Discourse, in a broad sense, refers to language used in specific situations and extends

beyond individual sentences. This perspective emphasizes the importance of considering

context and how language elements combine to structure conversations or written texts. In a
narrower sense, "discourse" can also describe a particular set of ideas and how they are
expressed, like environmentalism or feminism.
This meaning is linked to specialized knowledge and language used by social groups
and is associated with thinkers like Michel Foucault. The distinction between the two
meanings is sometimes called "little 'd' discourse" for language in context and "big 'D'
discourses" for ideas and their articulation.

Discourse Studies, also known as Discourse Analysis, is the study of language within its
contextual use and beyond the sentence level. The term "Discourse Studies" is preferred
than the older term Discourse analysis because it encompasses theory, application, and
various methods, not just analysis alone. Both terms are used interchangeably Discourse
Analysis to refer to the actual analysis, and Discourse Studies to refer to the field, or
discipline, in general. (van Dijk, 2001b). Discourse Analysis is interdisciplinary, not just in
linguistics but also in fields like anthropology, communication, culture, education etc. It's
used informally to analyze everyday conversations, stories, gossip, and chat. In formal
settings, it's applied in politics, media analysis, law, healthcare, and business and
bureaucracy.

Alternatively, Discourse Analysis can adopt a functional approach, emphasizing the

meanings and communicative forces behind what is said or written. It explores language as
a form of communicative action, addressing questions about persuasion, politeness, indirect
communication, racism, sexism, power dynamics, and hidden motivations. Alternatively, in a
functional approach, the discourse analyst might look at particular discourse genres
examines specific discourse genres, Another aspect is Register analysis, which looks at how
language is used by specific social groups, such as teachers, politicians, or business
executives, to identify their social affiliations While most Discourse Analysis is qualitative,
quantitative analysis has gained attention with the use of computers, especially in Corpus
Linguistics, which examines the frequency of language patterns by different individuals or
social groups in texts.

Discourse Analysis can focus on various types of text, both spoken and written. "Text" in this
context refers to any stretch of language. In written form, it can include news reports,
textbooks, business reports, personal letters, emails, and more. In spoken form, it can
encompass casual conversations, business meetings, service interactions, classroom
lessons, and others.
Recently, Discourse Analysis has expanded its scope to examine multimodal
discourse, where written or spoken text is combined with visual or auditory elements, like TV
programs, movies, websites, museum exhibits, and advertisements. These texts, whether
contemporary or historical, provide valuable data for Discourse Analysis, even in historical
studies. (Flowerdew, 2012a)

Discourse Studies employ various analysis approaches, including:

1. Register analysis, which examines typical features in specific fields or professions,
focusing on cohesion and coherence.
2. Thematic development, investigating how text maintains structure and function.
3. Pragmatics, which explores language actions.
4. Conversation Analysis, a microanalytic approach to spoken interaction.
 5. Genre Analysis, studying language through recurrent stages in specific contexts.
6. Corpus-based Discourse Analysis, using computers to identify phraseologies and
rhetorical patterns in large text collections (corpora).
7. Critical Discourse Analysis, interpreting texts from a social perspective, uncovering
power dynamics, manipulation, and discrimination.
Many analysts adopt hybrid approaches, enhancing the flexibility of Discourse Studies.
Discourse Studies focus on understanding how language functions in various contexts of
use. Context, often synonymous with situation, plays a crucial role in interpreting utterances.
Hymes (1972a) identified 16 features of context, including the physical setting, participants,
their purposes, communication channel, attitudes, genre, and background knowledge.

Intertextuality is a fundamental concept in Discourse Analysis, highlighting how one text

relates to other texts. This connection is crucial for understanding a text's meaning. It can be
explicit, as in direct quotations with inverted commas, or implicit, commonly found in
newspaper headlines and advertisements. Implicit intertextuality is widespread and often
relies on shared cultural knowledge.
Discourse Studies offer valuable insights for Language Education, whether in one's native
language or as a second or foreign language (Reddy, 1979; Sperber & Wilson, 1995).
Communication, central to language learning, relies on discourse as its vehicle. Traditionally,
the code model of communication posited that a sender encodes a message, it travels
through a channel as a signal, and then decoed by receiver, assuming a shared code for
successful communication. However, this model disregards the significance of context,
which shapes our interpretation of messages.
In recent communication models, called inferential models, speakers consider their
audience's background knowledge and context. They adjust their messages to match what
they think the listeners already know, allowing them to leave out some details and rely on the
listeners to fill in the gaps.

Understanding discourse and its role in communication is crucial for effective language
education. In the, Chomsky (1960s) distinguished between competence (underlying
grammar) and performance (actual language use). However, Dell Hymes argued for
communicative competence, recognizing that real communication involves conventions and
patterns beyond idealized grammar. Applied linguists adopted Hymes's ideas in the
communicative approach to language teaching (CLT), shifting the focus toward teaching
standards. The model of communicative competence, primarily attributed to Canale and
Swain, comprises grammatical, sociolinguistic, and strategic competence. Later, discourse
competence was added, encompassing the selection, sequencing, and arrangement of
words to create unified spoken messages. Celce-Murcia's model integrates these
components, emphasizing discourse competence's central role in unifying the other
elements. This model is dynamic, representing an ongoing interaction among its
components

Language educators aim to facilitate effective communication for learners, making an

understanding of discourse crucial. In the 1960s, Chomsky distinguished between
competence (innate grammar knowledge) and performance (actual language use), favoring
the former. Hymes responded by introducing communicative competence, emphasizing the
importance of real-world language skills and conventions.
Applied linguists adopted Hymes's ideas, leading to the communicative approach to
language teaching (CLT). Despite shifting focus from language communities to teaching
standards, CLT, anchored by communicative competence, became the primary paradigm for
international language development. This approach recognizes the significance of language
use beyond theoretical grammar knowledge.
Canale and Swain (1980) widely recognized model of communicative competence in
language teaching identifies three key subcomponents:
1. Grammatical
2. Sociolinguistic
3. Strategic
Later, Canale (1983) added a fourth component, discourse competence, focused on the
ability to effectively combine linguistic elements for cohesive text creation. While the addition
initially seemed distinct, Celce-Murcia (2007) introduced a more integrated model,
emphasizing discourse competence's central role in communication. This comprehensive
framework highlights the interconnectedness of these competencies.
Celce-Murcia's model includes several key components:
1. Sociocultural Competence: This involves understanding pragmatic knowledge,
including speaking rules, social factors like age, gender, and status, stylistic
appropriateness, such as politeness, and cultural background knowledge about the
target language group.
2. Linguistic Competence: This is similar to grammatical competence and relates to
knowledge of language structure.
3. Formulaic Competence: It deals with fixed language chunks that don't follow regular
grammar rules.
4. Interactional Competence: Encompasses the ability to perform speech acts and
manage turn-taking in conversations.
5. Strategic Competence: Involves strategies for language learning and maintaining
smooth communication.
6. Discourse Competence: This is central, controlling the selection, sequencing, and
arrangement of words, structures, and utterances to create coherent spoken
messages. It unites lexical, linguistic, formulaic, sociocultural, and interactional
knowledge.
Celce-Murcia's model should be seen as dynamic, with these elements constantly
interacting