Language and Power (2001)

Recommended Text for BBI 3303

(Language and Power)

Fairclough, Norman. (2001). Language

and Power. 2nd ed. London: Longman
Pearson Education Ltd.
 Chapter 1: Introduction

Language and Power (2001; 2nd Ed.):

• connections between language use and
unequal relations of power
• Aims:
– To help understand the importance of
language in the production, maintenance, and
change of social relations of power
– To help understand how some people use
language to dominate others
 Introduction (cont’d…)
• Linguistics, especially sociolinguistics
does not explain:
• the interrelationships between language
and power
• the production of relations of power and
power struggles in society
• Sociolinguistic conventions that have a
dual relation to power (differences in, and
production of power)
 Introduction (cont’d…)
• Fairclough’s (2001) focus on explaining
how existing conventions arise from social
power relations and power struggle
• Ideologies as ‘common sense’
assumptions:
• Linked to social conventions of language
use and underlying power relations
• Legitimize existing social relations and
differences of power
 Introduction (cont’d…)
• Exercise of power in modern societies is
achieved through the ideological workings of
language
– ‘linguistic turn’ in social theory (Cf. Pierre Bourdieu,
Michel Foucault and Jurgen Habermas)
– Focus on visual language in postmodernistic culture
• It is important to study language in its social
context, esp. since there is a gap in people’s
understanding
 Introduction (cont’d…)

• Power cannot be reduced to the workings

of language alone
• Power exists in different modalities:
– Coercion ie. use of physical force
– Manufacture of consent (via ideology)
 Introduction (cont’d…)

• How people use language to dominate

others:
– Need to see to what extent language use is
based on common sense assumptions
– Need to see how assumptions are
ideologically shaped by power relations
– For resistance and change, people need to
develop a critical consciousness of
domination and its modalities
 Introduction (cont’d…)

• Relevance of critical language awareness

(CLA) for:
– Students and teachers in higher education
– Educators and teacher trainers
– Specialists in vocational and professional
training
– Other social activists engaged in education
 Introduction (cont’d…)

• Critical language analysis to be

complemented by pamphlets, leaflets and
other types of materials
• Socialist position of the writer/analyst:
– Affected by social experiences, values and
political commitments
– To promote the emancipation (empowerment)
of the socially oppressed
 Introduction (cont’d…)

• About Critical Language Study (CLS) as

an approach:
– ‘Critical’ concerns exposing hidden
connections between language, power and
ideology
– CLS investigates social interactions to focus
on language use and its hidden sources of
power in social relationships
 Approaches
to Language Study
• Why CLS?
• Current approaches to language study have
major limitations from a critical point of view
• Present approaches reviewed by Fairclough:
– linguistics
– sociolinguistics
– pragmatics
– cognitive psychology and AI
– conversation analysis
– discourse analysis
– language in social theory
 Linguistics

• The term ‘linguistics’ used in 2 broad

ways:
– All branches of language study
– ‘mainstream linguistics’ or ‘linguistics proper’
comprising phonology, morphology, syntax,
and semantics
 Linguistics (cont’d…)

• Linguistics is a narrow conception of

language
• Concerned with the study of langue
(language as a system/competence)
rather than parole (‘speaking/performance)
• Langue to be studies as a ‘synchronic’
rather than ‘diachronic’ system
• Asocial way of studying language in use
 Sociolinguistics

• Influence of anthropology and sociology

• Studies systematic connections between
changes in linguistic form and social
variables (e.g. social class and
relationships)
• Major influence of sociolinguistics on CLS
 Sociolinguistics
(Cont’d…)
• But sociolinguistics is strongly shaped by
‘positivist’ concepts from natural science
• Strong on ‘what?’ but weak on ‘why?’ and
‘how?’
• Concept of social class is taken for
granted in neutral terms
• Cf. Marxist view of social class and related
class struggle
 Sociolinguistics
(Cont’d…)
• Neglect of social conditions which give rise
sociolinguistic orders
• Sociolinguistics tends to legitimize social
orders and underlying power relations in
terms of ‘appropriate’ linguistic forms for a
particular social situation
 Pragmatics

• Interpretations of the field as:

– ‘the science of language use’
– Sub-discipline of linguistics that deals with
language use (Anglo-American Pragmatics)
• AAP associated with ‘speech acts’ or
using language to get things done (Austin
and Searle)
• Language is a form of action
 Pragmatics (Cont’d…)

• Main weakness of pragmatics is its focus

on the individual i.e. the individual
language user is capable of independent
action and strategies to realise his/her
social ‘goals’ or ‘intentions’
• Most individuals are constrained by (i.e.
they follow) social conventions even as
some struggle against them
 Pragmatics (Cont’d…)

• Individuals in social interactions do not

have equal control over ‘ground rules’ and
do not contribute equally to the interaction.

• ‘Cooperative interaction’ is presented as

an idealized ‘prototype’ (ie. same for
everyone) but is actually composed of
social struggles and inequalities of power.
 Pragmatics (cont’d…)

• Pragmatics generally focuses on single,

invented utterances (ie. sentences) rather
than extended discourse (whole situated
stretches of language use).
• The notion of ‘speech acts’ become
problematic as social context is not given
due critical attention.
 Cognitive Psychology
and Artificial Intelligence
• CP concerns processes of comprehension
(‘what is meant’) and production (‘what is said’).
• In CLS, comprehension does not simply mean
that people ‘decode’ what they hear by matching
it with similar structures stored in their long-term
memory.
• Comprehension is the product of interactions
between utterance interpretation and ‘MR’
(stored prototypes which are social in origin and
are constantly modified)
 CP and AI (cont’d…)
• CP and AI have given scant attention to
how MR originate from the social contexts.
• The MR in people’s heads are determined
by social factors and shaped by ideologies
that are routinely accepted as ‘common
sense’ assumptions.
• Such assumptions are a important way for
maintaining social relations of (unequal)
power.
 Conversation analysis
and Discourse analysis
• DA is seen as a new ‘cross-discipline’ formed
from other existing disciplines and shares
common ground with CLS.
• Ethnomethodologists study how people as social
actors use conversation skillfully to produce and
understand daily social actions.
• CA studies real conversation to show that it is
structured systematically and participants control
their participation as well as react to what others
say.
 CA and DA (cont’d…)

• Conversational structures are social

structures and are (re)produced in
everyday action as people interact
socially.
• However, CA does not make explicit the
connections between ‘micro’ structures of
conversation and the ‘macro’ structures of
society.
 CA and DA (cont’d…)
• Conversation does not exist in a social
vacuum but is subject to abstract social
structures/orders.
• E.g. ‘Casual conversation between
equals’, especially telephone
conversation, is never based on equal
relations of power
• CA answers ‘what?’ but not ‘how?’ and
‘why?’ questions.
 Some Recent
Social Theory
• Recent work in social theory has explored
the role of language in how people
exercise, maintain and change relations of
power:
– theory of ideology as a way of exercising
power in modern societies
– language as an (the) important ‘source’ of
ideology and power
 Some Recent
Social Theory (cont’d…)
• Michel Foucault – views on development
of modern forms of power
• Jurgen Habermas – ‘theory of
communicative action’ ie. present
communication practices are affected or
distorted by new forms of power
• Such contributions must be applied in a
practical way in CLS
 Relationship of CLS
to Approaches
• CLS more than complements existing
approaches; it provides an entirely
different perspective on language study
and has the potential to transform
established approaches
• Power determines a particular way of
dividing up disciplines and maintaining
these divisions (this is what ‘linguistics
proper’ has done now)
 Relationship of CLS
to Approaches (cont’d…)
• Sub-disciplines of linguistics take the cue
from mainstream linguistics but there are
signs of resistance e.g. sociolinguistics
and pragmatics
• CLS favours social study of language and
is supported by ‘functionalist’ approaches
such as Halliday’s systemic functional
linguistics (SFL) rather than ‘formalist’
approaches (see Chomskyan linguistics)
 Relationship of CLS
to Approaches (cont’d…)
• Current approaches to language study that
are compatible with CLS include systemic
linguistics, continental pragmatics, cross-
disciplinary discourse analysis
• Fairclough (2001) focuses on doing critical
analysis of discourse samples but goes
beyond current approaches by providing
the required theoretical concepts and
frameworks for analysis.