摘要
传统的传播研究以施拉姆确立的"四大奠基人"神话模式作为历史书写的主流话语。通过对20世纪50年代的传播论争及芝加哥大学"传播委员会"传播研究实践的考察,可以发现传播研究的学科建制与书写在当时的历史境遇下其实具备多种可能,而非由施拉姆建构的只注重效果的单一传播研究模式。20世纪70年代詹姆斯.凯瑞等人呼吁返回芝加哥学派,其实应将其视野扩展至更大范围,提倡传播学历史书写的多元性,以期获得更具活力的传播研究前景。
The classical mode of ＂four founding fathers,＂ established by Wilbur Schramm,is regarded as the mainstream discourse in the traditional historical research of communication.Inspecting the communication disputes in 1950＇s and the communication researches conducted by the ＂Communication Committee＂ in Chicago University,we find it possible to take various approaches to the disciplinary setting and research history in the then situation.It is held that the Schramm＇s effect-oriented paradigm should not be the only approach.While James Carey called for the returning to Chicago School in 1970＇s,his academic horizon should have been expanded to a wider range.
出处
《扬州大学学报（人文社会科学版）》
CSSCI
2012年第6期107-113,共7页
Journal of Yangzhou University(Humanities and Social Sciences Edition)
关键词
传播学历史
芝加哥学派
传播委员会
学科建制
communication history
Chicago School
Committee of Communication
discipline
