CAJ | 학술논문

话语批评强调对批评实践自身的批评。对话语批评的理论前提进行反思也是批评的要义。如果从其理论基础出发，则发现话语批评最为倚重的理论家Foucault、Bourdieu和Habermas分别阐说的话语权力主体观、习性主体观和交往行动主体观不能对批评何以可能的问题作出充分的解释，并导致话语伦理责任无法界定等问题的出现。Perelman等修辞论辩学家所阐述的秉持人文主义思想的修辞行动主体观，则可以弥补这些缺憾。
화어비평강조대비평실천자신적비평。대화어비평적이론전제진행반사야시비평적요의。여과종기이론기출출발，칙발현화어비평최위의중적이론가Foucault、Bourdieu화Habermas분별천설적화어권력주체관、습성주체관화교왕행동주체관불능대비평하이가능적문제작출충분적해석，병도치화어윤리책임무법계정등문제적출현。Perelman등수사론변학가소천술적병지인문주의사상적수사행동주체관，칙가이미보저사결감。
Discourse Criticism highlights self-reflection upon its own critical practice. Anatomy of its theoretical underpinnings is thus also an essential part of the criticism. Among the underpinnings, insights about the subjectivity of criticism, i.e., power-discursive subject, habitus-agent and agent of communicative action preferred by the great theorists Foucault, Bourdieu and Habermas respectively can not reasonably rationalize such issues as how criticism could be possible and how discursive responsibility should be defined. The paper argues that insights of rhetorical agent with humanism as its essence offered by Perelman and other rhetoricians and argumentation theorists would present adequate justifications for the issues.