Lecture (1) Introduction The study of well-established meanings or - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lecture (1) Introduction

 The study of well-established

meanings or ideas around a topic which shape how we can talk about it. e.g. ‘discourse

• f

religions’, ‘discourse

• f

economy and social welfare’

 The study of how meanings are established, used,

challenged and changed (including in talk)

(i)

Over time (‘genealogical study’ Foucault)

(ii)

In ordinary life (discourse practices)

Discourse is:

 defined broadly as language

in its contexts of use.

 language above the sentence

• r above the clause level

knowing a language is concerned with....

 grammar and vocabulary  how to participate in a conversation  how to structure a written text.

Thus, it is necessary to take context into account and how the units of language combine together and structure the

• verall discourse.

More restricted in sense, the term ‘discourse’ can also be used to refer to a particular set of ideas and how they are articulated. Examples:

 the discourse of religion.  the discourse of environmentalism,  the discourse of neo-liberalism  the discourse of feminism.

 In this case, the term ‘Discourse’ (with capital D) refers to a

type of specialised knowledge and language used by a particular social group.

 This meaning is associated with French post-structuralist

thinkers such as Michel Foucault.

 A little ‘d’ discourse: as language in the contexts of its use

and above the level of the sentence.

 Big ‘D’ discourse: as ideas and how they are articulated.

note the first is always singular, while the second can be pluralised

 Discourse Studies can be defined as the study of language in

its contexts of use and above the level of the sentence.

 Discourse

Studies, as a discipline, essentially an interdisciplinary activity, employed in such diverse fields as anthropology, business studies, communication studies, cultural studies educational studies, environmental studies, law, literary studies, media studies, philosophy, politics, psychology, sociology, and many others, in addition to linguistics.

 Structural or textual definition of discourse:

Discourse is a particular unit of language (above the sentence).

 Functional definition of discourse: Discourse is a particular

focus of language use.

St Stru ructural l funct ctio ional l a text or group of texts would be broken down into their component parts. look at how elements of language are held together in coherent units considers the particular meanings and communicative forces associated with what is said or written. considers language as a type of communicative action

functional approach to discourse considers language as a type of communicative action.

 It considers questions such as:

How is language used persuasively (e.g. to request, accept, refuse, complain?) What sort of language is polite language? How do people use language to convey meanings indirectly? What constitutes racist or sexist language? How do people exercise power through their use of language? What might be the hidden motivations behind certain uses of language?

functional approach to discourse can alternatively might look at particular discourse genres.

 Here, the discourse analyst asks:

How language is used in academic essays, in research articles, in conference presentations, in letters, in reports and in meetings?

 Here the concern is again with communicative purposes or

communicative action, but the focus is on particular contexts

• f use.

functional approach to discourse can also consider how language is used by particular social groups (known as register analysis).

 Here, the discourse analyst asks:

How do teachers or politicians or business executives use language? How do men and women vary in their use of language? What is particular about the language used by such people that it identifies them as belonging to particular social groups?

 Functional

analysis suggests a qualitative rather than a quantitative methodology and, indeed, most Discourse Analysis is qualitative in nature.

 The concern is not with measuring and counting, but with

describing.

 The use of computers, quantitative analysis has received more

attention and discourse analysts may also use computers to derive quantitative findings (for example, on the relative frequency

• f

particular language patterns by different individuals or social groups in particular texts or groups of texts).

 Discourse Analysis may focus on any sort of text, written or

spoken.

 The term ‘text’, in Discourse Analysis, refers to any stretch of

spoken or written language.

 In written text, Discourse Analysis may consider texts as

diverse as news reports, textbooks, company reports, personal letters, business letters, e-mails and faxes.

 In spoken discourse, it may focus on casual conversations,

business and other professional meetings, service encounters (buying and selling goods and services) and classroom lessons, among many others.

 in recent years, it has started to extend its field of activity to

consider multimodal discourse, where written and/or spoken text is combined with visual or aural dimensions, such as television programmes, movies, websites, museum exhibits and advertisements of various kinds.

 These texts, which form the data of Discourse Analysis, may

be contemporary or historical.

 register analysis: studies the typical features of particular

fields of activity or professions.

 cohesion, coherence and thematic development: investigate

how text is held together, in terms of both structure and function.

 Pragmatics: studies language in terms of the actions it

performs.

 Conversation Analysis: takes a micro-analytic approach to

spoken interaction.

 Genre Analysis: studies language in terms of the different

recurrent stages it goes through in specific contexts.

 Corpus-based Discourse Analysis: uses computers in the

analysis of very large bodies of text (known as corpora – singular corpus) in order to identify particular phraseologies (wordings) and rhetorical patterning.

 Critical Discourse Analysis: interprets texts from a social

perspective, analysing power relations and cases

• f

manipulation and discrimination in discourse.

in inform

• rmal f

fields ields form

• rmal f

l fields ields

• analyse how people

interact in conversation and in service encounters,

• to analyse how they tell

stories,

• to analyse how they

gossip

• to analyse how they chat.
• fruitfully employed

in the political arena

• in analysing the

media

• in the law
• in healthcare
• in business and
• ther forms of

bureaucracy.

 The definitions given above for Discourse Analysis and

Discourse Studies refers to the study of language in its contexts of use.

 Hymes (1972a) identified 16 features of situation, or context,

some of which are listed as follows:

• the physical and temporal setting;
• the participants (speaker or writer, listener or reader);
• the purposes of the participants;

features of situation, or context...cont.

• the channel of communication (e.g. face to face, electronic,

televised, written);

• the attitude of the participants;
• the genre, or type of speech event: poem, lecture, editorial,

sermon;

• background knowledge pertaining to the participants.

The things we know about the world assist us in the interpretation of discourse.

Example: participants

 ‘Sit down!’ is likely to be interpreted as appropriate when

spoken by a parent to a child. When addressed to a superior, however, it would likely be interpreted as rude.

 The important variable, therefore, in this example, is the

participants, whether one of them is a child or a superior.

Example: channel of communication ‘CUL8ER’

 the following might be perfectly acceptable as a text message

sent via the channel of a mobile phone: ‘CUL8ER’ (that is to say, ‘see you later’), but sent by means of another channel, such as a business letter, it would more likely be perceived as uneducated or rude.

Example: background knowledge

 suppose two people are playing a game and one says to the

• ther ‘Make sure you follow all the rules.’

 This person is relying on the other person knowing what these

rules are. It would be redundant to have to specify all of the rules. In this way, background knowledge makes communication more efficient.

 van Dijk (2008: x) stresses how contexts are ‘not some kind of

• bjective condition or direct cause’, but are, rather, subjective

constructs that develop over the course of an interaction.

 Individuals each develop and define their own contexts

according to their ‘(on-going) subjective interpretations of communicative situations’ (van Dijk, 2008: x).

 Context, for van Dijk, is thus not just a social phenomenon,

but a sociocognitive one.

 discourse analysts have come to accept the importance of

considering other texts in the analysis of a given text.

 One text cannot be understood except in relation to other texts

which have gone before (and, indeed, which are likely to follow).

 The intertextuality (Bakhtin, 1981) in this example – how one

text relates back to another text or texts – is made explicit.

 Another example of intertextuality, which is even more

explicit, would be direct quotation of one text in another, indicated through the use of inverted commas.

Here are some

• ther

examples

• f

intertextuality from newspaper headlines:

 Merkel is no Bond Girl

(German leader Angela Merkel says that she will not support the issuance of Eurobonds; intertext: James Bond movies, each of which features a ‘Bond girl’

Here are some

• ther

examples

• f

intertextuality from newspaper headlines:

 American Airlines is Terminal

(The airline is on the verge of bankruptcy; intertext: aircraft

• perate out of terminals)

Here are some

• ther

examples

• f

intertextuality from newspaper headlines:

 It’s Acropolis Now, Greece!

(Greece is on the verge of bankruptcy; intertext: the Vietnam War film Apocalypse Now! Directed by Francis Ford Coppola)

Here are some questions you may address to analyse a given discourse:

 Type 1 questions: who is doing what to whom?  Type 2 questions: attitudes, beliefs, and opinions  Type 3 question: Holding the discourse together

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

 Type 1 questions: who is doing what to whom? 1.

Who is the discourse aimed at?

2.

Who is involved in this discourse?

3.

What is the intention or purpose of this discourse?

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

 Type 2 questions: attitudes, beliefs, and opinions 1.

What is your overall impression of the speaker’s feelings?

2.

Can you point to the words/phrases that indicate these feelings of you?

3.

What kind of phrases/sentences does he use that demonstrate his state of mind?

4.

Is there any phrase/sentence that stands out as an indicator

• f the speaker’s feelings?

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

A catastrophic event, grief, sadness Making judgment (tinged with anger)

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

Uttering threats and making promises of future action

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

Uttering threats and making promises of future action Include the words will or going to

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

Uttering threats and making promises of future action Include the words will or going to All have the same form (statements)

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

Uttering threats and making promises of future action Include the words will or going to All have the same form (statements) Short/to the point (making the threat easy to identify)

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

Command/have strong impact At the end of his ‘call to arm’ speech

 Type 3 question: Holding the discourse together 1.

What words and phrases does the speaker use to let us know that he is focusing on particular themes or topics?

2.

How can listeners/readers, in general, and listeners of his speech, in particular, recognize that a specific discourse is a unified whole as opposed to just a collection of individual sentences.

“We’re at War”

President G. W. Bush September 14, 2001

I’ve asked the highest levels of our government to come to discuss the current tragedy that has so deeply affected our nation. Our country mourns for the loss of life and for those whose lives have been so deeply affected by this despicable act of terror. I am going to describe to our leadership what I saw: the wreckage of New York City, the signs of the first battle of war. We’re going to meet and deliberate and discuss – but there’s no question about it, this act will not stand; we will find those who did it; we will smoke them

• ut of their holes; we will get them running and we’ll bring them to justice.

We will not only deal with those who dare attack America, we will deal with those who harbor them and feed them and house them. Make no mistake about it: underneath our tears is the strong determination of America to win this war. And we will win it. I’m going to ask the Secretary

• f State to say a few things, and then the Attorney General.

 Type 3 question: Holding the discourse together

Vocabu bula lary chain ins War Tragedy President We/us Them/those

 Type 3 question: Holding the discourse together

Vocabu bula lary chain ins War Tragedy President We/us Them/those act of terror, deeply, wreckage affected, the loss

• f life

The highest levels, government, leadership Describe, meet , deliberate , discuss, find, smoke them

• ut, get them

running, bring them to justice their holes, bring them to justice, deal with, dare attack, those who harbor them, feed them, and house them