You are on page 1of 26

CRITICAL DISCOURSE

ANALYSIS
Some important concepts and
considerations

RUTH WODAK

DISTINGUISHED PROFESSOR
OF DISCOURSE STUDIES
LANCASTER UNIVERSITY
http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/profiles/Ruth-Wodak/

WHY DISCOURSE
ANALYSIS?
Qualitative Methods and/or Discourse
Analysis
y
in the Social Sciences

Developments
l
and
d synergies
i
An interest in the properties of naturally occurring
language
g g use by
y real language
g g users (instead
(
of a study
y
of abstract language systems and invented examples)
A focus on larger units than isolated words and
sentences, and hence, new basic units of analysis: texts,
discourses, conversations, speech acts, or communicative
events.
t
The extension of linguistics beyond sentence grammar
towards a study of action and interaction.
interaction
(Wodak 2008, van Dijk 2007)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Developments and synergies


The extension to non-verbal (semiotic, multimodal,
visual) aspects of interaction and communication:
gestures, images, film, the internet, and multimedia
A
A focus on dynamic (socio)
(socio)-cognitive
cognitive or interactional
moves and strategies
The study of the functions of (social, cultural, glocal,
and
d cognitive)
i i ) contexts off language
l
use
Analysis manifold phenomena of text grammar and
language
g g use: coherence,, cohesion,, macrostructures,,
speech acts, turn-taking, signs, politeness,
argumentation, rhetoric, and so forth.
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

CHALLENGES: QUALITATIVE METHODS AND


CHALLENGES
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS I

Dealing with interviews of all kinds


Dealing with focus group discussions
Dealing with policy papers
Dealing with media (visual,
broadcasts,, press,
p
, Internet,, blogs,
g ,
youtube)
Dealing with records,
records minutes,
minutes etc.
etc
when doing ethnography

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA


Course 2010

CHALLENGES II

DISCOURSE EMPTY SIGNIFIER


INTEGRATION OF CONTRADICTORY
EPISTEMOLOGICAL APPROACHES
NO KNOWLEDGE ABOUT THE SALIENCE
OF GENRE
GENRE AND RELATED INHERENT
CHARACTERISTICS
DISTINGUISHING BETWEEN
DISCOURSE AND TEXT
ANALYSING DISCOURSE
ANALYSING
ANALYSING TEXT
TEXT
CHERRY PICKING
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Functions of text material


(Titscher et al. 2000, 32)
as Text (1.)
of Features of the
Groups Investigated
(2.1.)

The Text

as Representation
R
t ti
off F
Features
t
off th
the
Situations Investigated
((2.2.))
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

DEFINING DISCOURSE?
Discourse, Genre, Text, Context

FOR EXAMPLE.
A SPECIFIC DISCOURSE (Racist, Sexist, national,
liberal, conservative, historical,)
(Discourse of the EU,, Discourse of
DISCOURSE OF (
an organisation, of men or women, of Hillary
Clinton, .)
X + DISCOURSE (security discourse,
globalisation
l b li ti
discourse)
di
)
DISCOURSE ABOUT (unemployment, racism,
enlargement)
MODE + DISCOURSE (visual
( is al discourse,
disco se written
itten
discourse, spoken discourse)
DISCOURSE as lieu de mmoire, as building, as
language as image.
language,
image
Different language-specific meanings (spoken
language, structures of knowledge)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Pragmatism
Pragmatismus
(Dewey)
(Dewey)

Georg
GeorgSimmel
Simmel

SSymbolischer
Symbolic
b li
Interactionism
Interaktionismus
(Mead,
(Mead,Blumer)
Blumer)

Social
SocialAnthropology
Anthropology
(Radcliffe-Brown,
(Radcliffe-Brown,EvansEvansPritchard,
Pritchard,Malinowski)
Malinowski)
Cultural
CulturalAnthropology
Anthropology
(Boas,
(Boas,Benedict)
Benedict)

Grounded
GroundedTheory
Theory
(Glaser
(Glaser//Strauss)
Strauss)

Russian
Russischer
Formalism
Formalismus
(Todorov,
(Todorov,Propp)
Propp)
Prague
Prager School
Schule of
der
Structural
Linguistics
strukturalen
Linguistik
(Jakobson)
(Jakobson)

Phenomenology
Phnomenologie
(Husserl)
(Husserl)

Conversation
analysis
Konversationsanalyse
(Sacks,
Schegloff,
(Sacks, Schegloff,
Jefferson)
Jefferson)

Technological
Technologisches
Communication
KommunikationsModel
modell
(Shannon/Weaver)
(Shannon/Weaver)

Theory
Theorieofd.
Mass
MassenCommunication
kommunikation
(Lasswell)
(Lasswell)

Content
analysis
Inhaltsanalyse

Ethnomethodology
Ethnomethodologie
(Garfinkel,
(Garfinkel,Cicourel)
Cicourel)

Functional
FunktionalePragmatics
Pragmatik
(Ehlich
(Ehlich//Rehbein)
Rehbein)

Objective
Objektive
Hermeneutics
Hermeneutik
(Oevermann)
(Oevermann)

Ludwig
Ludwig
Wittgenstein
Wittgenstein

Speech Act Theory


Sprechakttheorie
(Austin,
(A Searle,
ti
Wunderlich)
Searle,
Wunderlich)
Semiotics
Semiotik
(Morris)
(Morris)

Membership
Membership
Categorization
Categorization
Device
Device(Sacks)
(Sacks)

Ethnography
Ethnographyofof
Communication
Communication
(Hymes)
(Hymes)

Cultural-Structuralism
Kultur-Strukturalismus
(Levi-Strauss,
(Levi-Strauss,Mauss)
Mauss)
Structural
Strukturale
Linguistics
Linguistik
(Saussure)
(Saussure)

Phenomenological
Phnomenologische
Sociology
Soziologie(Schtz,
(Schtz,
Thomas)
Thomas)

Distinction
Diff
Differenztheoretische
thTheory
ti h
Text
Analysis
Textanalyse(Titscher
(Titscher/ /
Meyer)
Meyer)

Organon
model
Organonmodell
ofderLanguage
Sprache
(Bhler)
(Bhler)
Systemic
Systemische
Communication
Theory
Kommunikationstheorie
(Luhmann)
(Luhmann)
Distinction
theoryy
Differenztheorie
(Spencer
Brown)
(Spencer Brown)

Critical Discourse Analysis


(CDA)

Narrative
Narrative
Semiotics
Semiotik
(Greimas)
(Greimas)

SYMLOG
SYMLOG(Bales
(Bales/ /
Cohen)
Cohen)
Field
theory (Lewin)
Feldtheorie
(Lewin)

CDA
F i Fairclough
Fairclough
l h)
CDA(nach
Critical
Theory
Kritische
Theorie
(Adorno,
(Adorno,Habermas,
Habermas,
Horkheimer)
Horkheimer)
Hermeneutics
Hermeneutik
Psychoanalysis
Psychoanalyse
(Dilthey,
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT
- CDA
(Dilthey,
(Freud)
(Freud)
Gadamer)
Gadamer)
Course 2010

Discourse
historical
Diskurshistorische
Method
(Wodak)
Methode
(Wodak)

Michel
MichelFoucault
Foucault

Functional
y
FunctionalSystemic
Systemic
Linguistics
Linguistics(Halliday)
(Halliday)
Cognitive
CognitiveLinguistics
Linguistics
(Shank,
(Shank,Abelson)
Abelson)

CRITICAL DISCOURSE
ANALYSIS

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS


CDA highlights the substantively linguistic and
discursive nature of social relations of power in
contemporary societies. This is partly the matter
of how power relations are exercised and
negotiated in discourse. It is fruitful to look at
both power in discourse and power over
discourse in these dynamic terms
(Wodak 1996)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT CDA Course 2010

CDAS DISCOURSE-HISTORICAL APPROACH


1.The approach is problem-oriented, not
focused on specific linguistic items
2. The approach is interdisciplinary
3. The approach is abductive: a constant
movement back and forth between
theory and empirical data is necessary.

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT CDA Course 2010

CDAS DISCOURSE-HISTORICAL APPROACH

4. The categories and tools for the analysis


are defined according to all these steps
and procedures as well as to the specific
problem under investigation
5. Application
li
i
i aimed
is
i
d at.

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT CDA Course 2010

DHA: Beginning,
g
g Domains
of Research
Studying the Waldheim Affair in
Austria Detecting
nationalist/chauvinistic and
/
rhetoric in various
racist/anti-Semitic
public domains
Identity Politics
Organisations: Insiders/Outsiders
Text-Production
Text Production and Comprehension
(Wodak 1986, 1996, Wodak et al. 1990)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT CDA Course 2010

KEY CONCEPTS
OF DHA

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT CDA Course 2010

DISCOURSE, GENRE & TEXT


Discourse implies patterns and commonalities of
knowledge and structures;
Text is a specific and unique realization of a discourse.
Texts belong to genres.
Genre characterised as a socially ratified way of
using
g language
g g in connection with a p
particular type
yp of
social activity (Fairclough 1995: 14), used by
communities of practice with specific functions
(Swales 1992).
Text creates sense when its manifest and latent
meanings are read in connection with knowledge of
the world (context models, shared knowledge,
collective
collective memories
memories
Resonance)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Interdiscursive and intertextual


relationships between discourses,
discourses
discourse topics, genres, and texts
Discourse A
genre x

time axis

text x

Discourse B

genre y

genre z

text yz

genre u
text u

topic x1

topic yz1

topic u1

topic x2

topic yz2

topic u2

topic x3

topic yz3

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA


Course 2010

22

US and THEM
The discursive construction of US and
THEM is the foundation of prejudiced and
racist p
perceptions
p
and discourses.
This discursive construction starts with the
labelling of the social actors, proceeds to the
generalization of negative
g
g
attributions and
then elaborates arguments to justify the
exclusion of many and inclusion of some.
The discursive realizations can be more or less
intensified or mitigated, more or less implicit
or explicit, due to historical conventions,
public levels of tolerance,, p
p
political
correctness, context and public sphere.
(Reisigl and Wodak 2001)
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Analyzing
y
gp
positive self- and
negative other presentation
How are persons named and referred to
linguistically?
What traits,
traits characteristics,
characteristics qualities and
features are attributed to them?
By means of what arguments and
argumentation schemes do specific persons
or social groups try to justify and legitimize
the exclusion of others or inclusion of
some?
From what perspective or point of view are
these labels, attributions and arguments
expressed?
d?
Are the respective utterances articulated
overtly,
y are they
y even intensified or are they
y
mitigated?
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

Strategy

Objectives

Devices

referential /
nomination

Construction of
in-groups and
out-groups

Membership categorization
metaphors and metonymies
Synecdoches (pars pro toto, totum pro pars)

Predication

g social
Labelling
actors positively
or negatively

Stereotypical,
yp
, evaluative attributions of
negative or positive traits
implicit and explicit predicates

argumentation

Justification of
positive or
negative
attributions

topoi; fallacies

Perspectivation,
Perspectivation
framing or
discourse
representation

Expressing
involvement
Positioning
speaker's point of
view

reporting, description
reporting
description, narration or quotation
of events and utterances

intensification,
mitigation

Modifying the
epistemic status
of a proposition

intensifying or mitigating the illocutionary


force or (discriminatory) utterances

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA


Course 2010

Four-Level Model of Context


the immediate, language or text internal cotext;
the intertextual and interdiscursive relationship
between utterances, texts, genres and
discourses;
di
the extralinguistic social/sociological variables
and institutional frames of a specific context
of situation;
the broader socio-political and historical
contexts, to which the discursive practices are
embedded in and related.((Wodak 2001,, 2004,, 2008))
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

RECONTEXTUALISATION

Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA


Course 2010

CDA - Procedures
Balancing between linguistic expertise
and the needs of q
qualitative research

SUGGESTIONS
DEFINE PROBLEM/OBJECT UNDER
INVESTIGATION
EXPLORE THROUGH ETHNOGRAPHY
DEFINE DISCOURSE RELATED TO
MACRO-TOPIC & CONTEXT
CHARACTERISE RELEVANT GENRES
CHOSE TYPICAL TEXTS
CHOSE ADQUATE TOOLS FOR
ANALYSIS
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010

RECURSIVE STEPS

1. Activation and consultation of preceding theoretical


knowledge
2. Systematic collection of data and context information
(depending on the research question, various discourses and discursive
events, social fields as well as actors, semiotic media, genres and texts
are focused on).
3. Selection and preparation of data for specific analyses
((selection and downsizing
g of data according
g to relevant criteria,,
transcription of tape recordings, etc.).
4. Specification of the research question and formulation of
assumptions.
5. Qualitative pilot analysis ( allows testing categories and first
assumptions as well as the further specification of assumptions).
6. Detailed case studies (of a whole range of data, primarily
qualitatively, but in part also quantitatively).
7. Formulation of critique (interpretation of results, taking into
account the relevant context knowledge and referring to the three
dimensions of critique).
8. Application of the detailed analytical results (if possible, the
results
esu ts might
g t be app
applied
ed or
o proposed
p oposed for
o application).
app cat o )
Ruth Wodak, ACCEPT - CDA
Course 2010