language and Gender [C]. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell Oulishers. 202-228, retrieved on Jan. 2, 2007 from http://www.europaforum.or.at/site/HomepagelTECHwomen/documents/Herring.pdf.
Herring, S. C., L. A. Scheidt, S. Bonus, & E. Wright. (2004a). Bridging the gap: A genre analysis of weblogs. Proceedings of the 37th Hawai'i International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-37). Los Alamitos: IEEE Computer Society Press. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://www.blogninja.corn/DDGDD04.doc
Herring, S. C., I. Kouper, L. A. Scheidt & E. Wright (2004b). Women and children last: The discursive construction of weblogs [A]. In L. Gurak, S. Antonijevic, L. Johnson, C. Ratliff, & J. Reyman (Eds.), Into the Blogosphere: Rhetoric, Community, and Culture of Weblogs [C]. University of Minnesota. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://blog.lib.umn.edu/blogosphere/women_and_children.html
Herring, S. C. and J. C. Paolillo. 2006. Gender, Genre Differences in Weblogs [J]. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(4), 439-459. Retrieved on June 20, 2006 from http://www.blogninja.com/jslx.pdf
Hornby, A.S. 1997. Oxford Advance Learner's English-Chinese Dictionary, 4th edition. Translated by Li Beida. Oxford University Press. P. 409
Hudson, R.A. 2000. Sociolinguistics, 2th edition [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Huffaker, D. A. & S. L. Calvert. 2005. Gender, identity, and language use in teenage blogs [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(2), article 1. http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo110/issue2/huffaker.html
Hulsse, R. 1999. The Discursive Construction of Identity and Difference-Turkey as Europe's Other? Discussion paper presented at the ECPR Joint Sessions of Workshops, Mannheim, 26-31 March. Retrieved on Oct. 10, 2006 from http://www.essex.ac.uk/ecpr/events/jointsessions/paperarchive/mannheim/w22/hulsse.pdf
Ivanic, Roz. 1998. Writing and Identity: the discoursal construction of identity in academic writing [M]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 1-38.
Koller, V. and G. Mautner. 2004. Computer Application in Critical Discourse Analysis [A]. In Caroline Coffin and O'Halloran (eds.)Applying English Grammar: Functional and Corpus Approaches [C]. London: Arnold. 220-225.
Koppel, M., S. Argamon & A. R. Shimoni. 2002. Automatically categorizing written texts by author gender [J]. Literary and Linguistic Computing 17 (4): 401-412. retrieved Jan 10, 2007 from http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/～koppel/papers/male-female-llc-final.pdf
Lazar, M.M. 2005. Politicizing Gender in Discourse: Feminist CDA as political perspective and Praxis [A]. In Lazar, M.M. (ed.) Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology in Discourse [C]. Palgrave Macmillan Ltd. 1-25.
Lakoff, R. Language and women's place [J]. Language in Society 1973(2). Lee, C. (2003). How Does Instant Messaging Affect Interaction Between the Genders? Stanford, CA: The Mercury Project for Instant Messaging Studies at Stanford University. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www.stanford.edu/class/pwr3-25/group2/projects/lee.html
Lu, Xiaofei. 2002. Discourse and Ideology: The TaiwanIssue in the Chinese and American Media [A]. In Candlin, Christopher N. ed. Research and Practice in Professional Discourse [C]. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong Press. Retrieved on December 20. 2006 from http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/～xflu/papers/2002.pdf
Malinowski, B. 1923. The problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages. As the supplement in: Ogden and Richards: The Meaning of Meaning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. 306-310.
Martin, J.R. (1992). English text: System and structure [M]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Martin, J.R. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English [A]. In S. Huston & G. Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 142-175
Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause [M]. London: Continnum. 1-54
Martin, J.R., & P.R.R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: appraisal in English [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 1-35.
Meinhof, U. H. and D. Galasinski. 2005. The Language of Belonging [M]. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 1-10.
Mey, Jacob L. 2001. Pragmatics: An introduction [M]. Beijing: Foreign languages teaching and research Press
Mieroop, D.V.D. 2005. An integrated approach of quantitative and qualitative analysis in the study of identity in speeches [J]. Discourse and Society 16(1).
Mortensen, T., & J. Walker. 2002. Blogging thoughts: Personal publication as an online research tool [J]. In T. Morrison (ed.), Researching ICTs in Context [C]. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://www.intermedia.uio.no/konferanser/skikt-02/docs/Researching_ICTs_in_context-Ch11-Mortensen-Walker.pdf
Nardi, B., D. Schiano & M. Gumbrecht. 2004. Blogging as social activity, or, would you let 900 million people read your diary? Proceedings of Computer Supported Cooperative Work 2004. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://home.comcast.net/%7Ediane.schiano/CSCW04.Blog.pdf
Philips, L. and M. W. Jorgensen. 2002. Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method [M]. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Saeed, J.I. 2000. Semantics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Speer, Susan A. 2005. Gender Talk: Feminism, Discourse and Conversation Analysis [M]. London: Routledge
Stubbs, M. 1983. Discourse Analysis: the Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language [M]. Oxford: Basil Blackwell Publisher Limited. 1-66.
Tabouret-Keller, A. 2001. Language and Identity [A]. In: F. Coulmas (ed.): The Handbook of Sociolinguistics [C]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 301-326.
Tarrant, M., A. C. North & D. J. Hargreaves. 2004. Adolescents' Intergroup Attributions: A Comparison of Two Social Identities [J]. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, Vol. 33, No. 177-85. Retrieved November, 19, 2006 from http://www.springerlink.com/content/kg11271q41344531/
Thompson, G. 2000. introducing Functional Grammar[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 1-38.
Thoreau, E. (2006). Ouch!: An examination of the self-representation of disabled people on the Internet [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), article 3. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo111/issue2/thoreau.html
Trammell, K. D., A. Tarkowski, J. Hofmokl, & A. M. Sapp. (2006). Rzeczpospolita blogow [Republic of Blog]: Examining Polish bloggers through content analysis [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(3), article 2. Retrieved May 15, 2006 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vo111/issue3/trarnrnell.html
Viegas, F. B. (2005). Bloggers' expectations of privacy and accountability: An initial survey [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 12. Retrieved May 10, 2006 from http://jcrnc.indiana.edu/vo110/issue3/viegas.html
Wardhaugh, R. 2000. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Weatherall, A. 2002. Gender, Language and Discourse [M]. London: Routledge. 1-64.
Willett, Jerri. 1995. Becoming First Graders in an L2: An ethnographic study of L2 socialization [J]. TESOL Quarterly. Vol.29. No.3. 474-483.
Witmer, D. E, & S. L. Katzman. 1997. On-line smiles: Does gender make a difference in the use of graphic accents? [J]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2 (4). Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol2/issue4/witmer1.html
Wodak, R. 1996. Discourses of Discourse [M]. London/ New York: Addison Wesley Longrnan Limited. 1-15.
Wodak, R. & M. Meyer. 2001. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis [M]. London: Sage Publication. 1-30.
Wodak, R & G. Benke. 2001. Gender as a Sociolinguistic Variable: New Perspectives on Variation Studies [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. 68-128.
Zhou, Minglang. 2002. Between us and them in Chinese: Use of lai (come) and qu (go) in the Construction of Social Identity [A]. In A. Zuszak (ed.): Us and Others [C]. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company. Zheng, Chao. 2006. Introduction to Contemporary Linguistics [M]. Chongqing: Chongqing University Press.
毕竟，2006，传媒对男性审美霸权的两次颠覆，中国新闻研究中心。来源：http://www.cddc.net/shownews.asp?newsid=10113。
单惠芳，丁素萍，2006，用评价理论分析童话《丑小鸭》[J]。西安外国语学院学报14(3)。
宫宝龙，2005，超级女声事件的“李宇春困扰”。Retrieved Nov.15, 2006 from http://media.people.com.cn/GB/22114/44110/55469/4675428.html
纪玉华，2001，批评性话语分析：理论与方法[J]。厦门大学学报(哲学社会科学版)147(3)。
李素琼，肖敏，2005，性别身份在社会语言中的建构[J]。求索2005(6)。
梁鲁晋，2003，性别身份在英语广告中的构建[J]。解放军外国语学院学报26(2)。
万琼华 2006传统性别分工的现实存在与高校女教师的应对。Retrieved March 1，2007 from http://www.38hn.com/news.asp?id=288．
张斌，2005，媒体奇观的典型文本——对超级女声的文化批评。Retrieved Nov.15, 2006 from http://www.culstudies.com/rendanews/displaynews.asp?id=7233。
赵蓉晖，2003，语言与性别[M]。上海：上海外语教育出版社。