We introduce eleven orientations underpinning the rhetoric for promoting (or impeding) sustainable travel behavior. These orientations are: convenience, status, health, privacy, safety-security, economic, environmental, impact, justice-equity, geographical, and problem-solution. Using a novel and systematic method, we perform the study in three stages. First, using online media as data source, we apply concordance and Gioia methods to identify the rhetorical orientations underpinning these texts. Second, we cluster the orientations according to the direction (pro- or anti-sustainability) being generally pushed by each orientation. Convenience, status, health, privacy, safety-security orientations, in general, push towards anti-sustainability direction. On the other hand, economic, environmental, impact, justice-equity, and geographical orientations generally push towards pro-sustainability direction. Meanwhile, problem-solution orientation appears equally in both clusters. Finally, we extract the semantics of each rhetorical orientation using collocation analysis to differentiate their vocabularies. Our findings show the discursive struggle and contestation in relation to mobility, which manifest not only in the differences in rhetorical orientations appropriated but also the vocabularies deployed. One important implication is that any attempt to render the messages promoting sustainable travel behavior more persuasive necessitates the de-legitimation of contrary rhetorical orientations (convenience, status and health, privacy and safety-security) by addressing the issues associated with them.

我们介绍了十一个方向来支持促进（或阻碍）可持续旅行行为的言论。这些方向是：便利、地位、健康、隐私、安全保障、经济、环境、影响、公平公正、地理和问题解决方案。我们使用一种新颖而系统的方法，分三个阶段进行研究。首先，使用在线媒体作为数据源，我们应用一致性和 Gioia 方法来识别支撑这些文本的修辞方向。其次，我们根据每个方向通常推动的方向（支持或反对可持续性）对方向进行聚类。便利性、状态、健康、隐私、安全-安保方向，一般，向反可持续方向推进。另一方面，经济、环境、影响、公平公正和地理方向通常会朝着支持可持续发展的方向发展。同时，问题解决导向同样出现在两个集群中。最后，我们使用搭配分析来提取每个修辞方向的语义，以区分它们的词汇。我们的研究结果显示了与流动性有关的话语斗争和争论，这不仅体现在所挪用的修辞取向的差异上，还体现在所使用的词汇上。一个重要的含义是，任何使促进可持续旅行行为的信息更具说服力的尝试都需要取消相反的修辞取向（方便、地位和健康、