Critical discourse analysis

Article Talk

This article may be too technical for most

Learn more
readers to understand. (July 2012)

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is an

interdisciplinary approach to the study of
discourse that views language as a form of
social practice. CDA combines critique of
discourse and explanation of how it figures
within and contributes to the existing social
reality, as a basis for action to change that
existing reality in particular respects. Scholars
working in the tradition of CDA generally argue
that (non-linguistic) social practice and
linguistic practice constitute one another and
focus on investigating how societal power
relations are established and reinforced
through language use.[1] In this sense, it differs
from discourse analysis in that it highlights
issues of power asymmetries, manipulation,
exploitation, and structural inequities in
domains such as education, media, and
politics.[2]

Background

Critical discourse analysis emerged from

'critical linguistics' developed at the University
of East Anglia by Roger Fowler and fellow
scholars in the 1970s, and the terms are now
often interchangeable.[3][4] Research in the
field of sociolinguistics was paying little
attention to social hierarchy and power.[5] CDA
was first developed by the Lancaster school of
linguists of which Norman Fairclough was the
most prominent figure. Ruth Wodak has also
made a major contribution to this field of study.

In addition to linguistic theory, the approach

draws from social theory—and contributions
from Karl Marx, Antonio Gramsci, Louis
Althusser, Jürgen Habermas, Michel Foucault
and Pierre Bourdieu—in order to examine
ideologies and power relations involved in
discourse. Language connects with the social
through being the primary domain of ideology,
and through being both a site of, and a stake
in, struggles for power.[1] Ideology has been
called the basis of the social representations of
groups, and, in psychological versions of CDA
developed by Teun A. van Dijk and Ruth
Wodak, there is assumed to be a
sociocognitive interface between social
structures and discourse structures.[6] The
historical dimension in critical discourse
studies also plays an important role.[7]

Methodology

CDA is an application of discourse analysis; it

is generally agreed that methods from
discourse studies, the humanities and social
sciences may be used in CDA research. This is
on the condition that it is able to adequately
and relevantly produce insights into the way
discourse reproduces (or resists) social and
political inequality, power abuse or
domination.[8][9] Examples of power being
used by mainstream media have been
identified in the work of Stephen Teo in
Australia where he found numerous examples
of racism in crime reports of Vietnamese
youth. He describes the use of headlines used
to control the opinions of readers to see and
read about crime using what David Altheide
calls fear discourse. CDA does not limit its
analysis to specific structures of text or talk,
but systematically relates these to structures
of the sociopolitical context. This was further
examined by Pamela D Schulz in her book
linking Media reporting of Courts in Australia
and in western democracies. Her book "Courts
and Judges on Trial: Analysing and Managing
Discourses of Disapproval" showed a strong
connection between political manipulation of
media to encourage "tougher sentencing"
while at the same time refraining from
changing legislation to ensure that it
happens.[10] CDA has been used to examine
rhetoric in political speech acts, and any forms
of speech that may be used to manipulate the
impression given to the audience.[11] However,
there have been flaws noted with CDA. For
example, it has been said that it is
simultaneously too broad to distinctly identify
manipulations within the rhetoric, yet is also
not powerful enough to appropriately find all
that researchers set out to establish.[12]

Norman Fairclough discussed the term CDA in

his book Language and Power. Fairclough
introduced the concepts that are now viewed
as vital in CDA such as "discourse, power,
ideology, social practice and common
sense."[13] He argues that language should be
analyzed as a social practice through the lens
of discourse in both speaking and writing.

Fairclough developed a three-dimensional

framework for studying discourse, where the
aim is to map three separate forms of analysis
onto one another: analysis of (spoken or
written) language texts, analysis of discourse
practice (processes of text production,
distribution and consumption) and analysis of
discursive events as instances of socio-
cultural practice.[1][14] Particularly, he
combines micro, meso and macro-level
interpretation. At the micro-level, the analyst
considers various aspects of textual/linguistic
analysis, for example syntactic analysis, use of
metaphor and rhetorical
devices. [clarification needed] The meso-level or
"level of discursive practice" involves studying
issues of production and consumption, for
instance, which institution produced a text,
who is the target audience, etc. At the macro-
level, the analyst is concerned with intertextual
and interdiscursive elements and tries to take
into account the broad, societal currents that
are affecting the text being studied.[15][16]

Teun A. van Dijk's approach to Critical

Discourse Analysis combines cognitive
theories with linguistic and social theories. Van
Dijk uses cognition as the middle layer of a
three-layer approach consisting of discourse,
cognitive and society. By integrating a
cognitive approach, researchers are better
able to understand how larger social
phenomenon are reinforced through popular,
everyday discourse. Critics of this practice
point out that his approach focuses on the
reproduction of ideologies rather than the
transformation.[17]

Ruth Wodak has developed a framework based

on the systemic collection of sample texts on a
topic to better understand the interrelationship
of discourses that exist within the field. This
framework allows for the discussion and
analysis of ideologies involved in a set of
discourses. The macro level of analysis is
helpful in understanding how macro-structures
of inequality persist through discursive
processes across multiple sites and texts.[17]

Applications

CDA has been applied to media studies,

advertisements texts [18] English language
teaching, heritage language, power and
ideology,[19] socialization and environmental
sciences to name a few.[20][21][22][23]

Notable academics

Notable writers include Norman Fairclough,

Michał Krzyżanowski, Paul Chilton, Teun A. van
Dijk, Ruth Wodak, John E. Richardson, Phil
Graham, Theo Van Leeuwen, Siegfried
Jäger [de], Christina Schäffner [de], James Paul
Gee, Roger Fowler, Gunther Kress, Mary
Talbot, Lilie Chouliaraki, Thomas Huckin, Hilary
Janks, Veronika Koller, Christopher Hart, Bob
Hodge, and William Feighery.

See also

Bibliography

External links

Last edited 1 month ago by Candido

RELATED ARTICLES

Norman Fairclough

Teun A. van Dijk

Ruth Wodak
Austrian linguist (born 1950)

Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless

otherwise noted.

Terms of Use • Privacy policy • Desktop