Expert Of Discourse Analysis
NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH
After i read the definition of discourse analysis,i interest
with the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). i think i will search some expert
about the discourse analysis.some of them are NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH and RUTH
WODAK.so for this opportunity i will choose the exper wich name NORMAN
FAIRCLOUGH.
The simple biography of NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH is :
·
he was born on 1941.
·
he is a ameritus professor
of lancastar university in linguistics.
·
He is also one of the founders of Critical Discourse
Analysis (CDA) as applied to sociolinguistics.
·
Based on NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH
Critical Discoure Analysis (CDA) is concerned with how power is exercised
trought language.Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) learn about discourse in
Critical Discourse Analysis includes: text,video,and practices.
Methodology of (CDA)
Line of
study NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH can called also orientation textual of Discourse
Analysis. Since the early 1980s, Fairclough’s research has focused
on Critical Discourse Analysis, including the place of language in social
relations of power and ideology, and how language figures in process of social
change.over the past three years he has been working especially on aspects of ‘transition’in
Eentral and Eastern Europe,especially Romania,from a Discourse Analytical
perspective.This research is based upon the theoritical claim that Discaurse is
an element of social life which is dialectically interconnected with other
elements.His own recent contribution to this research has included three main
elements:Theoretical development of Critical Discourse Analysis to enhance it
is capacity to contribute to this area of social research.
Developing approaches
to linguistic analysis of text and interactions which are adapted to social
research.
Application of this theory and method in
researching aspects of contemporary social change.
Discussion obove about book and
article of professor NORMAN FAIRCLOUGH,i have some books and articles by
them.you can see or open the his book or erticles if you want to search about
Critical Discourse Analisysis (CDA).this is some of books and articles by them
:
BOOKS
- Fairclough, Norman (1992). Discourse and social
change.Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Fairclough, Norman (1995). Media
Discourse.London: Edward Arnol.
- Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical Discourse
Analysis.Boston: Addison Wesley.
ARTICLES
- Fairclough,
Norman (1985). Critical and
Descriptive Goals in Discourse Analysis journal of pragmatics 9 : 739
-763.
- Fairclough,
Norman (1992) Discourse and Text: Linguistics Intertextual Analysis within
Discourse Analysis.Discourse and Society 3(2): 193-217.
- Fairclough,
Norman (1993). Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketisation of Public
Discourse: The Universities.Discourse and Society 4(2): 133-168.
1. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
Critical
Discourse Analysis has been since 1952 when Zellig Harris created an article
that its title is Discourse Analysis in language journal. In 1970's, the
analysts realized that to be more critical when analyze a text or discourse is
extremely important. Then, many experts try to make theories of CDA.
critical discourse analysis can be also aimed at revealing ideological biases on the basis of the sychoronic studies of lexical patterns.
critical discourse analysis can be also aimed at revealing ideological biases on the basis of the sychoronic studies of lexical patterns.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a branch of linguistics that seeks to
understand how and why certain texts affect readers and hearers. Through the
analysis of grammar, it aims to uncover the 'hidden ideologies' that can
influence a reader or hearer's view of the world. Analysts have looked at a
wide variety of spoken and written texts – political manifestos, advertising,
rules and regulations – in an attempt to demonstrate how text producers use
language (wittingly or not) in a way that could be ideologically significant.
According to Fairclough (1995), CDA is one of Discourse Analysis branches that
focuses on the connections and interactions between language use, ideology,
power, discourse, and socialcultural change.
CDA is not a monolithic method or field of study but rather a
loose agglomeration of approaches to the study of discourse, all of which are
located broadly within the tradition of critical social research that has its
roots in the work of the Frankfurt School (Wodak and Meyer 2001). Though having
developed, at least initially, largely independently of each other, these
approaches are united by a concern to understand how social power, its use and
abuse, is related to spoken and written language.
2. Political Discourse
Political discourse is about the text and talk of professional politicians or
political institutions, such as presidenta and prime ministers and other
members of government, parliament or political parties, both at the local,
national and international levels. Some of the studies of politicians take a
discourse analytical approach (Carbó 1984; Dillon et al. 1990; Harris 1991;
Holly 1990; Maynard.
This
way of defining political discourse ishardly different from the identification
of medical, legal or educational discoursewith the respective participants in
the domains of medicine, law or education.This is the relatively easy part (if
we can agree on what `politics' means).
From the interactional point
of view ofdiscourse analysis, we therefore should also include the various
recipients inpolitical communicative events, such as the public, the people,
citizens, the`masses', and other groups or categories. That is, once we locate politics
and itsdiscourses in the public sphere, many more participants in political
communicationappear on the stage.
Obviously, the same is true for the definition of the field of media
discourse,which also needs to focus on its audiences. And also in medical,
legal or educational discourse, we not only think of participants such as
doctors, lawyers or teachers, but also of patients, defendants and students.
Hence, the delimitation of political discourse by its principal authors' is
insufficient and needs to be extended to a more complex picture of all its
relevant participants, whether or not these are actively involved in political
discourse, or merely as recipients in one-way modes of communication.
Definition of discourse :
1. Discourse is generally used to designate the forms of representation, codes, conventions and habits of language that produce specific fields of culturally and historically located meanings.
2. In linguistics, discourse refers to a unit of language longer than a single sentence. More broadly, discourse is the use of spoken or written language in a social context.
3. Discourse From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Discourse (from Latin discursus, "running to and from") denotes written and spoken communications such as:
1. Discourse is generally used to designate the forms of representation, codes, conventions and habits of language that produce specific fields of culturally and historically located meanings.
2. In linguistics, discourse refers to a unit of language longer than a single sentence. More broadly, discourse is the use of spoken or written language in a social context.
3. Discourse From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: Discourse (from Latin discursus, "running to and from") denotes written and spoken communications such as:
- In semantics and discourse analysis: Discourse is a conceptual generalization of conversation within each modality and context of communication.
- The totality of codified language (vocabulary) used in a given field of intellectual enquiry and of social practice, such as legal discourse, medical discourse, religious discourse, et cetera.
- In the work of Michel Foucault, and that of the social theoreticians he inspired: discourse describes "an entity of sequences, of signs, in that they are enouncements (énoncés)", statements in conversation.
4. Discourse is written as well as spoken: every utterance
assuming the a speaker Foucault, 1972: 80) The specification with the term is
that ‘discourse must be used with its social purpose’ this is the main
specification of discourse.
5. Foucault presents possibly the best definition of
discourse. He says, “Systems of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, and
courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the
subjects and the worlds of which they speak.
Definition of analysis :
1.
Analysis
is the process of breaking a complex topic or substance into smaller
parts in order to gain a better understanding of it.
2.
Simple Definition of analysis
a.
a careful study of something to learn about its parts, what they do,
and how they are related to each other
b.
an explanation of the nature and meaning of something.
3. Brown and Yule (1983) ) observe that DA examines “how addressers construct linguistic messages for addressees and how addressees work on linguistic messages in order to interpret them.”
4.While Nunan (1993), states the definition of discourse linguistics as the study of how stretches of language used in communication assume meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of coherence (an interaction of text with given participants/context).
5. Discourse analysis does not presuppose a bias towards the study of either spoken or written language. In fact, the monolithic character of the categories of speech and writing has been widely challenged,especially as the gaze of analysts turns to multi-media texts and practices on the Internet.
3. Brown and Yule (1983) ) observe that DA examines “how addressers construct linguistic messages for addressees and how addressees work on linguistic messages in order to interpret them.”
4.While Nunan (1993), states the definition of discourse linguistics as the study of how stretches of language used in communication assume meaning, purpose and unity for their users: the quality of coherence (an interaction of text with given participants/context).
5. Discourse analysis does not presuppose a bias towards the study of either spoken or written language. In fact, the monolithic character of the categories of speech and writing has been widely challenged,especially as the gaze of analysts turns to multi-media texts and practices on the Internet.
Definition of discourse analysis
1. Discourse analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language 'beyond the sentence'.
1. Discourse analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language 'beyond the sentence'.
2. This contrasts with types of analysis more typical of modern linguistics, which are chiefly concerned with the study of grammar: the study of smaller bits of language, such as sounds (phonetics and phonology), parts of words (morphology), meaning (semantics), and the order of words in sentences (syntax). Discourse analysts study larger chunks of as they flow together.
3. Discourse analysis (DA), or discourse studies, is a general term for a number of approaches to analyze written, vocal, or sign language use, or any significant semiotic event.
4. discourse analysis is very ambiguous. It refers mainly to the linguistic analysis of naturally occurring connected speech or written discourse. Roughly speaking, it refers to attempts to study the organization of language above the sentence or above the clause, and therefore to study larger linguistic units, such as conversational exchanges or written texts. It follows that discourse analysis is also concerned with language use in social contexts, and in particular with interaction or dialogue between speakers.
5. Discourse
analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language 'beyond the sentence.
This contrasts with types of analysis more typical of modern linguistics, which
are chiefly concerned with the study of grammar: the study of smaller bits of
language, such as sounds (phonetics and phonology), parts of words
(morphology), meaning (semantics), and the order of words in sentences
(syntax). Discourse analysts study larger chunks of as they flow together.
