DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

1.     What is Discourse Analysis 

Discourse Analysisis the investigation of knowledge about language beyond the word, clause, phrase and sentence levels. All of them are the basic building blocks of successful communication. In discourse analysis researchers have to infiltrate language as a whole beyond the micro level of words and sentences and look at the entire body of communication produced in a given / particular situation.Discourse analysis refers ‘to attempts to study the organization of language above the sentence, or above the clause, and therefore to studylarger linguistic units, such as conversationalexchanges or written texts’(Stubbs 1983:1). However, Michael Stubbs redefines Discourse in his later work as ‘It is therefore more accurate to say that text and discourse analysis studies language in context: how words and phrases fit into both longer texts, and also social contexts of use’ (Stubbs 2001a:5).

a.                Relationship Between Language And Context      

The basic consideration of Discourse Analysis is relationship between language and the situations wherein it is produced. It analyzes and investigates both spoken and written interactions.In the broader context, it’s not only the conversation that is taken into account in discourse analysis, but also the societal customs and practicesas well that make the entire web of social fibre / behaviours.

b.               Discourse Analysisand Pragmatics  

chapter will highlight pragmatics that is the prime consideration of the ways in which people mean more than what they say in spoken and written discourses.Paltridge discusses Discourse Analysis from pragmatic point of view.

c.                The Discourse Structure Of Text               

Discourse Analysts are interested in how people knit into a structure what they intend to convey to others in a conversation or in a piece of writing.For Example there are cultural differences of greetings in Japan and USA. In US they are very short while in Japan they include weather and other details in greetings. As they say “greetings from HOT and SIZZLING Tokyo” instead of only the word of greetings which is not a requirement in English

d.               Cultural Ways Of Speaking And Writing               

The author criticizesthe study of the Ethnography of communication by Dell Hymes.The cultural context remains the most important aspect that needs attention of analysts, researchers and critics. Paltridgemaintains that though Hymesanalyzed cultural point of view but he ignored social and cultural context in language occurs.

e.                Communicative Competence &Discourse  

Communicative competence is knowing about the structures that are normally used while communicating in a given language. It revolves around the knowledge of speakers as to how to respond to different speech acts as faced during day to day situations. Communicative competence consists offour componentsi.e. grammatical competence, socio linguistic competence discourse competence and strategic competence.

f.                Discursive Competence        

Discursive competenceis not only language related and text level knowledge but also includescomplex factors beyond text which are required for useful communication.Discursive competence draws together the notion of textual competence generic competence and social competence.

2.     Different Views of Discourse Analysis                  

It is the analysis offunctional language i.e. the language currently in use in context. Paltridge has discussed different uses of discourse analysisi.e. the one is textually oriented and the other is social constructionist use of discourse analysis. The first view only concentrates on language features of text while the second one talks about the text in social and cultural settings. Paltridge has focused more ondiscourse analysis from the second point of view. Both of these aspects can hardly be ignored in a realistic discourse analysis. Different features of text are important components but at the same time the contextual settings cannot be separated from the textual features to scrutinize / analyze the intended meaning.

a.      Discourse as the Social Constructionof Reality          

The author here  discusses that through discourse we always construct our social reality and she gives the example of BBC Panorama interview in which Princess Diana doesn’t only talk about herself but while she talking she also constructs her social world in a way that she wants people to see.

b.     Discourse And Socially Situated Identities 

Similarly, whenever we speak or pen something down weconstruct our socially situated identities.A speaker can construct multi identities in a single stretch of discourse. For example, when a speaker, in an interview, tells that his son goes to Chicago University, he establishes his identity of being a father and a husband.In the same very interview if he discloses it to the audience that he is a high ranking officer in the Army, he constructs his second identity of being an army office.It includes the way we dress, the way we act and interactinfluences.

c.      Discourse And Performance

Sometimes our discourse not only shows the intentions and identities, it actually performs the intended functions.  It’s based on the view that in saying something we do it.  For example when it is said, “I promise and I now pronounce you man and wife” The act has been performed i.e. the couple has become man and wife.

d.     Discourse And Intertextuality         

All text whether spoken or written,takes meanings from other texts and refers to other texts. So, this way they are in an intertextual relationship with other texts. Casablanca movie in which different genre such as adventure patriotic war propaganda are mixed up.

3.     Difference Between Spoken And Written Discourse                   

Thereare a no of differences b/w spoken and written discourse.The differences are as under:-

a.                Grammatical Intricacy and Spoken Discourse                   

Researchers have shown that speech as well as writing is grammatically complex and different from each other. The written language is more complex grammatically compared to the spoken version of discourse       

b.               Lexical Density in Spoken and Written Discourse             

Discourse analysts like Hallidaymaintain that written discourse is more lexically dense than the spoken form. It used thicker and comparatively difficult lexicon to convey the meaning.

c.                Nominalization In Written And Spoken Discourse 

Nominalization refers to the process of forming nouns from other word class than nouns. For example red+ness=redness. It occurs where actions and events are presented as nouns rather than verbs.In written discourse the process of nominalization takes place on higher level while in spoken discourse there is low level of nominalization.

d.               Explicitness In Spoken And Written Discourse                  

Writing is more explicit than speech.Explicitness in writing and speech depends on the purpose of the text as well as listeners and readers.

e.                Contextualization In Spoken And Written Discourse                    

Some of the spoken genre is decontextualized and some of the written genre is also decontextualized while some are not.In thewritten discourse the contextualization has to be established before starting the major discussion/explanation.The spoken genre, such as academic lectures, is decontextualized.

f.                The Spontaneous Nature Of Spoken Discourse

Spokendiscourse is often produced spontaneously so sometimes it is disorganized in comparison to writing as Halliday points out writing is, “a highly idealized version of the writing process”

g.               Repetition Hesitation and Redundancy in Spoken Discourse

Spoken discourse being produced spontaneously and without any preplanning, contains abundant repetition hesitation and redundancy because it is produced in real time and it contains pauses and fillers.          

h.               A Continuum Of Differences between Spoken and Written Discourse

There are no binding rules of differentiating between spoken and written discourse as spoken and written styles may intermingle with each other in forms.

4.     3 Of Book Recommendation

1- How to Do Discourse Analysis by James Paul Gee

‘Using a practical how-to approach, Gee provides the tools necessary to work with discourse analysis, with engaging step-by-step tasks featured throughout the book. Each tool is clearly explained, along with guidance on how to use it, and authentic data is provided for readers to practice using the tools. Readers from all fields will gain both a practical and theoretical background in how to do discourse analysis and knowledge of discourse analysis as a distinctive research methodology.’

2- An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Theory and Method 4th Edition by James Paul Gee

‘Discourse analysis considers how language, both spoken and written, enacts social and cultural perspectives and identities. Assuming no prior knowledge of linguistics, An Introduction to Discourse Analysis examines the field and presents James Paul Gee’s unique integrated approach which incorporates both a theory of language-in-use and a method of research.’

3- Discourse Analysis 2nd Edition by Barbara Johnstone

‘Fully revised and updated throughout, the new edition of Discourse Analysis is a user-friendly textbook for students taking their first course in linguistic approaches to discourse.’

5.3  Of Contemporary Researchers For Discourse Analysis And Their Findings

1.Discourse Analysis by Lawrance D Berg “Discourse Analysis”

   Geographers have become key theorist of subjectivity because of the important role that space and place play in subject forrmation and thus subject ‘position’in social and spatial relations.

     2.Discourse Analysis By Brian Paltridge “What Is Discourse Analysis”

. It explains discourse analysis and different approaches to discourse, society, pragmatics, genre, grammar and corpus studies.An extensive glossary at the end and the guidance as to further readings is a great help for the researchers. For the advance level researchers the book proffers new perspectives on approaches to discourse, alongwith an entire chapter dedicated tocritical discourse analysis.  Furthermore, the diversity of literatureenables readers to discover areas that were never interrogated upon before.

3. Grzegorz Kowalski “Abstract rhetors in Polish and English scientific discourse:

           a diachronic study”

As has been found, Polish authors writing in English use abstract rhetors in similar proportions to English linguists writing in their mother tongue, whereas texts written in Polish show a visibly different pattern of distribution of the said feature. Moreover, this regularity is observed in the whole period in question, thus the symbolic borderline of the year 1989, denoting not only the pre-/post-Iron Curtain eras but also the beginning of globalization, does not correlate with any evident change in the use of the said parameter of scientific discourse.