英国广播公司(BBC)前总裁、现担任《纽约时报》(New York Times)首席执行官的马克.汤普森(Mark Thompson)在其于今年夏天出版的《无须多言:政治语言出了什么问题?》(Enough Said: What’s Gone Wrong With The Language of Politics?)一书中,引用了特朗普关于愤怒的原话。
He argues that the prevailing currents of the day — fuelled and amplified by social media — are towards emotive, maximalist language, preaching to the converted, and the production of heat rather than light.
他认为,在社交媒体的推动和放大下,如今的主流方向是情绪化、极端化的语言,向皈依者布道,是为了煽动、而不是启迪。
He was right.
他说的没错。
Both Clinton partisans and UK Remainers struggled to find a slogan as emotive or as forceful as Take Back Control or Make America Great Again.
希拉里阵营和英国留欧派都难以找到像拿回控制权(Take Back Control)或让美国再次伟大起来(Make America Great Again)那样感召人心或强有力的口号——
Compare the flaccid, verbless Better Together and Stronger In.
对比一下这两个软绵绵的口号:在一起更好(Better Together)和留欧更强(Stronger In)。
Both winning slogans were imperative in mood: a call to action rather than floating expressions of a vague status quo.
两个获胜方的口号在情绪上都更有紧迫感:号召采取行动、而不是缥缈地表达一种模糊的现状。
【特朗普语言学如何改变世界】相关文章:
最新
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-07
2019-01-05