DISCOURSE ANALYSIS:

Most obviously, discourse analysis since many years emphasizes the relevance of the study
of context for our understanding of many aspects of discourse. Relevant in such contexts are the
social domain (e.g., Education, Politics), the global act partially accomplished by text or talk
(e.g., legislation, teaching, etc.), the participants and their various communicative, social and
professional roles, the relations between participants (such as that of power), the setting (time,
location) and maybe some other social or interactional properties of communicative event. Part
of the context, however, are also some of the 'cognitive' properties of the participants, such as
their aims, beliefs, knowledge and opinions.

DISCOURSE PROCESSING:
People produce and understand whole discourses, and even the processing of words, clauses and
sentences needs to be studied as integrated part of the processes involved in the production or
comprehension of discourse. A cognitive study of discourse is rather different from a more
formal, grammatical or (say) stylistic, narrative or argumentative analysis. It does not deal with
abstract categories and rules to describe 'structures' of discourse, but with the actual mental
representations and processes of language users.
Meaning of a text is not 'in' the text, or on paper, or in the air, but assigned to a text by language
users, and as such represented in their minds. The vast majority of psychologists and many
linguists accept this as part of standard theory. The question is rather which of the (other) mental
representations (models, knowledge, etc.) are necessary to account for discourse processing, and
how such processing takes place exactly.
Indeed, many aspects of cognitive representations and processing are themselves social -- such as
the socially shared knowledge and other beliefs, as well as the jointly constructed social aspects
of the context. In the same way as a cognitive account is incomplete without a social component
that explains structures of context, as well as the acquisition, change and uses of socially shared
representations such as knowledge and other beliefs.

MEMORY:
Memory does not only refer to the ability to remember but also shows opinions, ideologies,
representations, concepts and social cognition is connected to what Van Dijk in 2002 terms as
“social memory”. According to Van Dijk “cognition processes and representations are defined
relative to mental structure called memory”.

MEMORY (SOCIAL COGNITION):

Short term memory – online process for clearing concept and making a result.
Long term memory – stored process meaning the result.
  Episodic memory is recall of personal facts and information
 Semantic memory is the recall of general or social shared facts and information

MIND, MEMORY AND DISCOURSE PROCESSING:

COGNITIVE PROCESSES:
A cognitive process such as thinking, perceiving, thinking, behaving, understanding, interpreting,
language use, interaction, planning, hoping and feeling etc. take place in the mind or memory of
an individual social actors as members of social groups and communities.

RESULT OF COGNITIVE PROCESSES:

Forming, changing, storing or de (activating) the cognitive structure/mental representation
(thoughts, knowledge, beliefs, interpretation, plans, attitudes or ideologies).
As cognitive processes and representations cause and control all human actions and reactions and
hence all language use and discourse. Mind controls memory and memory creates language.
Memory (when we say something) – cognitive process (brain start processing) – mental
representation (shows the mentality and belief of a person) – human action, interaction and
language.

VAN DIJK MODEL FOR CD:

Approaches to critical discourse analysis:
 Textual approach
 Historical approach
 Cognitive approach
 Socio-cognitive approach:
It is a model in which the link between text and society is mediated by cognition. According to
Van Dijk, textual structures and social structures are mediated by social cognition.

COGNITION:
Refers to personal as well as social cognition, beliefs, representations, mental or memory
structures.

SOCIETY:
The cognition (memories) are largely acquired, used and changed through texts.

EXAMPLE:
For example if you read a short story that portrays the society your living in then your mind with
its culture, traditions, norms, beliefs, language, religion etc. you will process it more easily and
will get a better understanding because your used to that environment and society. So the textual
structure of the discourse that is written is connected with the social structure (knowledge stored
in the mind in the long term memory) thus giving a better understanding and mental
representations and processing of what is being read.

TEXTUAL – COGNITION – SOCIAL STRUCTURE TRIANGLE:

INDICATORS (US – SELF AND THEM – OTHERS):

Social cognition (cognitive structure)

Social structure Textual structure

1. ACTOR DESCRIPTION:
It is positive self-representation and negative other representation. For example if India writes
some type of discourse against Pakistan then majority of the citizens of India will agree with it
because they are in the “self-group” while Pakistanis will be totally against them because they
are included in the “them-group” contrary to the Indians. While analyzing any discourse let’s say
a story, to see if the writer is positively representing himself and how we have to describe and
see how they negatively represent others. So we are not a part of any group but we have to
distribute facts and points into two separate group based on what is written.

2. AUTHORITY:
It can be a person, organization or a book. It is an influential, higher or superior power that exerts
control, gives orders and enforces obedience in any particular situation. When we talk about
something we make it more valid. We will use high authority or power or famous personality in
our speech to make our speech more valid. So by analyzing a discourse we will keep in mind
how he coated someone in the text and did he use second authority to convey his speech.

3. DISCLAIMER:
The negation in such a case is primarily serves as a form of positive self-representation of face
keeping. Meaning showing others mistakes in a discourse and hiding one’s own mistakes which
politicians usually do to make themselves look like the good guys and the opposing group as bad
guys.

4. EVIDENTIALLY:
Don’t rely on baseless blames, come up with strong evidences, and prove your opponent to be
the guilty party by showing facts and figures. While analyzing a text we will look for strong facts
and evidences to prove the opposite party wrong and not just blaming them for what they have
not done. For example politicians usually while giving public speeches or interviews give facts
about how a government member has done corruption and how much and when to the public,

5. COMPARISON:
Comparison is an act of looking for similarities or dissimilarities in discourse. For example
claims vs. actions, north vs. south, rich vs. poor, black vs. white, and privatization vs.
nationalization.

6. POLARIZATION:
The categorical division of people in in group (us) and out group (them). Polarization divides
individuals or ideas into two opposing separate groups.

7. EUPHEMISM:
Replacement of an apparently unpleasant or offensive word or expression with one that is mild
or pleasant. For example using words like passed away instead of expired or died, or let go
instead of fired and many more.

8. HYPERBOLE:
The deliberate exaggeration of certain facts and figures used for the sake of heightened effect. A
speaker may use certain exaggerated expressions. It may also add humour to the situation.

9. IRONY:
Irony is used for humor or emphasis meaning being sarcastic. Irony is different or opposite to the
literal meaning. For example situation contrary to what one expects like when a student walks
into class wait the teacher will sarcastically tell the student how early he or she has arrived which
is not true but is just creating humour and meaning is opposite to what is literally said.

10.VICTIMIZATION:
To represent the in group as victims by the hands of the out group members. When the others
tend to be represented in the negative terms ad especially when they are associated with threats,
then the in group needs to be represented as a victim of such a threat and the out group as bad
guys or the culprits.

11.GENERALIZATION:
When concrete events or actions are generalized and possibly abstracted form, thus making the
claim broader while more generally applicable. Meaning if one person commits a mistake then as
a whole the whole group of people or society are blamed. Like if a student makes a mistake in
class then the whole of the class will be remembered because of that one student.
 12.PRESUPPOSITION:
The information that a speaker assumes to be already known. Speakers assume certain
information is already known by their listeners. This is part of what is communicated but not
said. For example, “the king of France is bald”, or “the king of France is not bald”.
Presupposition is that France has a king which all the listeners know about.

13.VAGUENESS AND HEDGING:

Vagueness means uneducated/unclear/informal while hedging means clear/educated/formal.
Used when precise statements are contextually inappropriate or simply politically incorrect. For
example a politician or journalist may oppose immigrations but may hedge or be vague such an
opinion lest he or she be accuses of racism.

SIMULTANEOUS SPPECH:
TWO NORMSFOR CONVERSATION:
1. One speaker at a time norm - The standard of human talk
2. Simultaneous speech – when two speakers speak at a time. It is simply called
overlapping.

TWO TYPES:
1. NON INTERRUPTIVE/COOPERATIVE SIMULTANEOUS SPEECH:

 Expression of supportive agreement or completion of an anticipated point.

 The intention is to keep the attention on the speaker’s point.

2. INTERRUPTIVE/COMPETITIVE SIMULTANEOUS SPEECH:

 Disruptive and problematic and pose threats to the current speaker’s territory.
 Disrupt the process and content of the ongoing conversation.
 Perceived as disturbing and violation of existing conversational rules.

TYPES OF NON COMPETETIVE OVERLAPS:

 TERMINAL OVERLAP:
It occurs when a speaker assumes the other speaker has or is about to finish their turn and begins
to speak, thus creating overlap.

 CONTINUER OVERLAP:
Is a way of the hearer acknowledging or understanding what the speaker is saying. Examples of
the continuer’s phrases are “mm hm” or “uh huh”.
  CONDITIONAL ACCESS TO THE TURN:
The current speaker yields their turn or invites another speaker to join in the conversation.

 CHORDAL OVERLAP:
Consist of a non-serial occurrence of turns: meaning both speaker’s turns are occurring at once,
such as laughter.

FERGUSON (1977) FOUR CATEGORIES OF INTERRUPTIVE

SIMULTANEOUS SPEECH:
1. SIMPLE SIMULTANEOUS SPEECH:

 An overlap takes place

 The S2 prevents the S1 from completing the utterances
 The first speaker does not complete his or her utterance.

2. OVERLAP:

 The S1 completes his utterance

 But S2 starts speaking just before the S1 has finished.

3. BUTTING IN INTERRUPTION:

 The speaker does not take the turn

 But starts speaking at the same time
 Interrupts S1 and then let him speak

4. SILENT INTERRUPTIONS:

 S1 takes a pause
 His utterance is incomplete yet
 S2 starts speaking
 No simultaneous speech is there actually.

FREQUENCY OF SIMULTANEOUS SPEECH IS STRONGLY

ASSOCIATED WITH:
1. Degree of formality of speech domain
2. Degree of familiarity between listeners
3. The speaker’s status
4. Role and relationship
5. Gender