History of Discourse Analysis
Discourse Analysis was emerged in 1970s. In the first full decade of its existence, a number of key studies were published: Brown and Yule (1983), de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981), Stubbs (1983) and van Dijk (1983). Moreover, two journals have published; Discourse Process (from 1970s) and Texts (from 1980). This field of study is still new as it contributes to the systematic linguistic analysis of spoken and written form. This field of study requires systematic analysis of both spoken and written discourse.
However, despite of this, there was a writing published in France in 1964 (Communication 4): a new critical analysis of Propp by Bremond, an application of modern linguistics and semantics to literature by Todorov, the well-known extension to the analysis of film by Metz, the famous rhetorical analysis of publicity pictures by Barthes, and finally the first introduction to new discipline of semiotics semiologie which was also by Barthes. Furthermore, during that period, it was also other few writings and publications produced on structuralism and its theory in text analysis.
In the early 1970s, there was several publication on systematic discourse analysis. The discovery in linguistics on speech acts contributes to the development of discourse analysis during this time. This development includes the social context, defining speaker's attentions, beliefs and relate them to the relationship of speaker and listener. This new dimension as added a pragmatic orientation in discourse analysis.
The development continues on its grammatical framework itself. This includes the study of pronouns, cohesion markers, semantic coherence, presupposition, topic and also the comments. It led for a broader study of textlinguistics and discourse.
Meanwhile, in the early 1970s, there was development of sociology on the analysis of everyday conversation. The conversational analysis included the early structure and formal approaches to the structure of sentences and it was then provide first elements of grammar of verbal interaction.
Read more on this topic at
However, despite of this, there was a writing published in France in 1964 (Communication 4): a new critical analysis of Propp by Bremond, an application of modern linguistics and semantics to literature by Todorov, the well-known extension to the analysis of film by Metz, the famous rhetorical analysis of publicity pictures by Barthes, and finally the first introduction to new discipline of semiotics semiologie which was also by Barthes. Furthermore, during that period, it was also other few writings and publications produced on structuralism and its theory in text analysis.
In the early 1970s, there was several publication on systematic discourse analysis. The discovery in linguistics on speech acts contributes to the development of discourse analysis during this time. This development includes the social context, defining speaker's attentions, beliefs and relate them to the relationship of speaker and listener. This new dimension as added a pragmatic orientation in discourse analysis.
The development continues on its grammatical framework itself. This includes the study of pronouns, cohesion markers, semantic coherence, presupposition, topic and also the comments. It led for a broader study of textlinguistics and discourse.
Meanwhile, in the early 1970s, there was development of sociology on the analysis of everyday conversation. The conversational analysis included the early structure and formal approaches to the structure of sentences and it was then provide first elements of grammar of verbal interaction.
Read more on this topic at
_________________________________________________________________________________
Bits and Pieces of Discourse Analysis
Salam folks!
Thank you for staying tune with this blog! In this section of blog, we intend to
let you venture yourselves more into the Discourse Analysis course module, in depth, insha
Allah.
Talking about Discourse Analysis.... Ah,
discourse! What an elude term to be defined and captured. Or, rather, it
inspires a whole mess of varying definitions -- most of which serve only to
make it even more mysterious,
more elusive!
However, in discourse analysis it is essential
to acknowledge the difference between spoken
words, painted pictures, tuned music, written sentences (and many more), thus different means of
communication hold different ways of influence. It is also essential to
acknowledge that texts are not meaningful individually: it is interconnected with other texts (Phillips N & Hardy C, 2002).
Discourse analysis is a qualitative method, which is more concentrating on meaning of data than to the generality of the data. The word discourse was first used in 1950’s Zellig Harris, but it became scientifically accepted in Europe through the writings of Michel Foucault in his book “The Archaeology of Knowledge” in 1969. There goes a 'lil bit of History there!
Why is it so important for us to
first, understand the nature of discourse? Because discourse can be anything
from a grunt or single expletive, through short conversations and scribbled
notes right up to novels or a lengthy legal case.
Discourse Analysis is the study of discourse, or language used by members of a speech community, it looks at both language form and function, and includes the study of both spoken interaction and written texts. Well.. To sound very intact, it is a cross-disciplinary field, originally developing from Sociolinguistics, Anthropology, Sociology and Social Psychology. Much language study and most of language teaching has always been devoted to sentences.
Discourse Analysis is the study of discourse, or language used by members of a speech community, it looks at both language form and function, and includes the study of both spoken interaction and written texts. Well.. To sound very intact, it is a cross-disciplinary field, originally developing from Sociolinguistics, Anthropology, Sociology and Social Psychology. Much language study and most of language teaching has always been devoted to sentences.
However, it is obvious that there is
more to using language, and communicating successfully with other people, than
being able to produce correct sentences.
We provide some illustrations below to give a clearer picture of what the whole idea of discourse is all about..!
Illustration 1
We provide some illustrations below to give a clearer picture of what the whole idea of discourse is all about..!
Illustration 1
A.
Chicken marmalade. That’s a funny looking dress. Inconsistent. Come here honey. Discourse may be composed of one or more well-formed sentences which are grammatically correct. I hate that man! My toes hurt. Revenge. Who’s your great uncle?
B.
Zidane stood and waited to see what would happen, but he pulled off his captain’s armband, indicating that he knew he was going to be expelled. Argentine referee Horacio Elizondo consulted the assistant, then ran over to Zidane, reached into his back pocket for the red card and brandished it at the player. Zidane’s World Cup, and his career, were over. He trudged to the sideline, stripping the bandage off his wrist while doing so. He did not argue the call.
Zidane stood and waited to see what would happen, but he pulled off his captain’s armband, indicating that he knew he was going to be expelled. Argentine referee Horacio Elizondo consulted the assistant, then ran over to Zidane, reached into his back pocket for the red card and brandished it at the player. Zidane’s World Cup, and his career, were over. He trudged to the sideline, stripping the bandage off his wrist while doing so. He did not argue the call.
Now.. which of the above texts is more
cohesive? Which is coherent? Which one is discourse?
A piece of language is said to be coherent (therefore discourse) if it has a discernible, unified meaning. A piece of discourse is said to be cohesive if its components (ie. sentences/phrases/words) are bound together through linguistic and non-linguistic features to form a unified whole.
To make it more understandable.. We
must also know some components of discourse devices which enable us to identify
meanings in discourse and to also be participative in a particular discourse,
mentally and verbally. So.. Obviously, it is safe to say that Illustration B is more cohesive, coherent and can be called a discourse due to all the criteria mentioned!
Important Tools!
In Discourse Analysis, there are few important elements (or aspects) that are coming into picture upon completing the task of analysis and they are;
Cohesion and Cohesive Devices
In Discourse Analysis, there are few important elements (or aspects) that are coming into picture upon completing the task of analysis and they are;
Cohesion and Cohesive Devices
A stretch of language becomes
discourse when it has unity and coherence.
Coherence is achieved in discourse by
contextual features outside the language as well as formal links within the
discourse. Such formal links within text that links sentences/clauses are known
as cohesive devices. The purpose of cohesive devices is to hold parts of the
discourse together in order to achieve overall unity.
Among the most common cohesive
devices are:
i. verb
formii. parallelism
iii. referring expressions
iv. repetition and lexical chains
v. substitution
vi. ellipsis
vii. Conjunction
iii. referring expressions
iv. repetition and lexical chains
v. substitution
vi. ellipsis
vii. Conjunction
i. Verb form
Cohesion is attained in a piece of
discourse by the forms of the verbs used. The form of the verb in one sentence
limits the choice of verbs form in the next. Depending on the time frame to
which the piece of discourse alludes, the verbs used in it need to conform to
the particular tense.
e.g.
Speaker 1: Right, who’s going to arrange the transport?
Well, someone’s gotta do it.
Speaker 2: I’m not going to.
Speaker 1: Come on, will you?
Speaker 1: Right, who’s going to arrange the transport?
Well, someone’s gotta do it.
Speaker 2: I’m not going to.
Speaker 1: Come on, will you?
All the verbs are in the present.
There is an apparent degree of formal connection between them, a way in which
the first tense conditions all the others.
It would be quite strange if the
conversation had been:
Speaker 1: Right, who’s going to
arrange the transport?
Well, someone had gotta do it.
Speaker 2: I shan’t have been going to.
Speaker 2: Don’t! Come on, will you?
Well, someone had gotta do it.
Speaker 2: I shan’t have been going to.
Speaker 2: Don’t! Come on, will you?
ii. Parallelism
Another link in discourse is created
by parallelism, a device which effects a connection simply by repeating the
form of the sentences/clauses
e.g.
Pregnant women get emotional very
easily. They get emotional if you raise your voice at them. They get emotional
if you do something romantic. They get emotional if you notice they are eating a
lot. They get emotional if you tell them they look beautiful. They get
emotional if you are too protective. They get emotional if you are not
protective enough.
What links the sentences in the above
discourse?
Parallelism is often used in
speeches, prayers, poetry and advertisements. It can have a powerful emotional
effect, and it is also very useful as a memory aid.
Parallelism, which achieves cohesion
by an echo of form, is not restricted to grammatical form.
e.g.
A.
Georgie Porgie pudding and pie
Kissed the girls and made them cry
When the boys came out to play
Georgie Porgie ran away
A.
Georgie Porgie pudding and pie
Kissed the girls and made them cry
When the boys came out to play
Georgie Porgie ran away
B.
Speaker 1: We would like to take this opportunity to wish you the best of luck
Speaker 2: Go break a leg man!
Speaker 1: We would like to take this opportunity to wish you the best of luck
Speaker 2: Go break a leg man!
iii. Referring expressions
The meanings of some words can be
decoded only by referring to other words or elements of the context which are
clear to both the speaker and listener.
The most obvious example of this are
third person pronouns – she/her/hers/herself , he/him/his/himself,
it/its/itself
Sometimes, more than a knowledge of
the meaning of the word is necessary to decipher the meanings of referring
expressions
e.g.
Then they burnt it.
Referring expressions can be anaphoric, cataphoric or exophoric
Then they burnt it.
Referring expressions can be anaphoric, cataphoric or exophoric
Anaphoric references are those that
refer back to elements mentioned earlier in the discourse. (ana means “upwards”
and phor means “to carry.”)
e.g.
The passengers presented themselves
for checking before boarding the plane.
Cataphoric references are those that
refer to elements that are mentioned after them. (cata means ‘downwards’)
e.g.
This is what she said – our teacher
is a raving lunatic!
Exophoric references are those that
refer to elements outside the text. (exo means ‘outside’)
e.g.
Finally, on 7 May 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allied Forces
Finally, on 7 May 1945, Germany surrendered to the Allied Forces
iv. Repetition and lexical chains
The same sort of link as pronouns can
be created by the repetition of words.
Native speakers are, however, often
discouraged from repeating the same word as it is considered ‘bad style’. What
is encouraged is ‘elegant repetition’ where synonyms or more general
words/phrases are used.
e.g.
Dice the mangoes into large cubes.
Arrange the diced mango cubes on a plate, in any pattern you like. Pour whipped
cream over the diced mango cubes.
Referring expressions, repetitions
and elegant repetitions all establish cohesion by creating ‘chains’ of
connected words/clauses. Such lexical chains can also consist
of words that associate with each other by virtue of some formal semantic
connection.
e.g.
Four legs good. Two legs bad.
v. Substitution
Another type of cohesive device is
the substitution of one word with another.
e.g.
Speaker 1: Which shirt shall I wear today?
Speaker 2: The maroon one.
Speaker 2: You also like that one then?
Speaker 1: Yes, I do! I think It suits you better.
Speaker 2: I think so too.
Speaker 1: Which shirt shall I wear today?
Speaker 2: The maroon one.
Speaker 2: You also like that one then?
Speaker 1: Yes, I do! I think It suits you better.
Speaker 2: I think so too.
vi. Ellipsis
Sometimes, it is not necessary to
provide a substitution for a word/phrase which has already been mentioned. It
is simply omitted, but can be reconstructed quite successfully.
Omitting part of a sentence on the
assumption that an earlier sentence or context will make the meaning clear is
known as ellipsis. Ellipsis is also referred to as ‘substitution by zero’.
e.g.
Speaker 1: Have you been shopping
girls? What did you buy on your [shopping] spree?
Speaker 2: I bought jewelry and Zee [bought] clothes,
Speaker 3: Clothes? You already have more than enough [clothes], and you bought more [clothes]?
Speaker 2: I bought jewelry and Zee [bought] clothes,
Speaker 3: Clothes? You already have more than enough [clothes], and you bought more [clothes]?
vii. Conjunction
Conjunctions are another type of
cohesive device. They draw explicit attention to the type of relation which
exists between one sentence/clause and another.
e.g.
First, peel and clean the potatoes.
Then bake them. A conventional oven is best. However, a microwave oven will
also do. Potatoes burn easily, so make sure you keep a close watch on the
timer!
All of the elements/aspects mentioned are also the ones that we learnt in our Discourse Analysis course (ENGL 4635) under the tutelage of Dr. Haja Mohideen, few semesters back. Hence, we think that it is important to include in this section.
We hope you are enlightened by what we share here, stay tune with the next entries for more info rmation on Discourse Analysis module.
Till then,
Wassalam.
Source taken from:
http://www.azlifa.com/discourse-and-pragmatics-lecture-1/
_____________________________________________________________________________
Source taken from:
http://aggslanguage.wordpress.com/gender-interaction-theory-%E2%80%93-holmes-tannen-cameron-defrancisco/
____________________________________________________________________________
2. Language is 'always in the world'
2. Language is 'always in the world'
All of the elements/aspects mentioned are also the ones that we learnt in our Discourse Analysis course (ENGL 4635) under the tutelage of Dr. Haja Mohideen, few semesters back. Hence, we think that it is important to include in this section.
We hope you are enlightened by what we share here, stay tune with the next entries for more info rmation on Discourse Analysis module.
Till then,
Wassalam.
Source taken from:
http://www.azlifa.com/discourse-and-pragmatics-lecture-1/
_____________________________________________________________________________
Gender and Discourse
Do men and women produce different linguistic forms and functions?
Do they have a different way of interacting when they talk?
Do women speak differently when men are around?
Do men speak differently when women are around?
Gender differences in language
1) Traditional terms of address : Mr. (men) –no term for marital status of men
: Mrs (married women) and Miss (unmarried women)
2) Pronoun ‘He’ : used to identify when sex is unknown
3) Terms for both sexes: Actor and author can be applied to both sexes but actress/authoress cannot.
Linguistics differences
1) Pronunciation: dialect, prestige forms, vocabulary choice, variation of pitch and swearing.
2) Vocabulary: Women use more precise color terms, more affective adjectives, more markers of politeness (and euphemisms), more hedges (well, kind of) and more tag questions (isn’t it, don’t you) compared to men.
Interactional differences
Men
1) Tell fewer stories,
2) Topics: sports, cars, technology, travel, their achievements
3) More technical language, swearing, taboo language, comical incidents
4) Pay less attention to details and avoid personal talk
5) Competitive
Women:
1) Tell more stories with eye contact
2) Topic: family, personal information, emotional issues such as fear and embarrassment, gossip
3) Talk about men and women
4) Non-competitive
Mixed talk
Men: Longer turns, more expressive, different topics and less taboo language
Women: More taboo language.
http://aggslanguage.wordpress.com/gender-interaction-theory-%E2%80%93-holmes-tannen-cameron-defrancisco/
____________________________________________________________________________
Sneak Peek of What Discourse Analysis is all about:
Discourse Analysis is the study of the ways sentences and utterances are put together to make texts and interactions and how those texts and interactions fit into our social world. It is also the study of semantics, syntax, morphology which makes it, an interdisciplinary study. But, discourse analysis is not just the study of language. It is a way of looking at language that focuses on how people use it in real life which has various purpose such as joke and argue and persuade and flirt, and to show that they are certain kinds of people belong to certain groups. This way of looking at language is based on four main assumptions and they are:
1. Language is ambiguous
What things mean is never absolutely clear. All communication involves interpreting what other people mean and what they are trying to do.
2. Language is 'always in the world'
Means, what language means is always a matter of where and when it is used and what it is used.
3. The way we use language is inseparable from who we are and the different social groups to which we belong
We use language to display different kinds of social identities and to show that we belong to different group.
4. Language is never used all by itself.
It is always combined with other things such as our tone of voice, facial expressions and gestures, when we speak, and the fonts, layout and graphics we use in written texts. What language means and what we can do with it is often a matter of how it is combined with these other things.
So, what good is discourse analysis?
We already engage in discourse analysis all the time when we try to figure out what people mean by what they say and when we try to express our multiple and complicated meanings to them.
Discourse analysis can help us to understand how the societies in which we live are put together and how they are maintained through our day-to-day activities of speaking, writing and making use of other modes of communication.
It can help us to:
1. Understand why people interact with one another the way they do
2. How people exert power and influence over one another
3. Understand how people view reality differently and why they view it that way
The study of discourse analysis, then, is not just the study of how we use language. It is also indirectly the study of politics, power, psychology, romance and a whole lot of other things! :)
For a brief visual overview of what Discourse Analysis is all about, please click to the video below.
Sneak Peek of What Discourse Analysis is all about:
Discourse Analysis is the study of the ways sentences and utterances are put together to make texts and interactions and how those texts and interactions fit into our social world. It is also the study of semantics, syntax, morphology which makes it, an interdisciplinary study. But, discourse analysis is not just the study of language. It is a way of looking at language that focuses on how people use it in real life which has various purpose such as joke and argue and persuade and flirt, and to show that they are certain kinds of people belong to certain groups. This way of looking at language is based on four main assumptions and they are:
1. Language is ambiguous
What things mean is never absolutely clear. All communication involves interpreting what other people mean and what they are trying to do.
2. Language is 'always in the world'
Means, what language means is always a matter of where and when it is used and what it is used.
3. The way we use language is inseparable from who we are and the different social groups to which we belong
We use language to display different kinds of social identities and to show that we belong to different group.
4. Language is never used all by itself.
It is always combined with other things such as our tone of voice, facial expressions and gestures, when we speak, and the fonts, layout and graphics we use in written texts. What language means and what we can do with it is often a matter of how it is combined with these other things.
So, what good is discourse analysis?
We already engage in discourse analysis all the time when we try to figure out what people mean by what they say and when we try to express our multiple and complicated meanings to them.
Discourse analysis can help us to understand how the societies in which we live are put together and how they are maintained through our day-to-day activities of speaking, writing and making use of other modes of communication.
It can help us to:
1. Understand why people interact with one another the way they do
2. How people exert power and influence over one another
3. Understand how people view reality differently and why they view it that way
The study of discourse analysis, then, is not just the study of how we use language. It is also indirectly the study of politics, power, psychology, romance and a whole lot of other things! :)
For a brief visual overview of what Discourse Analysis is all about, please click to the video below.
No comments:
Post a Comment