discourse_analysis

nullDISCOURSE ANALYSIS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS 2010-3 nullWhat time did you leave the building? -*what I did at five thirty was leave the building. * No one else had known where the entrance to the cave was situated. What john discovered was the cave. A man took a ride in an airplane. Unfortunately, he fell out,. Fortunately, he had a parachute on. Unfortunately, it didn’t open. Fortunately, there was a haystack below him. Unfortunately, there was a pitchfork out of it. Fortunately he missed the pitchfork. Unfortunately, he missed the haystack.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisWhat is discourse? What is discourse analysis? Discourse, text? Discourse analysis in linguistic proper Why discourse analysis? The scope of discourse analysis Principles of discourse analysis Approaches to discourse analysis Research methods in discourse analysis Resources for discourse analysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisWhat is discourse? Discourse: discursus (argument), originally “a running to and fro” (dis+currere=run different ways) Titscher, S.et.al (2000) put it, discourse may be derived etymologically from the Latin discurrere or from the normalization discursus (running apart from in the transferred sense of indulging in something or giving information about something) Fairclough (1992) lists several uses of the term, particularly as they occur in modern discourse analysis: Samples of spoken dialogue, in contrast with written texts Spoken and written language Situational context of language use Interaction between reader/writer and text Notion of genre Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisDefinitions of discourse found in literature Discourse is a continuous stretch of language larger than a sentence. (Crystal 1986) Discourse is “language above the sentence or above the clause”, (Stubbs 1983) The study of discourse is the study of any aspect of language use.(Fasold 1990) The analysis of discouse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which these forms are designed to serve in human affairs.(Brown&Yule 1983) Critical discourse analysis sees discourse—language in use in speech and writing—as a form of social practice.(Woodak 1996) Three main categories (Schiffrin et al. 2001): a, anything beyond the sentence b, language use c, a broader range of social practice that includes nonlinguistic and nonspecific instances of language Three dimensions of discourse (Van Dijk 1997) a, language use b. the communication of beliefs (cognition) c, interaction in social situations Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisWhat is discourse analysis Discouse analysis is the study of how sentences in spoken and written language form larger meaningful units such as paragraphs and conversation. (Richards et al. 1985) What distinguishes discourse analysis from other sorts of study that bear on human language and communication lies not in the questions discourse analysts ask but in the ways they try to answer them: by analyzing discourse—that is, by examining aspects of the structure and function of language in use. (Johnstone 2002) Multi-displinary discourse analysis: based on the three dimensions of discourse, Van Dijk(1997) identifies three main approaches to discourse analysis: a, those which focus on discourse itself, that is on structures of text and talk b, those which study discourse and communication as cognition c, those which focus on social structure and culture This triangle of discourse-cognition-society is indeed the site of multidisplinary discourse analysis. In the field of Critical Discourse Analysis, discourse analysis is concerned with studying and analyzing written and spoken texts to reveal the discursive sources of power, dominance, inequality and bias. It examines how these discursive sources are maintained and reproduced within specific social, political and historical contexts. Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisWhat is meant by analysis? (Johnstone 2002) a, A process of talking apart: diving longer stretches of discourse into parts according to various criteria and then looking at the particular characteristics of each part: Divisions can be made according to who is talking, for example, where the paragraph boundaries are, when a new topic arises, or the subject ends and the predicate begins. Are grammatical patterns different when social superiors are talking than when their subordinates are? Does new information tend to come in the first sentence or paragraph? Are topic changes signaled by special markers? Do sentence subjects tend to be slots in which events or actions or feelings can be presented as objects? Discourse can be taken apart into individual words or phrases, and concordances of these can be used to support claims about how grammar works or what words are used to mean. Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysisb, analysis that involves taking apart less literally: looking at discourse in a variety of ways, by systematically asking a number of questions, systematically taking several theoretical perspectives, or systematically performing a variety of tests. Such as analysis could include a breaking-down into parts. It could also include a breaking-down into functions (what is persuasive discourse like? What is a narrative like?), or according to participants (how do men talk in all-male groups? How do psychotherapists talk? What is newspaper writing like?) or settings (what goes on in classrooms? In working places? In sororities?) or processes (how do children learn to get the conversation floor? How do people create social categories like “girl” or “foreigner” or “old persons” as they talk to, among each other? ) 3 profusions or confusions discourse, text, discourse analysis, text analysis, text linguistics, discourse studies, discourse research, text studies,语篇， 篇章， 话语 Attempts to distinguish the terms: (Wood & Kroger 2000) The term discourse and text are used interchangeably. Discourse as spoken forms, text as written forms Text as an abstract, theoretical construct that is realized in discourse Discourse is treated as an abstraction and text as its specific realization Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisDiscourse analysis focuses on the structure of naturally occurring spoken language, as found in such discourses as conversations, interviews, commentaries, and speeches. Text analysis focuses on the structure of written language, as found in such texts as essays, notices, road signs, chapters. Text linguistics, in Europe, the term is often used for the study of the linguistic principles governing the structure of all forms of text. Discourse analysis and other fields of study If discourse is all language units with a definable communicative function: field! Help!, No smoking! Mc Carthy (1991): discourse analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship between language and the context in which it is used. field of study delimiting linguistic unit grammar [-suprasentential] [-use] sentence Text linguistics [+suprasentential][-use] text Pragmatics [-suprasentential] [+use] utterance Discourse analysis [+suprasentential] [+use] discourse (Leech,G. 1983) Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis5 discourse analysis in the linguistics proper Formalism and functionalism Leech(1983:46) a, formalism (eg.Chomsky) tend to regard language primarily as a mental phenomenon. Functionalism (Halliday) tend to regard it as a social phenomenon. b, formalism tend to explain linguistic universals as deriving from a common genetic linguistic inheritance of the human species. Functionalism tend to explain them as deriving from the universality of the uses to which language is put in human society. c, formalists are inclined to explain children’s acquisition of language in terms of a built-in human capacity to learn language. Functionalists are inclined to explain it in terms of the development of the children’s communicative needs and abilities in society. d, above all, formalists study language as an autonomous system, whereas functionalists study it in relation to its social function. Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisSchiffrin (1994:21) structural Structure of language code as grammar Use merely implements, perhaps limits, may correlate with, what is analyzed as code, analysis of code prior to analysis of use Elements and structures analytically arbitrary （in cross-culture historical perspective, or universal (in theoretical perspective) Functional (adaptive) equivalence of languages; all languages essentially (potentially) equal Single homogeneous code and community Fundamental concepts, such as speech community, speech act, fluent speaker, functions of speech and of language, taken for granted or arbitrarily postulated functional structure of speech (act event) as ways of speaking analysis of use prior to analysis of code, organization of use discloses additional features and relations; shows code and use in integral (dialectical) relation elements and structures as ethnographically appropriate (psychologically in Sapir’s sense) functional differentiation of languages, varieties, styles; these being existentially not necessarily equivalent speech community a matrix of code-repertories, or speech styles fundamental concepts taken as problematic and to be investigated Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisFunctional is based on two general assumptions: a, language has functions that are external to the linguistic system itself; b, external functions influence the internal organization of the linguistic system. (Schiffrin 1994) Formalism has two characteristics: autonomy and modularity (Newsmeyer 1983) 5 why discourse analysis 5.1 limitations of sentence grammar (Givon 1979) Isolated sentences and their syntax are often at great variance with the syntax of sentences or clauses in natural, unsolicited speech. The study of syntax, when limited to the sentence-clause level and deprived of its communicative-functional context, tends to bypass and even to obscure the immense role that communicative considerations affecting the structure of discourse play in determining so-called syntactic rules. The dogma of autonomous syntax also precludes asking the most interesting questions about the grammar of human language, namely, why it is the way it is; how it got to be that way; what function it serves, and how it relates to the use of human language as an instrument of information processing, storage, retrieval, and—above all—communication. As Lyons (1997) suggests: there is much in the structure of languages that can only be explained n the assumption that they have developed for communication in face-to-face interaction. Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis5.2 understanding the nature of language 5.2.1 textual properties of lexical expressions 5.2.2 textual properties of sentences 5.2.3 the role of discourse in constraining the choices of sentence structures 5.2.4 the role of discourse in determining sentence meaning. A, I can’t stand Sally Binns. She’s tall and thin and walks like a crane. I do admire Sally Binns. She’s tall and thin and walks like a crane. B, 跳下站台，进入隧道，危险 C, 紧急时击碎玻璃，拉下红色手柄，停车后走出车门。勿擅动，危险。 5.3 understanding discourse itself 5.3.1 to know how discourse is organized and the possible ways to mend or perfect “damaged discourse” (Hoey 1983) 5.3.2 to know how ideas and concepts develop in discourse so as to form encoding skills in writing and oral presentation 5.3.3 to know different approaches to discourse analysis so as to be able to adopt different ways to decode different stretches of connected discourse, which may help students in their reading and listening comprehension. 5.3.4 to appreciate or evaluate.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis5.4 two levels of achievement in discourse analysis (Halliday 1994) In any piece of discourse analysis, there are always two possible levels of achievement to aim at: a, a contribution to the understanding of the text: the linguistic analysis enables one to show how, and why, the text means what it does. b,a contribution to the evaluation of the text: the linguistic analysis enables one to say why the text is, or is not, an effective text for its own purposes-in what respects it succeeds and in what respects it fails, or is less successful. 5.5 some uses of discourse analysis (Johnstone 2002) a, extensions of traditional linguistic studies while linguists have long been interested in the structure of words (morphology) and sentences (syntax), discourse analysis has moved the description of structure up a level, looking at actual stretches of connected text or transcript and providing descriptions of the structure of paragraphs, stories, and conversations. As to the study of meaning, in a natural progression from work in semantics and syntax, discourse analysts have asked about what goes where in long stretches of talk than words or phrases: how meaning can be signaled via the arrangement of chunks of information across a series of sentences or via the details of how a conversationalist takes up and responds to what has just been said; how speakers indicate their semantic intentions and how hearers interpret what they hear, and the cognitive abilities that underlie human symbol use.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysisb, contribution to the study of linguistic variation and language change by examining both internal causes of change as well as external causes of change. c, contribution to research on language acquisition, through the analysis of foreign talk and teacher talk, and studies of contrastive rhetoric and contrastive pragmatics. d, helping answer questions about the roles of language in human cognition, art, and social life which have been asked for centuries: artistic uses of language, why people tell stories, why they have conversations, how people adapt language to specialized situation like classrooms and psychotherapy, what persuasion is and how it works. e, useful in answering questions that are posed in many fiends that traditionally focus on human life and communication, such as anthropology, cultural studies, psychology, communications, and sociology, as well as in fields in which the details of discourse have not always been thought relevant, such as geography, parks and recreation, human-computer interaction and interaction design, medicine, law, public policy, and business. Anyone who wants to understand human beings has to understand discourse, so the potential uses of discourse analysis are almost innumerable… to the extent that discourse and discourses-meaning-making, in linguistic and other modes, and ways of acting, being, and envisioning self and environment-are at the center of human experience and activity, discourse analysis can help in answering any question that could be asked about humans in society: discourse analysts help answer questions about social relations, such as dominance and oppression or solidarity. Discourse analysis is useful in the study of personal identity and social identification, as illustrated by work on discourse and gender or discourse and ethnicity. Discourse analysis has been used in the study of how people define and create lifespan processes such as aging and disability as they talk, how decisions are made, resources allocated, and social adaptation or conflict accomplished in public and private life.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis6 scope of discourse analysis Linguists: the feature of language that binds sentences when they are used in sequence. Ethnographers and sociolinguists: the structure of social interaction, especially as manifested in the way people enter into dialogue. Psychologist: carry out experiments on the mental processes underlying comprehension. Computational linguists: produce models of discourse processing Common concern: they stress the need to view language as a dynamic, social, interactive phenomenon—whether between speaker and listener, or writer and reader. It is argued that meaning is not conveyed by single sentences but by more complex stretches of discourse, in which the participants’ belief and expectations, the knowledge they share about each other and about the world, and the situation in which they interact, play a crucial part.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis7 principles of DA 7.1 Van Dijk (1997:29) a, naturally occuring text and talk b, context c, discourse as talk d, discourse as social practice of members e, members’ categories f, sequentially g, constructivity h, levels and dimension i, meaning and function j, rules k, strategies l, social cognition 7.2 Schiffrin (1994:414) a, analysis of discourse is empirical: data come from a speech community; analysis are accountable to the data; analysis are predictive. b, discourse is not just a sequence of linguistic units c, resources for coherence jointly contribute to participant achievement and understanding of what is said. Meant and done through everyday talk. In other words, linguistic forms and meanings work together with social and cultural meanings, and interpretive framework, to create discourse. Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysisd, the structures, meanings, and actions of everyday spoken discourse are interactively achieved. e, what is said, meant and done is sequentially situated. f, how something is said, meant, and done is guided by relationships among the following: !,spoken interaction @, conventionalized strategies for making intentions recognizable #, the meanings and functions of linguistic forms within their emerging context $, the sequential context of other utterances %, properties of the discourse mode, eg, narrative, descriptive, exposition ^, the social context &, a cultural framework of beliefs and actions 7.3 text-linguistic perspectives on discourse (Geogekopoulou & Goutsos 1997) a, the basic unit of analysis is text b, the focus of examination is the language of the text c, text is structured d, text are meaningful linguistic units, which primarily derive their meaning from their situated use. e, there are no privileged texts, but only authentic, attested texts can be the basis of analysis.Grips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis8 approaches to discourse analysis 8.1 McHoul (1994:940) a, the formal approach; discourse as product; traced back to Russian formalism and French structuralism; b, the empirical approach; discourse process, conversation analysis, functional c, the critical approach; power and ideology in discourse; how discourse controls people’s conception and views of the world 8.2 Schiffrin (1994) a, speech act theory b, interactional sociolinguistics c, the ethnography of communication d, pragmatics e, conversation analysis f, variation analysisGrips with Discourse AnalysisGrips with Discourse Analysis9 research method in DA 9.1 research design Research question: what great social and political changes in American society are reflected in influential daily newspapers? Function of the text (logical relation between data and research question): daily newspaper as a convenient repository of socially relevant symbols Approach: content analysis Data collection: a, from what material di I make the selection? From newspapers: the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times b, what do I select from this? The title pages for the years 1890 to 1989 c, how much of this selection do I analyses? A random sample, each of ten sentences o