4)To explain the reasons for similarities and differences for the use of intertextuality inChinese and American CSRRs.
CHAPTER TWOLITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Intertextuality
In this section,general introduction to intertextuality,as well as variedclassifications of intertextuality put forward by different scholars will be reviewedrespectively.
2.1.1 The development of intertextuality
“Intertextuality”,a term originated from the Latin word“intertexto”,conveys themeaning of intermingle while weaving.It was first proposed by Julia Kristeva,aFrench semiotician in the late 1960s.In her words,intertextuality refers to themeaning that“any text is constructed as a mosaic of quotations,and any text is theabsorption and transformation of another”(Kristeva,1980),which means that textsare not completely original,instead,they absorb and are built out of texts from thepast since utterances only appear at a specific historical period but also under conditions of particular social settings.In another word,the text responds to,reaccentuates,and reworks past texts,and in doing so helps to make history and toshape subsequent texts(Fairclough,1992).It is believed that term intertextuality wascoined by Kristeva based on Mikahail Bakhtin’s dialogism theory.In accordance withBakhtin,a dialogue is apparently not only confined to face-to-face conversation,butalso involves diverse utterance exchanges in any form.As he has put it,“When alistener perceives and understands the meaning of speech,he simultaneously takes anactive,responsive attitude towards it...Any speaker is himself a respondent to agreater or lesser degree.He is not,after all,the first speaker,the one who disturbs theeternal silence of the universe.”(Bakhtin,1986).In another word,when people areintended to reveal their ideas and thoughts,they are more likely to mix diverse genresin a specific way which they have appropriated when they speak.Hence,“Allutterances are dialogic,their meaning and logic dependent upon what has previouslybeen said and on how they will be perceived by others.”(Allen,2000:97)
2.2 Corporate social responsibility reports(CSRRs)
In this section,the definition of CSRRs,along with previous studies on CSRRsat home and abroad will be discussed respectively.
2.2.1 Definition of CSRRs
Originated in the 1950s,the concept“Corporate Social Responsibility”(CSR)became a popular issue in the 1960s.When it comes to the definition of CSR,academics and practitioners have continuously discussed and debated for nearly 30years(Marrewijk,2003).According to Friedman,engaging in CSR is considered assymptom of an agency problem or a conflict between the interests of managers andshareholders.He asserts that CSR is employed by managers as an instrument tofurther corporate’s social,political,or career agendas at the expense of shareholders’benefits.Carrol A.B.categorizes CSR into four major components,includingeconomic responsibilities,legal responsibilities,ethical responsibilities,andphilanthropic responsibilities(Carrol,2002).Furthermore,Galbreath regards CSR asa guideline for a firm’s activities,which consists of all parts of organizationalprocesses to have a reciprocal relationship with society and stakeholders’objectives(Galbreath,2010).Hooghiemstra,from the perspective of business communication,interprets CSR as a communication instrument applied to create and enhancecorporate’s reputation through enhancing customer’s satisfaction.Moreover,according to the opinion presented by World Business Council for SustainableDevelopment,which is known as its abbreviation“WBSCD”,CSR is perceived as apublic non-financial report targeting different parties of stakeholders.
CHAPTER THREETHEORETICAL FRAMEWORK..................................26
3.1 Xin Bin’s intertextual theory...............................26
3.1.1 Specific intertextuality.................................26
3.
