MTI 413

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

ASSIST. PROF. MUHSIN YANAR

What is discourse analysis?

Different views COURSE

STRUCTURE

Written and spoken discourse

Discussion questions
CONTEXTUAL

STRUCTURAL

DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
 • patterns of language across texts
• the relationship between language and the social
and cultural contexts
• the use of language presents different views of the
WHAT IS world and different understandings
DISCOURSE • how the use of language is influenced by
ANALYSIS? relationships between participants
• the effects the use of language has upon social
identities and relations.
• how views of the world, and identities, are
constructed using discourse.
 the term ‘discourse analyses was first
introduced by Zellig Harris (1952) as
a way of analyzing connected speech
and writing.
WHAT IS
DISCOURSE
ANALYSIS?
a way for describing how language
features are distributed within texts
and the ways in which they are
combined kinds and styles of texts.
WHAT IS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS?

• the examination of language beyond the level of the

sentence
• the relationship between linguistic and non-
linguistic behavior?

---how language features are distributed within texts

and the ways in which they are combined kinds and
styles of texts.
What is Discourse Analysis?

• people know, from the situation that they are in, how to
interpret what someone says
e.g.: The runway is full now.
(this most likely means it is not possible to land the plane)
(The runway is full at the moment has a particular meaning in
a particular situation (in this case the landing of a plane) and
may mean something different in another situation)
the relationship between language and context
the relationship between
language and context

The same discourse, thus, can

be understood differently by
different language users as well
as understood differently in
different contexts (van Dijk 2011)
Context is a subjective construct that accounts not only for
the uniqueness of each text but also for the common ground and
shared representations that language users draw on to communicate
with each other (van Dijk 2008).

---the link between society and discourse is often indirect and

depends on how language users themselves define the genre or
communicative event in which they engaged.

---‘[i]t is not the social situation that influences (or is influenced by)
discourse, but the way the participants define (original emphasis)’ the
situation in which the discourse occurs (van Dijk 2008: x).

---Contexts are not objective conditions but rather (inter)subjective

constructs that are constantly updated by participants in their
interactions with each other as members of groups or communities.
 - in order to understand
the meaning of what a
person says or writes we
need to know something
the relationship between about the situational and
language and context is Firth draws on
cultural context in which
fundamental to the work Malinowski’s (1923,
1935) notions of context it is located. That is, if
of J. R. Firth (1935, you don’t know what the
1957a, 1957b), Michael of situation and context
of culture people involved in a text
Halliday (1971, 1989) are doing and don’t
and John Sinclair (2004), understand their culture,
‘then you can’t make
sense of their text’
(Martin 2001: 151).
This is reflected in the concern by discourse analysts to study language within
authentic instances of use – a concern with the inseparability of meaning and
form and a focus on a contextual theory of meaning (Stubbs 1996).
Sinclair (2004) also argues that language should be studied in naturally occurring
contexts and that the analysis of meaning should be its key focus.
Discourse analysis, then, is the analysis of language in use.

Discourse analysis considers the relationship between language and the contexts
in which it is used and is concerned with the description and analysis of both
spoken and written interactions.

Its primary purpose, as Chimombo and Roseberry (1998) argue, is to provide a

deeper understanding and appreciation of texts and how they become
meaningful to their users.
Discourse analysts are also interested in:
how people organize what they say in the sense of
what they typically say first, what they say next and
so on in a conversation or in a piece of writing. This
is something that varies across cultures and is by
no means the same across languages.

--Dear Professor Paltridge something like Greetings!

It’s such a beautiful day today here in Kyoto---
 ----Mitchell (1957) was
one of the first
researchers to examine
Félix-Brasdefer (2015)
the discourse structure
of texts.
---how people order what
they say in buying and selling
interactions. He looked at
the overall structure of
these kinds of texts,
introducing the notion of Mitchell discusses how
stages into discourse language is used as, what
analysis, that is, the steps he calls, co-operative
that language users go action and how the
through as they carry out
interactions.
meaning of language lies
in the situational context
(emails, letter writing, in which it is used and in
buying and selling, the context of the text as
requests, offers and a whole.
greetings)
 (emails, letter
writing, buying and
selling, requests, Please, thank you!
offers and
greetings)
People working in the area of Foucauldian discourse
Foucauldian discourse analysis, further, challenges
analysis (Cheek 2012), for ‘ways of thinking about
example, pay particular aspects of reality that have
attention to matters of come to viewed as being
power, arguing that power is natural or normal and
always present in the use of therefore taken for granted’
discourse. (Cheek 2012: 356).
 Foucault also rejects
the notion of absolute
truth, arguing that
meaning is something
that is always shifting
and unstable.
 Discourse analysis is also a view
Discourse analysis considers how
of language in use, that is, how
people manage interactions with
people achieve certain
each other, how people
communicative goals using
communicate within particular
language, perform certain
groups and societies as well as
communicative acts, participate
in certain communicative events how they communicate with
other groups, and with other
and present themselves to
cultures.
others.
Discourse as The Social Construction of Reality

----recognizes the relationship Ludwig Wittgenstein (1992):

between language and thought and
the power of language to construct ‘The words of my language
different perspectives on things as are the limits of my world’
well as ‘to establish ideas about reflect an early view on the
which perspective is the “normal” relationship between
one’ (Goddard and Carey 2017: 29). language and thought.

---the role of language in

‘constructing ideas about the
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (Sapir 1958; nature of things’ (Goddard and
Whorf 1940) that language controls
Carey 2017: 26), that is, how,
our perceptions, thinking and
through the use language, we
behavior.
construct certain realities and
views of the world.
The social constructionist view:
see texts as communicative units which are embedded in social and
cultural practices.
The texts we write and speak both shape and are shaped by these
practices. Discourse, then, is both shaped by the world as well as shaping
the world. Discourse is shaped by language as well as shaping language.
It is shaped by the people who use the language as well as shaping the
language that people use. Discourse is shaped, as well, by the discourse
that has preceded it and that which might follow it. Discourse is also
shaped by the medium in which it occurs as well as it shapes the
possibilities for that medium.
The purpose of the text also influences the discourse.
Discussion questions
(1) Think of examples of how people recognize your socially situated
identity through your use of language. For example, in what ways does your
use of language reflect your age, social class, gender, ethnic background or
nationality? This might be through your use of vocabulary, your accent or
the things you talk about and how you talk about them. Try to think of
specific examples of each of these.
(2) Think of a situation you have been in where someone has meant more
than what they said in their use of language. For example, you may have
asked someone a favor and not got a direct answer from them. How would
the other person have expected you to work out their answer to your
request? Or perhaps someone wanted to complain to you about something
but thought it would not be polite to do this directly. How did they do this
indirectly, yet still feel sure you would get the point of what they are saying?
(3) Think of rules of communication that people seem to
follow when they are using language. For example, what are
some of the rules that students follow when talking to their
teachers? Do they use a typical level of formality and typical
forms of address (such as ‘Sir’ and ‘Miss’) when they speak
to their teachers? Are there typical topics they talk to their
teachers about, and some topics they do not talk about? Are
there typical ways they start and end a conversation with a
teacher? Do some of these depend on the setting in which
the conversation takes place, such as in a classroom or in
the teacher’s office?
(4) Think of some of the kinds of spoken or written
discourse that you participate in, such as lunch-time
conversations with your friends, tutorial discussions with
other students and social media interactions with people.
What are some of the characteristic ways in which you
interact in this kind of situation? How do you typically
express yourself in these situations? Is the way in which
you communicate the same or different in each of these
situations? Why do you think this is the case?