《批评性话语分析》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《批评性话语分析（52页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、http:/www.hum.uva.nl/teun/cda.htm CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS Teun A. van Dijk Second draft, January 1998 Comments welcome To appear in Deborah Tannen, Deborah Schiffrin see also Mey, 1985). CDA, as it is commonly abbreviated, has counterparts in critical developments in sociolinguistics, psychology
2、 and the social sciences, some already dating back to the early 1970s (Birnbaum, 1971; Calhoun, 1995; Fay, 1987; Fox Hymes, 1972; Ibaez Singh, 1996; Thomas, 1993; Turkel, 1996; Wodak, 1996). As is the case in these neigboring disciplines, CDA may be seen as a reaction against the dominant formal (of
3、ten asocial or uncritical) paradigms of the 1960s and 1970s. CDA is not so much a direction, school or specialization - next to the many other approaches in discourse studies. Rather, it aims to offer a different mode or perspective of theorizing, analysis and application throughout the whole field.
4、 We may find a more or less critical perspective in such diverse areas as pragmatics, conversation analysis, narrative analysis, rhetoric, stylistics, sociolinguistics, ethnography, or media analysis, among others. Discourse analysis and society Crucial for critical discourse analysts is the explici
5、t awareness of their role in society. Continuing a tradition that rejects the possibility of a value-free science, they argue that science, and especially scholarly discourse, are inherently part of, and influenced by social structure, and produced in social interaction. Instead of denying or ignori
6、ng such a relation between scholarship and society, they plead that such relations be studied and accounted for in their own right, and that scholarly practices should be based on such insights. Theory formation, description and explanation, also in discourse analysis, are socio-politically situated
7、, whether we like it or not. Reflection the on role of scholars in society and the polity thus becomes inherent part of the discourse analytical enterprise. This may mean, among other things, that discourse analysts conduct research in solidarity and cooperation with dominated groups. Critical resea
8、rch on discourse needs to satisfy a number of requirements in order to effectively realize its aims: - As is often the case for more marginal research traditions, CDA research has to be better than other research in order to be accepted. - It focuses primarily on social problems and political issues
9、, rather than on current paradigms and fashions. - Empirically adequate critical analysis of social problems is usually multidisciplinary . - Rather than to merely describe discourse structures, it tries to explain them in terms of properties of social interaction and especially social structure. -
10、More specifically CDA focuses on the ways discourse structures enact, confirm, legitimate, reproduce or challenge relations of power and dominance in society. Fairclough Fairclough, 1995; Fairclough Fowler, Hodge, Kress Van Dijk, 1993b). Conceptual and Theoretical frameworks Since CDA is not a speci
11、fic direction of research, it does not have a unitary theoretical framework. Within the aims mentioned above, there are many types of CDA, and these may be theoretically and analytically quite diverse. Critical analysis of conversation is very different from an analysis of news reports in the press
12、or of lessons and teaching at school. Yet, given the common perspective and the general aims of CDA, we may also find overall conceptual and theoretical frameworks that are closely related. As suggested, most kinds of CDA will ask questions about the way specific discourse structures are deployed in
13、 the reproduction of social dominance, whether they are part of a conversation or a news report or other genres and contexts. Thus, the typical vocabulary of many scholars in CDA will feature such notions as power, dominance, hegemony, ideology, class, gender, race, discrimination, interests, reprod
14、uction, institutions, social structure or social order, besides the more familiar discourse analytical notions. It comes as no surprise that also CDA research will often refer to the leading social philosophers and social scientists of our time when theorizing these and other fundamental notions. Th
15、us, reference to the leading scholars of the Frankfurter Schule and to the contemporary work by Habermas (for instance on legitimation and his last discourse approach to norms and democracy) is of course common in critical analysis. Similarly, many critical studies will refer to Foucault when dealin
16、g with notions such as power, domination and discipline or the more philosophical notion of orders of discourse. More recently, the many studies on language, culture and society by Bourdieu have become increasingly influential, for instance his notion of habitus. From another sociological perspective, Giddens structuration theory is now occasionally mentioned. These
