Mid Term assignment

Submitted To:
Sir Waqar Mehmood.
Submitted By:
Shaista Younas . (3088)
Subject:
Discourse Analysis
Session:
(2018-2020) .
Class:
M.A English 4th Semester.
Section:
A (Evening).

University Of Okara
What is Discorse Analysis:

Discourse analysis is a research method for studying written or spoken language in

relation to its social context. It aims to understand how language is used in real life
situations. Discorse means any written and spoken communication between the people
on some serious issue or some discussion is serious. The good discorse analysis is
only done with complete text.

Origin of Discorse:
Originally the word discorse comes frome Latin, 'discursus’,which means conversations
or speech as a noun it can mean verbal communication,talk,formal speech or writing on
a subject and unit of text used by linguistic phenomena that range over more than one
sentence.

Basic purposes of Discorse:

 To inform: It means to give information about something like news papers are
informed us about daily updates, and if we will to create an email accont, the
instructions and rules that are informing us how to create an account.

 To persuade: It means to convence someone to think that you are thinking.

Advertisement, posters and comercial are the example of persuading like through
comercial of any company they are convencing us to think the same that they are
thinking.

 To entertain: It means to amuse someone to bring pleasure for someone

through different jokes and riddles.

There are three characteristics of discorse.

 It must be formal: It means a discorse must be on good topic.

 It must be logical: It means the organization must be good the structure must
be good the grammar must be following good rules and sentences.

 It must be organized: It means discorse must be following some reasoning.

Examples of discorse:

Literary criticism is the good example of discorse. When a critic do criticized on any
topic so he must be following every characteristics of discorse, the language which a
critic uses is formal ideas are raged they are organized and they are entirely in
logical manner and coherence is there formal sentences and lines are there it means
a writer is following every characteristics of discorse. For exalpe Poetics by Aristolte
is also a good example of discorse in this book Aristotle gives his views about
tragedy, epic and these all done with very much organized, logical and formal way.
So we can simply say criticism in general way is a example of discorse.

Factors influence discorse:

 Writer’s culture: It means a writer’s culture is depicts in his writing,discorse.

 Social environment: Social environment also seen in the writer’s discorse.

 Personal experience : It means writer’s experience is depicts in his

discorse,writing and spoken communication.

Text vs Context:

Text:

Text is everything that is in written form, it could be anything that is in written, for
example if i am writing a message, email, chat on watsapp that is my text.

Context:

Context is the surrounding of the text and describes the reality of text it means text is
the written content and context is discribing what is the knowledge behind the text
what is the contextual information behind the text. In simply we can say that context
is the message or information that is the author wants to describes through text.

Example:

Now we can take some daily routine example of text and context, for example if
there are two person in a room one says i feel thirsty so the other will bring a glass
of water for him here we see the first person is not directly asking for glass of water
he is just telling him i am thirsty but the context is that he is want a glass of water.
And another example is that if a boy says to his mother i am going to school so the
text is he is going to school but the context maybe chage, maybe he going for
seeking knowledge, maybe he is going for interactions with teachers or friends,
maybe he is going to play any match or eating food, maybe he is going to school for
issues book from library, so we can know the value of context through discorse
analysis.

Types of context:
  Linguistic context: Linguistic context refers to the context within the
discorse,that is the relationship between words and phrase, sentences and even
paragraphs. Take the word “ bachelor” as an example. We can’t understand the
exact meaning of sentence. “ He is bachelor” without the linguistic context to
make clear the exact meaning of word.

 Situational context: Situational context and context of situation, refers to the

environment, time and place etc in which the discorse occur and relationship
between the participants.

 Cultural context: Cultural context refers to the culture customs and background
of epoch in language communities in which the speaker participate. Language is
a social phenomenon and it is closely tied up with social structure and value
systems of society.

SPEECH- ACT THEORY:

This theory is generally taken as a subfield of pragmatics. It is equally important
to understand the significance of Context in studies of discourse analysis.The
theory talks about the fact that how words are not only restricted to presenting
information but also to carry out actions. It was introduced by an Oxford
philosopher John Langshaw Austin in his work ‘How to do things with words’ and
was further developed by an American Philosopher J.R Searle.

llocutionary Act: Illocutionary act is basically the intended result of speaker. It

is an act performe.

Media Discourse:

                                       Media Discourse refers to ineractions that take place through a broadcast

platform, whether spoken or written, in which the discourse is oriented to a non presesnt
reader, listerner or viewer.

There are two primary types of Media Discourse:

             Two primary types:

      Written:  

                   Written texts include newspapers and magazines

      Spoken: 

        Radio and television, News broadcasts, Drama

   What is highlighted through spoken and written :

           Media Focuses o ceretain things which are highlighted in Media Discourses

o Immediacy :
                     Specific actions and events.
o Drama:
            Volience, Crisis or conflict, extremist behaviours, outrageius acts.
o Simplicity:
                         Clear cut opinions, images, major, personalities, two sided conflicts.
o Ethnocerntism:
                                  Our beliefs, myths and symbols, our suffering the brutality of some oth.

 In News
Government Conflict
Disagreements
Decisions
Prosposals 
Fucnctions
Protests
Crime, Scandals
Investigations and disasters

Electronic Media Discourse

Electronic media

• Electronic media are media that use electronics or electromechanical energy for
the end user to access the content
Background
• The Pakistan Electronic Media Regulatory
Authority was formed in 2002.
• The first television station began broadcasting
from Lahore in November 1963.
• The government-owned Pakistan Broadcasting
Corporation (PBC) was formed on 14 August
1947.• At independence, Pakistan had radio stations in Dhaka, Lahore, and
Peshawar. A major programmed of expansion saw new stations open
at Karachi and Rawalpindi in 1948.
Criteria of electronic media discourse

• Form: • -external appearance of a clearly defined area.

• Content• -the subjects or topics covered.
• Technique :method of performance; way of accomplishing.
 . Genre in electronic media discourse

• Drama

• Talk shows

• Songs

• news

                    Discourse Influences on Micro and Macro Levels

Micro Level Influences:

                 Personal characteristics, professional background, personal attitudes and
professional role, conception of media workers are micro level influences that
affect upon media content.

 Macro Level Influences:

               Individuals, organizations, interest groups, public relations practitioners,

government etc macro level influences that affect upon media content.  Sources
that provide news to media organizations sometimes withhold information or lie.

Paul Grice’s Maxims and cooperation principle.

Paul Drice’s cooperation principle is to describe how we infer unstated meanings

in ordinary conversation and apply this to dramatic conversations. Grice says that
when we communicate we assume without releasing it that we and the people
are talking to, will be conventionally cooperative we will cooperate to achieve
mutual conversational ends. This conversational cooperation menifestis itself
according to Grice in a number or conversational Maxims, as he calls them which
we feels to abide by.

The Conversational Maxims.

Maxim of quantity :

“Where one tries to be as informative as one possibly can, and gives as much
information as is needed, and no more.”

The Maxim of quality:

“ Where one tries to be truthful, and does not give information that is false or that
is not supported by evidence.”
The maxim of relation:
“where one tries to be relevant, and says things that are pertinent to the
discussion.”
The maxim of manner:
“when one tries to be as clear, as brief, and as orderly as one can in what one
says, and where one avoids obscurity and ambiguity.”

As the maxims stand, there may be an overlap, as regards the length of what
one says, between the maxims of quantity and manner; this overlap can be
explained (partially if not entirely) by thinking of the maxim of quantity (artificial
though this approach may be) in terms of units of information.

In other words, if the listener needs, let us say, five units of information from the
speaker, but gets less, or more than the expected number, then the speaker is
breaking the maxim of quantity. However, if the speaker gives the five required
units of information, but is either too curt or long-winded in conveying them to the
listener, then the maxim of manner is broken. The dividing line however, may be
rather thin or unclear, and there are times when we may say that both the
maxims of quantity and quality are broken by the same factors.
Grice distinguishes between what is said by a sentence and what is meant by
uttering it. The former refers to the conventional meaning of the sentence,
whereas the latter refers to what is implicated or suggested by uttering a
sentence. An example in which what is meant is not determined by what is said
is illustrated by the following example

A and B are talking about a mutual friend, C, who is now working in a bank. A
asks B how C is getting on in his job, and B replies, Oh quite well, I think; he likes
his colleagues, and he hasn’t been to prison yet. (Grice 1975: 43)

In the above conversation, B by saying that “C has not been to prison yet”
implies something like C may surrender to his job temptations. Grice by citing this
example asserts that whatever B implied is totally different from what B said in
that the latter would simply mean C has not been to prison yet.

Grice's Cooperative Principle

What is Grice's Cooperative Principle in Conversation?
We will use Paul Grice's (1975) influential 'Cooperative Principle' approach to
describe how weinfer unstated meanings in ordinary conversations and apply this
to dramatic conversations. Your role in this task is to read and understand. Then,
in subsequent tasks we will apply Gricean analysis to a series of brief examples
to help you understand how to apply Gricean analysis.
Conversational cooperation

Grice says that when we communicate we assume, without realizing it, that we,
and the people we are talking to, will be conversationally cooperative - we will
cooperate to achieve mutualconversational ends. This conversational
cooperation even works when we are not being cooperative socially. So, For
Example, we can be arguing with one another angrily and yet we will still
cooperate quite a lot conversationally to achieve the argument. This
conversational cooperation manifests itself,

According to Grice, in a number of conversational MAXIMS, as he calls them,

which we feel theneed to abide by. These maxims look at first sight like rules, but
they appear to be broken more often than grammatical or phonological rules are,
For Example, as we will see later, and this is why Grice uses the term 'maxim'
rather than 'rule'. Here are the four maxims (there may well be more) which Grice
says we all try to adhere to in conversation. You can click on each one and get
an explanatory

The conversational maxims

Maxim of quantity (quantity of information)

‘‘Give the most helpful amount of information.’’ This maxim is a bit like the
temperature of baby bear's porridge in Goldilocks and the Three Bears - not too
much, not too little, but just right! You may often feel that we are guilty of giving
you too much information on this website. But we are trying to behelpful, honest!

Maxim of quality (quality of information)

‘‘Do not say what you believe to be false.’ It may seem at first sight that it would
be simpler for this maxim to be 'Tell the truth'. But it is often difficult to be sure
about what is true, and so Grice formulates this maxim in a way that, although it
looks more complicated, is actually easier to follow.

Evidence of the strength of this maxim is that most people find it difficult to lie
when asked a direct question, and we tend to believe what people tell us without
thinking, especially if it is written down (presumably because writers normally
have more time than speakers to consider carefully what they (say).
Maxim of relation

‘‘Be relevant.’’ Note that if you join a conversation you can't just begin to talk
about whatever you like. You have to connect what you want to say (make it
relevant) to what is already being talked about.

For example if everyone else is talking about their holidays and you want to talk
about Spain, you'll need to connect the two topics together with a remark like 'I
went on holiday to Spain last year. ' Similarly, if, in an exam, you write an essay
on a topic slightly different from the question asked you are likely to lose marks.

Maxim of manner

‘‘Put what you say in the clearest, briefest, and most orderly manner.’’ Good evidence
for this maxim is what you get penalized for when you write essays. If your are vague or
ambiguous (i.e. not clear) you can lose marks; if you are over-wordy you can lose marks
(readers don't like having to read extra words when they don't have to); if you do not
present what you say in the most sensible order for your argument you can lose marks.
And although you don't lose marks in conversation, you can lose friends if you do not
abide by these maxims.

Breaking the maxims

We have already pointed out that the conversational maxims are broken rather more
often than linguistic rules (e.g. in grammar).

We can break the conversational maxims in two main ways:

We can VIOLATE them:

This means that we break the maxims surreptitiously, or covertly, so that other people do
not

know. If we violate the Maxim of quality, we lie. If we violate the Maxim of quantity by
not giving enough information, if someone finds out we can be accused of 'Being
economical with the truth', another deceit. If you like, violating the maxims amounts to
breaking them 'illegally', just as people who steal are guilty of laws concerning theft. As
with laws, some maxim violation can be more heinous than others. Lying in a court of
law is disapproved, but 'white lies', small lies to keep the social peace, are often thought
as acceptable.
 We can FLOUT them

If we FLOUT a maxim, we break it in a FLAGRANT (and often foregrounded) way, so

that it is obvious to all concerned that it has been broken. If this happens, then it is clear
that the speaker is intending the hearer to infer some extra meaning over and above what
is said (evidence for this is that people of say things like 'He said he was happy, but the
way he said it implied he wasn't really'. Grice distinguishes what he calls 'Sentence
Meaning' from 'utterer's meaning' and he refers to an utterer's meaning indicated through
a flout as an IMPLICATURE. So the implicature is what we have been referring to so far
as the 'Extra Meaning'.

Re-examining the examples:

we have already looked at It is the flouting of maxims which constitute their

'extra-breaking' character, as compared with linguistic rules. Essentially maxim-
flouting is conversationally cooperative because all the participants in the
conversation can see that a maxim has been broken on purpose by the speaker
or writer in order to create an extra layer of meaning which is accessible by
inference.

In the following tasks we will look again at the two examples we have already
considered on the 'Inference and the discourse architecture of drama' page. In
each case when we analyze a text or discourse we will need to consider

• What maxim(s) have been broken,

• Whether the break constitutes a violation or a flout and
• What implicature, if any, arises as a result of the break.
Of course we have already covered (3) in the answers to the exercises on the
'Inference and the Discourse architecture of drama' page, so we don't need to go
through that again in any detail .

Michel Foucault's Theory

Foucault was born in Poitiers, France into a upper/middle class family on the 15th of October 1926.
He later died in 1984. He was associated with the structuralism and poststructuarlism movements
during his lifetime and Foucault was often labelled a post-structuralist or postmodernist, but he
rejected these labels, preferring to presenthis thought as a ‘critical history of modernity’.

Foucault’s Theory

Foucault didn’t agree with society’s view. For Foucault, people do not have a 'real' identity within
themselves; that's just a way of talking about the person - a discourse. An 'identity' is communicated
to others in your interactions with them, but it can shift; it is not fixed. It is a impermanent feature.
He also said that people do not 'have' power unreservedly; instead, power is a technique or action
which individuals can engage in. Power is not possessed; it is exercised. And where there is power,
there is always also resistance.

Foucault’s Influence on Media

Foucault’s theory influences the media because with his theory, he defined what essentially, a
character’ is. This important for film makers and other medias when they are creating a character,
because they need to understand exactly what ‘character’ is, in order for them to create it. The
media now concentrate on their character’s interactions with people in order to portray their
character, particularly in films and TV shows. I think that this technique is effective.

Example of Foucault’s Theory in Action :Examples of Foucault’s theory can be found in

most films and TV shows. Take Toy Story, for example. Buzz Lightyear’scharacter is defined by the
way he interacts with others. He is made out to be slightly delusional, because he speaks to Woody
and other characters about how he really is an astronaut hero and he uses parts of his costume as if
they are real, when actually he’s just a toy. He is also shown to be funny, although he doesn’t intend
to be, that’s just how his character is defined by others. The way he talks about being a superhero
and saving the day, and the way he actually tries to do so is rather funny, and other characters are
sometimes shown to laugh at him, with a shake of the head in disapproval.