Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach to the study of discourse that views language as a form of social practice

and focuses on the ways social and political domination are [1] reproduced in text and talk. Since Norman Fairclough's Language and Power in 1989, CDA has been deployed as a method of multidisciplinary analysis throughout the humanities and social sciences. It does not confine itself only to method, though the overriding assumption shared by CDA practitioners is that language and power are linked.
Contents
[hide]

1 Background 2 Methodology 3 Notable academics 4 See also 5 Bibliography

o o o

5.1 Notes 5.2 References 5.3 Further reading

6 External links

Background[edit source | editbeta]

Critical discourse analysis emerged from 'critical linguistics' (CL) developed at the University of East [2] Anglia in the 1970s, and the terms are now often interchangeable. Sociolinguistics was paying little [3] attention to social hierarchy and power. 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 remarkable contribution to this field of study. The approach draws from several disciplines in the humanities and [4] social sciences, such as critical linguistics. 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 sociocultural [1][5] practice. Particularly, he combines micro, meso and macro-level interpretation. At the micro-level, the [clarification needed] analyst considers the text's syntax, metaphoric structure and certain rhetorical devices . The meso-level involved studying the text's production and consumption, focusing on how power relations are enacted. At the macro-level, the analyst is concerned with intertextual understanding, trying to understand [6][7] the broad, societal currents that are affecting the text being studied. In addition to linguistic theory, the approach draws from social theory and contributions from Karl Marx, Antonio Gramsci, Louis Althusser, Jrgen 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 [1] for power. Ideology has been called the basis of the social representations of groups, and, in

psychological versions of CDA developed by Teun A. van Dijk andRuth Wodak, there is assumed to be a [8] sociocognitive interface between social structures and discourse structures. The historical dimension in [9] critical discourse studies also plays an important role.

Methodology[edit source | editbeta]

Although CDA is sometimes mistaken to represent a 'method' of discourse analysis, it is generally agreed upon that any explicit method in discourse studies, the humanities and social sciences may be used in CDA research, as long as it is able to adequately and relevantly produce insights into the way discourse [citation needed] reproduces (or resists) social and political inequality, power abuse or domination. That is, CDA does not limit its analysis to specific structures of text or talk, but systematically relates these to structures of the sociopolitical context.

Notable academics[edit source | editbeta]

Notable writers include Norman Fairclough, Micha Krzyanowski, Paul Chilton, Teun A. van Dijk, Ruth Wodak, Phil Graham, Theo Van Leeuwen, Siegfried Jger, Christina Schffner, James Paul Gee, Roger Fowler, Gunther Kress, Mary Talbot, Lilie Chouliaraki, Thomas Huckin, and Bob Hodge.

See also[edit source | editbeta]

Argumentation theory Conceptual history Critical theory Informal logic Hermeneutics Linguistic anthropology Pragma-dialectics Pragmatics Rhetoric Semiotics Systemic functional grammar

Bibliography[edit source | editbeta]

Notes[edit source | editbeta]
1. ^
a b c

Fairclough, Norman; Clive Holes (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language .

Longman. ISBN 0-582-21980-9. 2. 3. ^ Some still insist on distinctions between the two terms, although they are relatively minor ^ Wodak, R. (2001) "What CDA is about" In: Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (eds.) (2001) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. p5 4. ^ Fowler, Roger; Bob Hodge, Gunther Kress, Tony Trew (1979). Language and Control. Routledge. ISBN 978-0-7100-0288-4.

5. 6.

^ Fairclough, Norman (2001). Language and Power. Longman. ISBN 0-582-41483-0. ^ David Barry, Brigid Carroll and Hans Hansen (4 May 2006). Narrative and Discursive Organizational Studies To Text or Context? Endotextual, Exotextual, and Multi-textual Approaches to Narrative and Discursive Organizational Studies Organization Studies 2006; 27; 1091 . doi:10.1177/0170840606064568.

7.

^ Alvesson, Mats, Dan Karreman (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations 53/9: 11251149.

8.

^ van Dijk, Teun Adrianus (1998). Ideology: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Sage Publications.ISBN 0-76195654-9.

9.

^ Wodak, Ruth; Michael Meyer (2001). Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis: Methods of Critical. Sage Publications. ISBN 0-7619-6154-2.

References[edit source | editbeta]

Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen Rosa, and Coulthard, Malcolm, (editors) (1996) Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis, London: Routledge. Chouliaraki, Lilie & Norman Fairclough (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Norman Fairclough (1995). Media Discourse. London: Edward Arnold. Norman Fairclough (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge. Jaworski, Adam, & Coupland, Nikolas (Eds.) (2002). The Discourse Reader. New York: Routledge. Lazar, Michelle (Ed.) (2005). Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Gender, Power and Ideology In Discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave. Rogers, Rebecca (2003). A Critical Discourse Analysis of Family Literacy Practices: Power in and Out of Print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Rogers, Rebecca (Ed.) (2003). An Introduction to Critical Discourse Analysis in Education. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Talbot, Mary, Atkinson, Karen and Atkinson, David (2003). Language and Power in the Modern World. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Toolan, Michael (Ed.) (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics (Vol I: Precursors and Inspirations). London: Routledge. Toolan, Michael (Ed.) (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics (Vol II: Leading Advocates). London: Routledge. Toolan, Michael (Ed.) (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics (Vol III: Concurrent Analyses and Critiques). London: Routledge. Toolan, Michael (Ed.) (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis: Critical Concepts in Linguistics (Vol IV: Current Debates and New Directions). London: Routledge. Teun A. Van Dijk. (1993). Elite discourse and racism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Teun A. Van Dijk. (2005). Racism and discourse in Spain and Latin America. Amsterdam: Benjamins. Teun A. Van Dijk. (2008). Discourse and Power. Houndsmills: Palgrave.

Weiss, Gilbert & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2003). Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Palgrave. Young, Lynne & Harrison, Claire (Eds.) (2004). Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change. London: Continuum. Anna Duszak, Juliane House, ukasz Kumiga: Globalization, Discourse, Media: In a Critical Perspective / Globalisierung, Diskurse, Medien: eine kritische Perspektive. Warsaw University Press, r. 2010

http://books.google.com.pk/books?hl=en&lr=&id=BENCiEez4MsC&oi=fnd&pg=PA34&dq=critical+discou rse+analysis+assignment&ots=wqEm4qLB9H&sig=aMHzM2q0uOYS4wvRXAl9laDV8QQ#v=onepage&q=cr itical%20discourse%20analysis%20assignment&f=false