DISCOURSE ANALYSIS PAPERS

“History of the Development of Discourse and types of discourse”

Submitted to fulfill the final task of MK Discourse Analysis

Lecturer : Dr.Sariakin, M.Pd

Compiled by :
Rahmanijar (1911060039)

UNIVERSITAS BINA BANGSA GETSEMPENA

S1 PENDIDIKAN BAHASA INGGRIS
BANDA ACEH
2022

1
 FOREWORD

Praise be to God Almighty for all the abundance of mercy, inayah, taufik and hinayah
so that the author can complete this paper to fulfill the assignment of the Discourse
Analysis course.

In writing this paper, there are not a few obstacles that the author faces. But the author
realizes that this fluency in writing is thanks to nothing but the help of various aspects. One
of them is with the help of the lecturer who teaches the Discourse Analysis course, Mr.
Erik Candra Pertala, M.Hum. which makes it easier for the author to find the cores that the
author can cite in this area.

The author is aware of the shortcomings that exist. The improvement and refinement of
its content is highly expected for the progress of the author as a protégé in understanding
Discourse Analysis. The author would like to thank all the means that helped create this
paper. Finally, the author hopes that this paper can fulfill the assignment of a paper in the
field of Discourse Analysis with good results and grades. Hopefully, this writing will be
useful for other students.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
2
FOREWORD................................................................................................... i
TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................. Ii
BAB I

INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 1
A. Background................................................................................................. 1

BAB II
DISCUSSION..................................................................................................... 2
1. What is Discourse Analysis? ......................................................................... 2
2. History of the Development of Discourse Analysis....................................... 2
3. Types of Discourse ........................................................................................ 3
4. Aspects of the integrity of discourse..............................................................

CHAPTER III

COVER............................................................................................................... 6
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................
BIBLIOGRAPHY ................................................................................................

BAB I
3
 INTRODUCTION

11.1 Background

Relatively few analyses of discourse are carried out by linguists. This is contrary
to the many researches of kristis discourse by communication experts. Discourse studies
are concerned with the understanding of human actions carried out with language (verbal)
and not language (nonverbal). As an object of study and linguistic research, discourse can
be traced from various aspects. In addition, the aspects contained in it present a very
diverse type of study. Research on discourse still revolves around internal and grammatical
linguistic issues such as syntactic aspects in discourse, cohesion and coherence of
discourse. For this reason, it is necessary to develop this discourse research in a broader
direction. Discourse analysis is carried out to analyze discourse. Realizing this, the writing
in this paper intends to increase the knowledge of the author and readers in order to get a
clearer and more comprehensive picture of discourse. Realizing that, the author is
interested in studying what discourse is, the history of the development of discourse
analysis, the types of discourse and aspects of the integrity of discourse.

11.2 Problem Formulation

The problems that the author discusses in this paper are:

1. What is Discourse Analysis?
2. History of the Development of Discourse Analysis
3. Types of discourse
4. Aspects of the wholeness of discourse

11.3 Purpose of Writing

The purpose of writing this paper is to fulfill the task of Discourse Analysis and so
that bias becomes a new insight. Although the author knows that the content in this paper
has many shortcomings.

11.4 Writing Method

The data stated or written by the author in this paper are obtained from the results
of references provided by lecturers who teach Discourse Analysis courses, reading books
and articles.

BAB II
4
 DISCUSSION

2.1 What is Discourse Analysis?

Discourse in English is called discourse. Linguistically, discourse comes from the

Sanskrit "wac/wak/vak" which means "to say, to speak" then the word undergoes a change
to discourse. The word 'ana' behind is a form of suffix (suffix) which means "to rectify".
Thus the word discourse can be interpreted as a word or utterance. The word discourse
itself comes from the Latin 'discursus' which means 'to run to and fro', 'to run back and
forth'. This word is derived from 'dis' (from/in a different direction'. The development of
the origin of the word can be described as follows.

Dis+currere→discursus→discourse (discourse)
The term discourse was then used by linguists in linguistic studies, so that it became known
as discourse analysis (discourse analysis)
Discourse is the most complete unit of language above the sentence and the highest
grammatical unit in grammatical. As the most complete grammatical unit, discourse has
concepts, ideas, thoughts, or ideas that can be understood by both the reader and the
listener. As the highest grammatical unit, discourse is formed from sentences that meet
grammatical requirements and other requirements of discourse.

The Position of Discourse in Linguistic Units

 Discourse
 Sentence
 Klaus
 Waived
 Words
 Morpheme
 Phoneme

The chart above shows that the more upwards, the larger and wider the linguistic units
will be. That is, the linguistic units that are below will be covered and become part of the
language units that are above them. So it seems, until it reaches the unit of 'discourse' as the
largest unit of language.
The grammatical requirement in discourse is that the existence of discourse must be
cohesive and coherent. Cohesive means that there is a harmony of the relationship of the
elements in the discourse. Meanwhile, coherent means that the discourse is integrated so
that it contains the right understanding.

Therefore, the relatively most decisive criterion in discourse is the integrity of its

5
meaning. When someone is in a food stall says:

1. "Chicken noodles, Soursop juice, two"

The utterance can be interpreted as a discourse because it contains a complete
wholeness of meaning which means that the word order is arranged regularly, the meaning
and mandate are continuous, pronounced in an appropriate (contextual) place, and between
the greeter and the greeter can understand each other the meaning of the short utterance.
Discourse analysis is a science that has only emerged in recent years, previously linguistic
schools only limited their analysis to the social of sentences, but recently only linguists
have turned their attention to the analysis of discourse.
Discourse analysis is the study of the structure of messages in a communication or a
study of the various functions (pragmatics) of language. Through discourse analysis, we
not only know the message to be conveyed, why it should be conveyed, and how the
messages are composed and understood. The object of study or research of discourse
analysis is generally centered on the language used daily, both in the form of text and
spoken.

2.2 History of the Development of Discourse Analysis

Historically, it is recorded that until the early 50s, grammar studies were still
struggling around sentences. It wasn't until 1952 that a well-known linguist named Zelling
S Harris expressed dissatisfaction with the 'grammar of the sentence'. According to him,
there are still many linguistic problems that are not touched by the scalpel called 'sentence
grammatics' therefore he wrote and published an article entitled "discourse analysis".
Long before that, in 1935 in England, John Firth (1890-1960) once advocated that linguists
try to study conversational language. According to him, "this is where we will find the key
to a better and broader understanding of what is called a language and how it operates"
(Firth, 1935).
Meanwhile, in America came the sociolinguistic approach pioneered by Dell
Hymes which, among other things, examined the problems of conversation,
communication, and greeting, which would later develop into a broader study of discourse.
This interest and work of sociolinguistic research continued to roll in the 1960s. Research
in the fields of phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, and stylistic variation is
increasingly open to its contact with social factors. It is this condition that encourages them
to look at the field of discourse studies that seems to accommodate the problem.
Discourse analysis as a discipline with a clear and explicit methodology, only really
developed steadily in the early 1980s. Various discourse studies books were published in
that decade. For example, Stubbs (1983), Brown and Yule
(1983) and the most comprehensive is the work of Van Dijk (1985). The point of attention
of discourse analysis also continues to develop and pervade on things or issues that many
people are talking about today. Such as gender differences, political discourse, and the
emancipation of women, as well as a number of other social issues.
6
2.3 Types of Discourse

The types of discourse are distinguished according to the point of view of the
discourse it is seen. When viewed from its purpose, discourse is divided into oral discourse
and written discourse. Judging from the use of language, discourse is distinguished into
prose discourse and poetry discourse.
Meanwhile, judging from the delivery of its content, discourse is divided into:

1. Narrative, which reflects a topic, thing or news. This discourse tells of an event in
order based on the time of the incident (bias is also not sequential but the flow is
here and there. An example is an event or events that are conveyed in the form of
events that actually happened, can be merely imagination or a combination of both.

2. Exposition, which is to explain the topic, fact, or explain something to the recipient
(reader) so that the person concerned understands it. This discourse is written with
the aim of explaining or providing understanding with a short, accurate and concise
writing style. For example, with the presence of factual data in the text, that is, a
condition that actually happened, exists and can be historical about how an event
occurred, and so on.

3. Persuasion, which is in the nature of inviting, advocating, prohibiting or aiming to

influence speech partners to perform actions as expected by their speakers,
sometimes this discourse of persuasion uses irrational grounds, for example
advertisements and seductions.

4. Argumentation, which is to give an argument or basis for a thing both based on

logical and emotional considerations. A discourse is categorized as an
argumentation discourse when it departs from Tanya an issue that is controversial
in nature between speakers and speaker partners. The development of an
argumentation essay framework can be patterned as a cause-and-effect, a cause-to-
cause, or a pattern of solving in a problem.

5. Description, which is to show the recipient of the message in order to form an

image (imagination) of something. This type of essay contains an overview of a
thing/situation so that the reader seems to see, listen, or feel it. An example is the
sales catalog and data in the police force.

2.4 Aspects of the integrity of discourse

7
 A complete discourse is a complete discourse, that is, it contains integrated and
unified aspects. The aspects in question, among others, are cohesion, coherence, topic of
discourse, lexical aspects, grammatical aspects, phonological aspects, and semantic
aspects.
In comprehensive it can be said that the integrity of discourse can occur from the
existence of interrelationships between the two main aspects of discourse, namely the text
and the context. Some of the aspects of discourse mentioned above can be grouped into
two elements, namely the element of cohesion and the element of coherence.

A. Cohesion

Cohesion in discourse is defined as the cohesion of formswhich structurally form syntactic

bonds. The cohesion of discourse is divided into two aspects namely grammatical cohesion
and lexical cohesion.
- Grammatical cohesion: Reference, Substitution, Ellipsis, Parallelism,
Conjugation.
- Lexical: Sinonimi, Antonimi, Hyponymi, Collocation, Repetition, Equivalence.
In the context of discourse, reference designations are divided into two types,
namely exophora (outside the text) and endophora (inside the text). The reference is
divided into two patterns, namely anaphora and cataphora.
The sentence below is an example:
Anaphora : Maria’s feet feels pain, she fell last night.
The she form in the second sentence, becomes a connecting tool for the previous
sentence.
Cataphora : Based on the approval of the committee, then the student will be
divided into two groups : a. Fruit group b. Flower group
The following form refers to other things that will be explained afterwards, namely
in points (a) and (b).

B. Coherence

The term "coherence" means 'connection'. In the concept of discourse, it means the
relationship between the meaning or content of a sentence (HG Tarigan, 1987: 32).
Basically, a coherence relationship is a set of facts and ideas that are orderly and logically
arranged. The elements of discourse coherence include: elements of addition, repetition,
pronominal, synonyms, totality-parts, comparison, emphasis, contrast, conclusion,
example, parallelism, location-member, and time.

CHAPTER III
8
 COVER

3.1 Conclusion

Discourse has a very complete and complex supporting element. The element
consists of verbal elements (linguistics) and nonverbal elements (nonlinguistic). The
linguistic structure of discourse is the highest and most complete lingual unit in terms of
linguistic hierarchy. While the nonlinguistic elements that surround it contain a large
amount of unlimited knowledge and information. This suggests, that discourse is a broad
and contextual object of study.
Thus the presentation of "Discourse Analysis" by the author. The author realizes
that this paper is far from perfect, so the author still needs to learn more in analyzing
discourse so that this paper contains clear information about "Discourse analysis".

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mulyana, Discourse Studies: Theory, Methods and Applications, Principles of Discourse
Analysis (Yogyakarta: Tiara Discourse, 2005).