You are on page 1of 15

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

(CDA)
SUB-TOPICS

CDA: Origins and Programe


CDA and Social Theory
Theory and methodology: Norman Fairclough
The Pros and Cons of CDA
INTRODUCTION

CDA is an approach led by people


such as Norman Fairclough, Ruth
Wodak, Teun van Dijk, Paul Chilton,
and others.
CDA is a critical approach on
language in society.
CDA especially focuses on power,
dominance, and inequality.
CDA: ORIGINS AND PROGRAMME

A. The Origins of CDA


1. Critical linguistics which was based on the Hallidayan
linguistics
2. British Cultural Studies. The Birmingham Centre for
Contemporary Culture Studies (headed by Stuart Hall)
3. Faircloughs book about Language and Power (1989)
CDA: ORIGINS AND PROGRAM

B. The Program of CDA


The purpose of CDA is to analyze
opaque as well as transparent
structural relationships of
dominance, discrimination, power
and control as manifested in
language (Wodak 1995: 204).
CONTINUED.
Some applied topics and social
domains in CDA practitioners work
are political discourse, Ideology,
Racism, The discourse of economics,
Advertisements and promotional
culture, Media language, Gender,
Institutional discourse, and Education.
CDA-practitioners also interest in
literacy.
CDA AND SOCIAL THEORY

Theories of power and ideology


Theory of structuration
THEORY AND METHODOLOGY: NORMAN
FAIRCLOUGH

Faircloughs three dimensional model for CDA


1. Discourse-as-text
2. Discourse-as-discursive-practice
3. Discourse-as-social-practice
FAIRCLOUGHS THREEFOLD
DISTINCTION

1. Description
2. Interpretation
3. Explanation
THE PROS AND CONS OF CDA

Two kinds of criticisms against CDA:


1. Specific critical comments on method,
methodology, and analytical approaches.
2. More general criticisms relating to the
potential offered by CDA for becoming a
critical study of language.
THE PROS AND CONS OF
CDA
Critical Debate in CDA about Theoretical and
Methodological Defects:
1. Widdowson notes the vagueness of many
concepts as well as the vagueness of the
analytical models in CDA and argues CDA
provides biased interpretations of discourse
under the guise of critical analysis. CDA does
not analyze how a text can be read in many
ways, or under what social circumstances it is
produced and consumed. He also stated that
CDA collapses semantics and pragmatics.
CONTINUED..
2. Emanuel Schegloff (1997): there is a
tendency to assume the priori
relevance of aspects of context in
CDA work.
3. Slembrouck (2001): He questions
the explanatory level in CDA.
CONTINUED.
The Potential of CDA:
1. A critical language awareness
2. Dialogue between linguistic
analysis and other social-scientific
endeavors
3. Institutional environments
CONTINUED.

The Problems of CDA:


1. The linguistic bias in CDA
2. Closure to particular kinds of
societies
3. Closure to a particular time-frame