Maulina Adzkiyah (2201409033/ 405-406)
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Definition of DA
Is it text or discourse analysis? It is not easy to define them actually. In everyday popular use, it might be said that the term text is restricted to written language, while discourse is restricted to spoken language. However, modern Linguistics has introduces a concept of text that includes every type of utterance; therefore, a text may be a magazine article, a television interview, a conversation or a cooking recipe. According to De Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) text and communicative event must satisfy its seven criteria. They are Cohesion, Coherence, Intentionality, Acceptability, Informativity, Situationality, and Intertextuality.
Originally, the word “discourse’ comes from Latin “discursus” which denoted “conversation, speech”. Here are some definitions about Discourse Analysis (DA):
1. Discourse analysis can be characterized as a way of approaching and thinking about a problem.
2. Discourse analysis (DA), or discourse studies, is a general term for a number of approaches to analyzing written, spoken, signed language use or any significant semiotic event.
3. Discourse analysis is a qualitative method that has been adopted and developed by social constructionists. Although discourse analysis can and is used by a handful of cognitive psychologists, it is based on a view that is largely anti-scientific, though not anti-research.
4. Slembrouck points out the ambiguity of the term discourse analysis and provides another broad definition:
The term discourse analysis is very ambiguous. I will use it in this book to refer mainly to the linguistic analysis of naturally occurring connected speech or written discourse. Roughly speaking, it refers to attempts to study the organisation of language above the sentence or above the clause, and therefore to study larger linguistic units, such as conversational exchanges or written texts. It follows that discourse analysis is also concerned with language use in social contexts, and in particular with interaction or dialogue between speakers. (2005:1)
Uses of DA
The contribution of the postmodern Discourse Analysis is the application of critical thought to social situations and the unveiling of hidden (or not so hidden) politics within the socially dominant as well as all other discourses (interpretations of the world, belief systems, etc.). Discourse Analysis can be applied to any text, that is, to any problem or situation. Since Discourse Analysis is basically and interpretative and deconstructing reading, there are no specific guidelines to follow. But, all purpose of DA is not to provide definite answers, but to expand our personal horizons and make us realize our own shortcomings and unacknowledged agendas/ motivations – as well as that of others.
Types of DA
There are numerous "types" or theories of Discourse Analysis. Jacques Derrida's "Deconstruction" would be one; so would Michel Foucault's Genealogy and social criticism and analysis of the uses of discourse to exercise power (such as his analysis of how "Knowledge" is created in our societies and with what purpose or effect).
Approaches to DA
a. Speech Act Theory
It is a logico-philosophic perspective on conversational organization focusing on interpretation rather than the production of utterances in discourse.
b. Interactional Sociolinguistics
It centrally concerned with the importance of context in the production and interpretation of discourse.
c. Ethnography of Communication
The ethnographic framework has led to broader notions of communicative competence.
d. Pragmatics
It formulates conversational behavior in terms of general “principles” rather than rules.
It also provides means of characterizing different varieties of conversation, e.g. in interactions, one can deliberately try to provocative or consensual.
e. Conversational Analysis
CA is a branch of ethnomethodology. Garfinkel (sociologist) concern: to understand how social members make sense of everyday life.
f. Variation Analysis
Labov & Waletzky (1967) argue that fundamental narrative structures are evident in spoken narratives of personal experience.
g. SFL
Issues of Reliability and Validity
Discourse or Critical Analysis always remains a matter of interpretation. As there is no hard data provided through discourse analysis, the reliability and the validity of one's research/findings depends on the force and logic of one's arguments. Even the best constructed arguments are subject to their own deconstructive reading and counter-interpretations. The validity of critical analysis is, therefore, dependent on the quality of the rhetoric. Despite this fact, well-founded arguments remain authoritative over time and have concrete applications.
Advantages and Disadvantages
Discourse Analysis and critical thinking is applicable to every situation and every subject. The new perspective provided by discourse analysis allows personal growth and a high level of creative fulfillment. No technology or funds are necessary and authoritative discourse analysis can lead to fundamental changes in the practices of an institution, the profession, and society as a whole. However, Discourse Analysis does not provide definite answers; it is not a "hard" science, but an insight/knowledge based on continuous debate and argumentation.
References
Alba, Laura – Juez. 2009. Perspective on Discourse Analysis: Theory and Practice. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Fulcher, Eamon. 2012. What is Discourse Analysis? Downloaded at http://www.eamonfulcher.com/discourse_analysis.html (April 18, 2012)
_____.____. Discourse Analysis. Downloaded at http://www.ischool.utexas.edu/~palmquis/courses/discourse.htm (April 18, 2012)
_____. 2012. Discourse Analysis. Downloaded at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_analysis (April 18, 2012)
Wisniewski, Kamil. 2006. Discourse Analysis. Downloaded at http://www.tlumaczenia-angielski.info/linguistics/discourse.htm (April 18, 2012)
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar