Discourse analysis

Last updated

Discourse analysis (DA), or discourse studies, is an approach to the analysis of written, spoken, or sign language, including any significant semiotic event.

Contents

The objects of discourse analysis (discourse, writing, conversation, communicative event) are variously defined in terms of coherent sequences of sentences, propositions, speech, or turns-at-talk. Contrary to much of traditional linguistics, discourse analysts not only study language use 'beyond the sentence boundary' but also prefer to analyze 'naturally occurring' language use, not invented examples. [1] Text linguistics is a closely related field. The essential difference between discourse analysis and text linguistics is that discourse analysis aims at revealing socio-psychological characteristics of a person/persons rather than text structure. [2]

Discourse analysis has been taken up in a variety of disciplines in the humanities and social sciences, including linguistics, education, sociology, anthropology, social work, cognitive psychology, social psychology, area studies, cultural studies, international relations, human geography, environmental science, communication studies, biblical studies, public relations, argumentation studies, and translation studies, each of which is subject to its own assumptions, dimensions of analysis, and methodologies.

History

Early use of the term

The ancient Greeks (among others) had much to say on discourse; however, there is ongoing discussion about whether Austria-born Leo Spitzer's Stilstudien (Style Studies) of 1928 is the earliest example of discourse analysis (DA). Michel Foucault translated it into French. [3] However, the term first came into general use following the publication of a series of papers by Zellig Harris from 1952 [4] reporting on work from which he developed transformational grammar in the late 1930s. Formally equivalent relations among the sentences of a coherent discourse are made explicit by using sentence transformations to put the text in a canonical form. Words and sentences with equivalent information then appear in the same column of an array.

This work progressed over the next four decades (see references) into a science of sublanguage analysis (Kittredge & Lehrberger 1982), culminating in a demonstration of the informational structures in texts of a sublanguage of science, that of Immunology (Harris et al. 1989), [5] and a fully articulated theory of linguistic informational content (Harris 1991). [6] During this time, however, most linguists ignored such developments in favor of a succession of elaborate theories of sentence-level syntax and semantics. [7]

In January 1953, a linguist working for the American Bible Society, James A. Lauriault (alt. Loriot), needed to find answers to some fundamental errors in translating Quechua, in the Cuzco area of Peru. Following Harris's 1952 publications, he worked over the meaning and placement of each word in a collection of Quechua legends with a native speaker of Quechua and was able to formulate discourse rules that transcended the simple sentence structure. He then applied the process to Shipibo, another language of Eastern Peru. He taught the theory at the [8] Summer Institute of Linguistics in Norman, Oklahoma, in the summers of 1956 and 1957 and entered the University of Pennsylvania [9] to study with Harris in the interim year. He tried to publish a paper, [10] Shipibo Paragraph Structure, but it was delayed until 1970 (Loriot & Hollenbach 1970).[ citation needed ] In the meantime, Kenneth Lee Pike, a professor at the University of Michigan, [11] taught the theory, and one of his students, Robert E. Longacre, developed it in his writings. Harris's methodology disclosing the correlation of form with meaning was developed into a system for the computer-aided analysis of natural language by a team led by Naomi Sager at NYU, which has been applied to a number of sublanguage domains, most notably to medical informatics. The software for the Medical Language Processor is publicly available on SourceForge.

In the humanities

In the late 1960s and 1970s, and without reference to this prior work, a variety of other approaches to a new cross-discipline of DA began to develop in most of the humanities and social sciences concurrently with, and related to, other disciplines. These include semiotics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and pragmatics. Many of these approaches, especially those influenced by the social sciences, favor a more dynamic study of oral talk-in-interaction. An example is "conversational analysis" (CA), [12] which was influenced by the sociologist Harold Garfinkel, [13] the founder of Ethnomethodology.

Foucault

In Europe, Michel Foucault became one of the key theorists of the subject, especially of discourse, and wrote The Archaeology of Knowledge. In this context, the term 'discourse' no longer refers to formal linguistic aspects, but to institutionalized patterns of knowledge that become manifest in disciplinary structures and operate by the connection of knowledge and power. Since the 1970s, Foucault's works have had an increasing impact especially on discourse analysis in the field of social sciences. Thus, in modern European social sciences, one can find a wide range of different approaches working with Foucault's definition of discourse and his theoretical concepts. Apart from the original context in France, there has been, since 2005, a broad discussion on socio-scientific discourse analysis in Germany. Here, for example, the sociologist Reiner Keller developed his widely recognized 'Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse (SKAD)'. [14] Following the sociology of knowledge by Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, Keller argues that our sense of reality in everyday life and thus the meaning of every object, action and event is the product of a permanent, routinized interaction. In this context, SKAD has been developed as a scientific perspective that is able to understand the processes of 'The Social Construction of Reality' on all levels of social life by combining the prementioned Michel Foucault's theories of discourse and power while also introducing the theory of knowledge by Berger/Luckmann. Whereas the latter primarily focus on the constitution and stabilization of knowledge on the level of interaction, Foucault's perspective concentrates on institutional contexts of the production and integration of knowledge, where the subject mainly appears to be determined by knowledge and power. Therefore, the 'Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse' can also be seen as an approach to deal with the vividly discussed micro–macro problem in sociology.[ citation needed ]

Perspectives

The following are some of the specific theoretical perspectives and analytical approaches used in linguistic discourse analysis:

Although these approaches emphasize different aspects of language use, they all view language as social interaction and are concerned with the social contexts in which discourse is embedded.

Often a distinction is made between 'local' structures of discourse (such as relations among sentences, propositions, and turns) and 'global' structures, such as overall topics and the schematic organization of discourses and conversations. For instance, many types of discourse begin with some kind of global 'summary', in titles, headlines, leads, abstracts, and so on.

A problem for the discourse analyst is to decide when a particular feature is relevant to the specification required. A question many linguists ask is: "Are there general principles which will determine the relevance or nature of the specification? [18] "[ citation needed ]

Topics of interest

Topics of discourse analysis include: [19]

Prominent academics

Political discourse

Political discourse is the text and talk of professional politicians or political institutions, such as presidents and prime ministers and other members of government, parliament or political parties, both at the local, national and international levels, includes both the speaker and the audience. [21]

Political discourse analysis is a field of discourse analysis which focuses on discourse in political forums (such as debates, speeches, and hearings) as the phenomenon of interest. Policy analysis requires discourse analysis to be effective from the post-positivist perspective. [22] [23]

Political discourse is the formal exchange of reasoned views as to which of several alternative courses of action should be taken to solve a societal problem. [24] [25]

Corporate discourse

Corporate discourse can be broadly defined as the language used by corporations. It encompasses a set of messages that a corporation sends out to the world (the general public, the customers and other corporations) and the messages it uses to communicate within its own structures (the employees and other stakeholders). [26]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Functional linguistics</span> Approach to linguistics

Functional linguistics is an approach to the study of language characterized by taking systematically into account the speaker's and the hearer's side, and the communicative needs of the speaker and of the given language community. Linguistic functionalism spawned in the 1920s to 1930s from Ferdinand de Saussure's systematic structuralist approach to language (1916).

The following outline is provided as an overview and topical guide to linguistics:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Social science</span> Branch of science that studies society and its relationships

Social science is one of the branches of science, devoted to the study of societies and the relationships among individuals within those societies. The term was formerly used to refer to the field of sociology, the original "science of society", established in the 18th century. In addition to sociology, it now encompasses a wide array of academic disciplines, including anthropology, archaeology, economics, human geography, linguistics, management science, communication science, psychology and political science.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Structuralism</span> Theory of culture and methodology

Structuralism is an intellectual current and methodological approach, primarily in the social sciences, that interprets elements of human culture by way of their relationship to a broader system. It works to uncover the structural patterns that underlie all the things that humans do, think, perceive, and feel.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Discourse</span> Field of theory which examines elements of conversation

Discourse is a generalization of the notion of a conversation to any form of communication. Discourse is a major topic in social theory, with work spanning fields such as sociology, anthropology, continental philosophy, and discourse analysis. Following pioneering work by Michel Foucault, these fields view discourse as a system of thought, knowledge, or communication that constructs our experience of the world. Since control of discourse amounts to control of how the world is perceived, social theory often studies discourse as a window into power. Within theoretical linguistics, discourse is understood more narrowly as linguistic information exchange and was one of the major motivations for the framework of dynamic semantics, in which expressions' denotations are equated with their ability to update a discourse context.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zellig Harris</span> American linguist

Zellig Sabbettai Harris was an influential American linguist, mathematical syntactician, and methodologist of science. Originally a Semiticist, he is best known for his work in structural linguistics and discourse analysis and for the discovery of transformational structure in language. These developments from the first 10 years of his career were published within the first 25. His contributions in the subsequent 35 years of his career include transfer grammar, string analysis, elementary sentence-differences, algebraic structures in language, operator grammar, sublanguage grammar, a theory of linguistic information, and a principled account of the nature and origin of language.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conversation analysis</span> Approach to the study of social interaction

Conversation analysis (CA) is an approach to the study of social interaction that empirically investigates the mechanisms by which humans achieve mutual understanding. It focuses on both verbal and non-verbal conduct, especially in situations of everyday life. CA originated as a sociological method, but has since spread to other fields. CA began with a focus on casual conversation, but its methods were subsequently adapted to embrace more task- and institution-centered interactions, such as those occurring in doctors' offices, courts, law enforcement, helplines, educational settings, and the mass media, and focus on multimodal and nonverbal activity in interaction, including gaze, body movement and gesture. As a consequence, the term conversation analysis has become something of a misnomer, but it has continued as a term for a distinctive and successful approach to the analysis of interactions. CA and ethnomethodology are sometimes considered one field and referred to as EMCA.

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach to the study of discourse that views language as a form of social practice. CDA combines critique of discourse and explanation of how it figures within and contributes to the existing social reality, as a basis for action to change that existing reality in particular respects. Scholars working in the tradition of CDA generally argue that (non-linguistic) social practice and linguistic practice constitute one another and focus on investigating how societal power relations are established and reinforced through language use. In this sense, it differs from discourse analysis in that it highlights issues of power asymmetries, manipulation, exploitation, and structural inequities in domains such as education, media, and politics.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Antihumanism</span> Philosophical and social theory, critical of traditional humanism

In social theory and philosophy, antihumanism or anti-humanism is a theory that is critical of traditional humanism, traditional ideas about humanity and the human condition. Central to antihumanism is the view that philosophical anthropology and its concepts of "human nature", "man" or "humanity" should be rejected as historically relative, ideological or metaphysical.

In epistemology, and more specifically, the sociology of knowledge, reflexivity refers to circular relationships between cause and effect, especially as embedded in human belief structures. A reflexive relationship is multi-directional when the causes and the effects affect the reflexive agent in a layered or complex sociological relationship. The complexity of this relationship can be furthered when epistemology includes religion.

Langueandparole is a theoretical linguistic dichotomy distinguished by Ferdinand de Saussure in his Course in General Linguistics.

In semiotics, linguistics, sociology and anthropology, context refers to those objects or entities which surround a focal event, in these disciplines typically a communicative event, of some kind. Context is "a frame that surrounds the event and provides resources for its appropriate interpretation". It is thus a relative concept, only definable with respect to some focal event within a frame, not independently of that frame.

Structural linguistics, or structuralism, in linguistics, denotes schools or theories in which language is conceived as a self-contained, self-regulating semiotic system whose elements are defined by their relationship to other elements within the system. It is derived from the work of Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure and is part of the overall approach of structuralism. Saussure's Course in General Linguistics, published posthumously in 1916, stressed examining language as a dynamic system of interconnected units. Saussure is also known for introducing several basic dimensions of semiotic analysis that are still important today. Two of these are his key methods of syntagmatic and paradigmatic analysis, which define units syntactically and lexically, respectively, according to their contrast with the other units in the system.

Interactional linguistics (IL) is an interdisciplinary approach to grammar and interaction in the field of linguistics, that applies the methods of Conversation Analysis to the study of linguistic structures, including syntax, phonetics, morphology, and so on. Interactional linguistics is based on the principle that linguistic structures and uses are formed through interaction and it aims at understanding how languages are shaped through interaction. The approach focuses on temporality, activity implication and embodiment in interaction. Interactional linguistics asks research questions such as "How are linguistic patterns shaped by interaction?" and "How do linguistic patterns themselves shape interaction?".

Linguistics is the scientific study of language. Linguistics is based on a theoretical as well as a descriptive study of language and is also interlinked with the applied fields of language studies and language learning, which entails the study of specific languages. Before the 20th century, linguistics evolved in conjunction with literary study and did not employ scientific methods. Modern-day linguistics is considered a science because it entails a comprehensive, systematic, objective, and precise analysis of all aspects of language – i.e., the cognitive, the social, the cultural, the psychological, the environmental, the biological, the literary, the grammatical, the paleographical, and the structural.

Interactional sociolinguistics is a subdiscipline of linguistics that uses discourse analysis to study how language users create meaning via social interaction. It is one of the ways in which linguists look at the intersections of human language and human society; other subfields that take this perspective are language planning, minority language studies, quantitative sociolinguistics, and sociohistorical linguistics, among others. Interactional sociolinguistics is a theoretical and methodological framework within the discipline of linguistic anthropology, which combines the methodology of linguistics with the cultural consideration of anthropology in order to understand how the use of language informs social and cultural interaction. Interactional sociolinguistics was founded by linguistic anthropologist John J. Gumperz. Topics that might benefit from an Interactional sociolinguistic analysis include: cross-cultural miscommunication, politeness, and framing.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to social science:

The sociology of knowledge approach to discourse (SKAD) is a social science research programme for studying discourse developed by Reiner Keller in order to analyze knowledge relationships and conditions in society. SKAD stems from the sociology of knowledge of Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann who in the 1960s studied the processes involved in the social construction of generally accessible everyday knowledge in their defining work, The Social Construction of Reality. Keller combines this approach with Michel Foucault's discourse theory, which is responsible for the prominent role of discourse concepts in social science and inspired several approaches to discourse analysis in other scientific disciplines. As a comprehensive analytical perspective, SKAD has been applied in a number of empirical studies, not only within social science but also in disciplines that extend beyond its borders. SKAD is predominantly in use within German-speaking academia, though interest has recently been increasing in the English-speaking world.

Feminist post-structuralist discourse analysis (FPDA) is a method of discourse analysis based on Chris Weedon's theories of feminist post-structuralism, and developed as a method of analysis by Judith Baxter in 2003. FPDA is based on a combination of feminism and post-structuralism. While it is still evolving as a methodology, FPDA has been used by a range of international scholars of gender and language to analyse texts such as: classroom discourse, teenage girls' conversation, and media representations of gender. FPDA is an approach to analysing the discourse of spoken interaction principally.

Theory of language is a topic in philosophy of language and theoretical linguistics. It has the goal of answering the questions "What is language?"; "Why do languages have the properties they do?"; or "What is the origin of language?". In addition to these fundamental questions, the theory of language also seeks to understand how language is acquired and used by individuals and communities. This involves investigating the cognitive and neural processes involved in language processing and production, as well as the social and cultural factors that shape linguistic behavior.

References

  1. ↑ "Discourse Analysis—What Speakers Do in Conversation". Linguistic Society of America. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  2. ↑ "Yatsko's Computational Linguistics Laboratory". yatsko.zohosites.com. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  3. ↑ Elden, Stuart (2016-11-10). "When did Foucault translate Leo Spitzer?". Progressive Geographies.
  4. ↑ Harris, Zellig (1952). "Discourse Analysis". JSTOR.
  5. ↑ Hardy, Donald E., -- (1991-04-01). "The foundations of linguistic theory: Selected writings of Roy Harris Ed. by Nigel Love (review)". Language. 67 (3). ISSN   1535-0665.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  6. ↑ Hardy, Donald E., -- (1991-04-01). "The foundations of linguistic theory: Selected writings of Roy Harris Ed. by Nigel Love (review)". Language. 67 (3). ISSN   1535-0665.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  7. ↑ John Corcoran, then a colleague of Harris in Linguistics at University of Pennsylvania, summarized and critically examined the development of Harris’s thought on discourse through 1969 in lectures attended by Harris’ colleagues and students in Philadelphia and Cambridge.
    Corcoran, John (1972). Plötz, Senta (ed.). "Harris on the Structures of Language". Transformationelle Analyse. Frankfurt: Athenäum Verlag: 275–292.
  8. ↑ "SIL International". SIL International. Retrieved 2020-12-03.
  9. ↑ "University of Pennsylvania |". www.upenn.edu. Retrieved 2020-12-03.
  10. ↑ Loriot, James; Hollenbach, Barbara (1970). "Shipibo Paragraph Structure". Foundations of Language. 6 (1): 43–66. ISSN   0015-900X. JSTOR   25000427.
  11. ↑ "University of Michigan". umich.edu. Retrieved 2020-12-03.
  12. ↑ "Conversational Analysis | Encyclopedia.com". www.encyclopedia.com. Retrieved 2020-12-03.
  13. ↑ Lynch, Michael (2011-07-13). "Harold Garfinkel obituary". The Guardian. Retrieved 2020-12-03.
  14. ↑ Keller, Reiner (March 2011). "The Sociology of Knowledge Approach to Discourse (SKAD)". Human Studies. 34 (1): 43–65. doi:10.1007/s10746-011-9175-z. ISSN   0163-8548. S2CID   143674874.
  15. ↑ James, Carl (June 1993). "What is applied linguistics?". International Journal of Applied Linguistics. 3 (1): 17–32. doi:10.1111/j.1473-4192.1993.tb00041.x. ISSN   0802-6106.
  16. ↑ Barbey, Aron K.; Colom, Roberto; Grafman, Jordan (January 2014). "Neural mechanisms of discourse comprehension: a human lesion study". Brain. 137 (1): 277–287. doi:10.1093/brain/awt312. ISSN   1460-2156. PMC   3954106 . PMID   24293267.
  17. ↑ Yates, Diana. "Researchers map brain areas vital to understanding language". news.illinois.edu. University of Illinois. Retrieved 2019-11-25.
  18. ↑ E Shaw, Sara; Bailey, Julia (October 2009). "Discourse analysis: what is it and why is it relevant to family practice?". Family Practice. 26 (5): 413–419. doi:10.1093/fampra/cmp038. ISSN   0263-2136. PMC   2743732 . PMID   19556336.
  19. ↑ Van Dijk, Teun (2005-01-01). "Critical discourse analysis". In Schiffrin, Deborah; Tannen, Deborah; Hamilton, Heidi E. (eds.). The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Malden, Massachusetts, USA: Blackwell Publishers Ltd. pp. 352–371. doi:10.1002/9780470753460. ISBN   978-0-470-75346-0.
  20. ↑ Sutanto, Haryo; Purbaningrum, Dwi (2022-12-29). "Representation of Power and Ideology on Jokowi's Speech". WACANA: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Komunikasi. 21 (2): 238–251. doi: 10.32509/wacana.v21i2.2143 . ISSN   2598-7402. S2CID   255654982.
  21. ↑ Kitaeva, Elena; Ozerova, Olga (2019). Intertextuality in Political Discourse. Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies. pp. 143–170. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-9444-4.ch007. ISBN   9781522594444. S2CID   197717211 . Retrieved 2020-12-03.{{cite book}}: |website= ignored (help)
  22. ↑ Wortham, Stanton; Kim, Deoksoon; May, Stephen, eds. (2017). Discourse and Education. Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02243-7. ISBN   978-3-319-02242-0.
  23. ↑ Hult, F.M. (2015). "Making policy connections across scales using nexus analysis". In Hult, F.M.; Johnson, D.C (eds.). Research Methods in Language Policy and Planning: A Practical Guide (First ed.). Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley. pp. 217–31. ISBN   978-1-118-33984-8. OCLC   905699853..
  24. ↑ Johnson, David W.; Johnson, Roger T. (2000). "Civil political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology". Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology. 6 (4): 291–317. doi:10.1207/S15327949PAC0604_01. ISSN   1532-7949.
  25. ↑ Sutanto, Haryo; Purbaningrum, Dwi (2022-12-29). "Representation of Power and Ideology on Jokowi's Speech". WACANA: Jurnal Ilmiah Ilmu Komunikasi. 21 (2): 238–251. doi: 10.32509/wacana.v21i2.2143 . ISSN   2598-7402. S2CID   255654982.
  26. ↑ Breeze, Ruth (2013). Corporate Discourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic. ISBN   978-1-4411-7753-7. OCLC   852898361.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.