Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Handout PDF

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS (ENG 524)  Lecture-01 What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Topic-01: Introduction to Discourse Analysis The term Discourse Analysis was first introduced by Zelling Harris (1952) to ex...

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS (ENG 524)  Lecture-01 What is Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Topic-01: Introduction to Discourse Analysis The term Discourse Analysis was first introduced by Zelling Harris (1952) to examine: the language beyond the level of the sentence, relation between linguistic and non-linguistic behaviour. It looks at patterns of language across texts as well as the social and cultural contexts the texts occur. Ranges from textually-oriented views of discourse to socially-oriented views of discourse. Knowledge about language, beyond the word, clause, phrase and sentence, needed for successful communication. The relationship between language and context. Pragmatic view of language at the core of discourse analysis. The discourse structure of texts. Cultural ways of speaking and writing e.g. cultural ways of buying and selling. Different Views/Aspects of DA Discourse as the social construction of reality. Discourse and socially situated identities. The ways we make visible and recognizable who we are and what we are doing always involve more than just language (Gee, 2005, cited in Paltridge, 2008). Discourse and Performance ‘a Discourse is a ‘dance’ (Gee, 2005, p. 19). While we say something, we also do it. Discourse and intertextuality. Assumptions of Discourse Analysis Four main assumptions: a. Language is ambiguous - What things mean is never absolutely clear. All communication involves interpreting what other people mean. b. Language is always ‘in the world’ - what language means is always a matter of where and when it is used and what it is used to do. c. The way we use language is inseparable from who we are and the different social groups to which we belong. We use language to display different kinds of social identities. d. Language is never used all by itself. It is always combined with other things such as our tone of voice, facial expressions and gestures when we speak, and the fonts, layout and graphics we use in written texts. Topic-02: Discourse and Text Meaning is the most important thing that makes a text; it has to make sense (Halliday). A text, in his view, is everything that is meaningful in a particular situation. And the basis for meaning is choice (Halliday 1978: 137). And the basis for meaning is choice. Different patterns of texture are associated with different types of texts. Devices are structured in a conventional way with a summary of the main points in the beginning and with the details coming later. The study of the social functions of different kinds of texts is called genre analysis. Mitchell (1957) was one the first researchers to examine the discourse structure of texts. He looked at the ways in which 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 stages into discourse analysis; that is the steps that language users go through. The notion of genre in discourse analysis goes beyond examining the conventional structures and features of different kinds of texts to asking what these structures and features can tell us about the people who use the texts and what they are using them to do. A genre is a recognizable communicative event characterized by a set of communicative purposes. Most often it is highly structured and conventionalized with constraints on allowable contributions in terms of their intent, positioning, form and functional value. Three important aspects of genres: a. Genres are communicative events b. Conventions and Constraints c. Creativity Different patterns of texture are associated with different types of texts. Newspaper articles, for example, tend to favor particular kinds of cohesive devices and are structured in a conventional way with a summary of the main points in the beginning and with the details coming later (e.g. see SectionC2). Topic-03: The Emergence of CDA  CDS developed historically out of Critical Linguistics (CL), an approach to language study developed at the University of East Anglia. CL emphasizes on the role of ideology and power relations in the practice of language use and the persuasive power of syntactic forms, such as the passive and nominalized forms (Kress 1989). Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) is an inter disciplinary approach to language in use - how discourse figures in social processes, social structures and social change. CDS is practiced in a wide range of fields, apart from language studies, such as anthropology, business studies, geography, health studies, media studies, psychology and tourism studies. CDS is not a method of discourse studies, but a group of varying approaches each with distinctive, but also overlapping methods (Wodak and Meyer, 2016). CDA is a linguistic approach that emerged in the early 1990s and is based on the view that discourse - including written and spoken texts -is socially determined. (CDA) is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the social and political context (Van Dijk). Investigates how social practices, events and texts are interrelated and arise out of and are ideologically shaped by relations of power (Fairclough, 1995). CDA as a Method of Research Views the systematic analysis and interpretation of texts as potentially revelatory of ways in which discourses consolidate power and colonize human subjects through often covert position calls (Locke, 2004). The Aim of CDA To help reveal hidden and ‘often out of sight’ values, positions and perspectives underlying texts (Paltridge, 2008). To unmask the strategies of discriminatory inclusion and exclusion in language in use (Wodak, 1992). The use of discourse in relation to social and cultural issues such as race, gender, politics, identity, ideology, etc. Assumptions of CDA Language use is always social. Discourse both reflects and constructs the social world. Discourses ‘are always socially, politically, racially and economically loaded’ (Rogers, 2004, p.6). Topic-04: Key Scholars of CDA Norman Fairclough He began work on CDA in the early 1980s (see 'Critical and descriptive goals in discourse analysis’,1985) with the aim of linking his academic work to his political activities. He focused on discourse as an element in the production, maintenance and transformation of the existing socio-economic order and in political struggles for a better order. Discourse in Late Modernity 1999, and various more focused studies reflected in the revised and extended second edition of Critical Discourse Analysis (2010) as well as New Labour, New Language (2000) and Language and Globalization (2006). He focuses on the trans-disciplinary nature of CDA research. He has drawn upon the 'cultural political economy' of Jessop and Sum, but this work has centered upon a collaboration with Isabela Fairclough to bring argumentation theory and analysis into CDA (Political Discourse Analysis, Routledge 2012), a development which Isabela advocated in earlier publications. https://lancaster.academia.edu/NormanFairclough Ruth Wodak Ruth is Emeritus Distinguished Professor at Lancaster University - also affiliated to the University of Vienna. A project on the "Discursive Construction of National Identity - Austria 2015“. The development of theoretical approaches in discourse studies (combining ethnography, argumentation theory, rhetoric, and text linguistics); identity politics and politics of the past; language and/in politics; racism, prejudice and discrimination. Combining several fields in discourse studies, she continues to develop the Discourse-Historical Approach in CDS, an interdisciplinary, problem-oriented approach which analyses the changes of discursive practices over time and in various genres. Teun A.van Dijk Teun A. van Dijk (1943) was professor of Discourse Studies at the University of Amsterdam until 2004. In the 90s, his work extended towards a more general study of the role of power and ideology in discourse and the reproduction of sociopolitical beliefs in society. His projects after 2000 are about discourse, context and knowledge. He has published in more than 250 articles. He holds three honorary doctorates and his work has been translated into a dozen foreign languages (including Russian, Arabic, Chinese and Japanese). Teun A. van Dijk founded a Dutch linguistics journal and six international journals, Poetics, Text (now called Text & Talk), Discourse and Society, Discourse Studies, Discourse and Communication, and the internet journal in Spanish Discurso & Sociedad. http://www.discourses.org/cv/Brief%20CV.pdf Topic-05: Approaches of CDA Socio-cultural Approach Fairclough – key proponent Faircloughs’ system of discourse analysis has three dimensions, since discourse is seen simultaneously as: (i) a text (spoken or written, including visual images), (ii) a discourse practice production, consumption and distribution of the text, (iii) a socio cultural practice. Subsequently, Fairclough provides a three-dimensional framework for the analysis of text and discourse: (a) the linguistic description of the formal properties of the text; (b) the interpretation of the relationship between the discursive processes/interaction and the text. (c) the explanation of the relationship between discourse and social and cultural reality. http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2347-3134.0601002 Socio-Cognitive Approach Van Dijk – key component Van Dijk concentrates on social cognition as the mediating part between text and society. He claims that CDA needs to account for the various forms of social cognitions that are shared by the social collectivities (groups, organizations and institutions) (Van Dijk, 2001). He identifies two levels of (discourse) analysis; macro vs. micro. Language use, discourse, verbal interaction and communication determine the micro level of social order, while the macro level refers to power, dominance and inequality between social groups (Van Dijk, 2003). http://dx.doi.org/10.20431/2347-3134.0601002 Discourse-Historical Approach Ruth Wodak views discourse as a form of social practice. It problems in our society are too complex to be studied from a single point of view that "studies in CDA are multifarious, derived from quite different theoretical backgrounds" (Wodak, 2001:5). Topic-06: Main Tenets of CDA Fairclough and Wodak (1997: 271-80) summarize the main tenets of CDA as follows: CDA addresses social problems Power relations are discursive Discourse constitutes society and culture Discourse does ideological work Discourse is historical The link between text and society is mediated Discourse analysis is interpretative and explanatory Discourse is a form of social action. Critical discourse analysts take explicit position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultimately resist social inequality. CDA has a purpose, clear-cut and strong message/ Socially Critical and analytical.  Lecture-02 Cultural Approach to CDA (CCDA) Topic-07: CCDA as a Branch of CDA Cultural Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis (CCDA) aims at exposing and examining the ways in which cultural codes are embedded in discourse, and contribute to the reproduction of abuses of power (Gavriely-Nuri 2013, 2015). Fairclough, CDA aims to shed light on the ways through which discourse helps to sustain social and political inequalities, abuses of power, and domination patterns (cf. Chilton 2004; Fairclough 1995). Teun A. van Dijk argues that CDA researchers should be interested not only in describing some interesting properties of political rhetoric, but also in explaining them. “In order to explain them, we need to relate them to such socio-cognitive representations as attitudes, norms, values and ideologies” (van Dijk 2007: 62). Shi-xu (2007) stated that since discourse is saturated with culture and cultural contestation in particular, we should refrain from reproducing dominant and repressive language as far as possible and try instead to use a culturally pluralistic, inclusive, critical, and egalitarian form of academic discourse. (Shi-xu 2007: 10) Interdisciplinary Approach CCDA, as an interdisciplinary approach, will house under one umbrella concepts such as ‘cultural memory,’ ‘cultural narratives,’ cultural representations’ and ‘cultural discourse analysis’ (Carbaugh 2007), as well as ‘the cultural turn’ (Fairclough 2003), ‘textual culture’ (Benwell 2005), ‘cultural scripts’ (Wierzbicka 1998), and many others. Topic-08: CCDA: General Principles CCDA focuses on the cultural aspects of any given ‘text’: verbal and non-verbal alike. This approach is guided by the following principles: a) No text is independent of its cultural contexts. Rather than the deconstruction of linguistic structures, CCDA shall aim to uncover the cultural and cross-cultural codes embedded in discourse. b) CCDA employs tools and methodologies taken from the discipline of Cultural Studies, such as the heuristic of decoding cultural codes. c) Cross-cultural or multi-cultural perspectives facilitate the identification of unique elements of specific cultural codes and thus contribute to the process of decoding them. d) Decoding cultural codes demands not only intimate familiarity with a community’s language, culture and history, but also special awareness of the idea that “social and historical creation... is treated as a natural event or as the inevitable outcome of natural characteristics” (Thompson 1990: 66). e) CCDA demonstrates that as far as the rhetoric of power is concerned, there is no difference between small and large cultural communities. f) CCDA seeks to expose the ‘global dictionary’ of power and manipulation. It does so, for example, by focusing on specific metaphors and idioms such as ‘axis of evil’ or ‘preemptive strike.’ g) CCDA analyses verbal and non-verbal practices (e.g., visual practices as well as cultural sites) alike, because it does not focus on the study of linguistic structures as such. That said, in this specific article I will focus mostly on verbal practices. h) CCDA analyses factual and fictional discourses alike. This is based on the assumption that a fictional short story has the same ability as a political speech to act as a repository for cultural codes and assist the continuation of power abuses. Topic-09: Cultural Codes and Discursive Strategies CCDA aims to expose the specific discursive strategies that enable the exclusion or the symbolic annihilation of social objects. ‘Strategy’ is “the process by which ends are related to means, intentions to capabilities, objectives to resources” (Gaddis 2005 : VIII). Considering that a strategy is a combination of goals and means (Fairclough 2009 : 174), CCDA is interested in discursive ‘means’ (e.g., metaphors, narratives, frames) that promote specific ‘goals’ (i.e., political agenda or specific policy). Topic-10: Critical Narrative Analysis-1  Souto-Manning (2014) has used the hybrid concept of CNA in her own research and proposed that “CNA unites CDA and narrative analysis in a mutually beneficial partnership that addresses both theoretical and methodological dilemmas in discourse analysis.” Critical Narrative Analysis (CNA) II Montesano, Montessori, and Morales Lopez (2015) define narrative as a powerful tool to depict a desired world or to envision alternatives to the status quo of any particular organisation, community, economic, or political system. They expressed this idea in the following words: Critical Narrative Analysis (CNA) III Narrative helps to rearticulate the status quo from an undesired version to a desired version, in which identities and concepts acquire new positions and new mutual relations. Narrative is a powerful tool in creating a new community and gaining its support or enthusiasm for a certain cause. Critical Narrative Analysis (CNA) IV Narrative is a powerful tool in creating a new community and gaining its support or enthusiasm for a certain cause. Collective Narrative is a narrative that forms part of a group’s identity. It is a story in a social and cultural context. It can also be defined as a story motivated by political interests and the wish to represent the consequences arising from such events in a way that reflects and serves political interests. Two ‘mega’ narratives for cultural construction. Cultural construction of social objects (such as a social group, a social phenomenon, or a social event) defines the social objects in one of two ways: either as a ‘normal’ object which forms part of normal life and normal society; or as a ‘strange’ object which does not form part of ‘normal’ life and normal society. Two mega-narratives are derived from this distinction, namely, one that ‘normalizes’ social objects and another that ‘estranges’ them. Topic-11: Critical Narrative Analysis-2 A study published on War-Normalizing Narrative in Routledge Handbook of CDA. The concept of ‘War-Normalizing Narrative’ is in fact a set of strategies that aim to blur war’s anomalous character by creating the misconception that war is a ‘natural’ or ‘normal’ event for a given society. On the other hand, the ‘Peace-Estrangement Narrative’ is a set of strategies intended for creating doubt as to the positive connotation usually associated with the concept of peace. For example, war can be depicted as an opportunity to demonstrate courage and brotherhood, while the actual condition of peace may be described as inherently dangerous, and peace initiatives may be represented as deceptive. ‘War-Normalizing’ strategies and ‘Peace- Estrangement’ strategies appear in various verbal and non-verbal contexts: these include political speeches, op-eds, literature, films, caricatures, and even national ceremonies. Strategies of Normalization: a) Euphemization – aims to color the social object in positive tones, in terms of its appearance, character, or valuation; b) Naturalization – aims to represent the social object as a force or event independent of human agency, or as an inevitable outcome of the laws of nature; c) Justification – aims to depict the social object as just, rational, worthy of support. Strategies of Abstraction Strategies of Abstraction are one of the most powerful strategies in the Israeli Peace- Estrangement discourse. The following strategies are included in this category: Strategies of Distancing A description that locates the targeted object in a distant conceptual realm. The description can be geographical, literal, conceptual, or metaphorical. The common narratives ‘peace is a dream’ and ‘peace in heaven’ are examples of distancing strategy. Strategies of Impersonalization An explanation of the relevant social object (e.g., peace) which removes the human factor and focuses on abstract organizational structures (i.e., movements, states). The penetration of the great powers to the vacuum created in the new states in Asia and Africa (Inbar 2000: 172). The escalation of the tensions between Jewish and Arab people in the 1920s and 1930s (Avieli- Tabibian 2009: 41). New centers of power began to rise around the world (Inbar 2000: 176). At the end of the 1920s, a new wave of violent acts against Jewish people erupted (Avieli- Tabibian 2009: 43). All this increased the friction between Jewish and Arab people (Avieli-Tabibian 2009: 43). The leaders of the Arab nations used the hatred towards Israel as a way to consolidate their people (Naveh 1999: 158). A related discursive strategy is that of personifying the state by using body metaphors (Musolff 2004, 2010). For example: Europe was embroiled in a net of treaties and agreements which tied its hands and every small spark could have ignited the fire of war (Inbar 2004: 82). In the sixties security problems on [Israel’s] eastern and northern borders intensified (Avieli-Tabibian 2009: 180).  Lecture-03 Introduction of Discourse Historical Approach-1 Topic-12: Introduction In English-speaking countries, the label “Discourse-Historical Approach” and its acronym “DHA” stand for one of the most prominent critical approaches to the study of discourse. The label stresses the strong historical research interest of the approach. Many theoretical and also methodological concepts used in the DHA are equally valid for other strands in critical discourse studies—even if their contexts of emergence have led to different toolkits (e.g., Hart & Cap 2014; Wodak & Meyer 2015). The DHA is distinctive both at the level of research interest and methodological orientation (an interest in identity construction and in unjustified discrimination. A focus on the historical dimensions of discourse formation and on [national, local, transnational, and global] identity politics and the politics of the past). Oriented toward the critical theory of the Frankfurt School, and in particular toward Habermas’s language philosophy (e.g. Reisigl & Wodak, 2015). A detailed DHA ideally follows an eight-stage program. 1. Literature review, activation of theoretical knowledge (i.e., recollection, reading, and discussion of previous research); 2. Systematic collection of data and context information (depending on the research questions, various discourses, genres, and texts are focused on); 3. Selection and preparation of data for specific analyses (selection and downsizing of data, etc.); 4. Specification of the research questions and formulation of assumptions (on the basis of the literature review and a first skimming of the data); 5. Qualitative pilot analysis (this allows for testing categories and first assumptions as well as for the further specification of assumptions); 6. Detailed case studies (of a whole range of data, primarily qualitatively, but in part also quantitatively); 7. Formulation of critique (interpretation of results, taking into account the relevant context knowledge and referring to the dimensions of critique); 8. Application of the detailed analytical results (if possible, the results might be applied or proposed for application). Topic-13: History of Discourse Historical Approach A short history, segmented into four stages, may help to illustrate the multiplicity of relevant subjects and interests. Phase 1: Viennese Critical Discourse Analysis ante litteram (1987–1993): The study for which the DHA was developed reconstructed the constitution of anti-Semitic stereotypes, as they emerged in (semi)public discourses. Four features of the DHA emerged from this project: A. Its interdisciplinarity and, especially, historical alignment B. Teamwork C. Triangulation of data, theories, as well as methods D. The attempt to practically apply the findings. The pioneering discourse-analytical research combined sociolinguistics and studies on narration, stylistics, rhetoric and argumentation with historical and sociological research. In the second half of the 1980s, additional DHA research was published (Examining news broadcasts and guidelines for non-sexist language use in administrative texts). Phase 2: The DHA becomes institutionalized in Vienna (1993–1997). In the 1990s, the Discourse-Historical Approach was increasingly acknowledged as one of the main approaches to Critical Discourse Analysis. It was further developed in a number of studies, for example, a study on racist discrimination against migrants from Romania. A study on the discourse about the nation and national identity in Austria (Matouschek, Wodak and Januschek 1995; Wodak, et al. 1998, 2009 ). The study analyses the relationships between the discursive construction of national sameness and difference, which leads to political and social exclusion of specific out- groups. Phase 3; The third phase comprises the years of the Research Centre “Discourse, Politics, Identity” (1997–2003) in Vienna. Ruth Wodak founded the centre with her Wittgenstein Prize awarded in 1996. The prize allowed her to fund research projects analysing a wide range of subjects, and to support a large research team. The topics and social issues investigated between 1997 and 2003 were: Overt and covert forms of racism in political discourses in national parliaments of six EU member states, especially, in debates on asylum and migration (Wodak and van Dijk 2000); Internal communication in organisations of the European Union and discourses on unemployment in EU (Muntigl, Weiss and Wodak 2000). The discursive construction of European identities in German, British and French speeches of politicians (e.g. Wodak and Weiss 2005); The Austrian discourse on the enlargement of the European Union (Galasinska and Krzyz˙anowski, 2008); Controversial debates on the issue of “permanent Austrian neutrality”, which was legally institutionalised in October 1945 (e.g. Kovacs and Wodak 2003); The controversial discourse on the role of the German Wehrmacht during World War II and on the two exhibitions about the “Crimes of the Wehrmacht”, organised by the Institute for Social Research in Hamburg (Heer et al., 2003, 2008). Phase 4; Further internationalisation of the DHA (2004–present). Two research projects mark the transition from the third to the fourth phase: The first analysed the print-mediated discourse on the Constitution of the European Union (Oberhuber et al. 2005; Krzyz˙anowski and Oberhuber 2007; Krzyz˙anowski 2010);  The second focused on discourses of integration, discrimination and migration in the European Union (Krzyz˙anowski and Wodak 2008). In 2004, when Lancaster University offered a personal chair to Ruth Wodak, Lancaster became a second center of the DHA. In the following decade, the DHA prospered in the universities of Loughborough, Bern and Orebro. In Vienna, former research interests remain relevant, e.g. doctor-patient interaction, feminist critical discourse analysis, and political commemoration. Recently, Discourse historical analysts seem to be interested in right-wing populism and fascist discourses in Europe. Similarly, the discourses on environment and climate change. Various case studies embracing different genres - political posters, leaflets, comics, documentaries, etc., have been carried out in recent years. DHA is a flexible and productive variety of CDS that always opts for a problem-oriented perspective; demonstrates a clear preference for interdisciplinary research. Still, DHA has strong roots in linguistics. Topic-14: Characteristics and Research Interests of DHA The DHA is problem-oriented. This implies that the study of (oral, written, visual) language remains only a part of the research. The investigation must be interdisciplinary. In order to analyze, understand, and explain the complexity of the objects, many different and accessible sources of data are analyzed from various analytical perspectives. The DHA is three- dimensional: (1) Specific contents or topics of a specific discourse are identified; (2) discursive strategies are investigated; (3) linguistic means are examined as types, and the specific, context-dependent linguistic realizations are examined as tokens. The DHA does not just look at the historical dimension of discourses, but is – more extensively – concerned with the following areas of discourse studies: Discourse and discrimination (e.g. racism, ethnicism, nationalism, xenophobia, islamophobia, sexism); Language barriers in various social institutions (hospitals, court rooms, authorities, academic and media institutions); Discourse and politics/policy/polity (e.g. politics of the past/political commemoration, nation-building, European Union, migration, asylum, multilingualism, language policy, populism); Discourse and identity (e.g. national and supranational/European identity, linguistic identity); Discourse and history (e.g. National Socialism, fascism, commemoration, history of discourse studies); Discourse in the media (both classical print media and new social media); Organizational communication (e.g. in institutions of the European Union); Discourse and ecology (e.g. climate change). The Discourse-Historical Approach considers discourse analysis not just to be a method of language analysis, but a multidimensional project incorporating theory, methods, methodology and empirically based research practices that yield concrete social applications. Topic-15: Discursive Strategies in DHA Nomination Discursive construction of social actors discursive construction of objects, phenomena, events discursive construction of processes and actions. How are persons, objects, phenomena, events, processes and actions named and referred to linguistically in the discourse in question? Predication Discursive characterization of social actors, objects, phenomena, events processes and actions (e.g. positively or negatively). What characteristics or qualities are attributed to social actors, objects, phenomena, events, processes and actions mentioned in the discourse? Argumentation Persuading addressees of the validity of specific claims of truth and normative rightness. What arguments are employed in discourse? Perspectivisation Positioning the speaker’s or writer’s point of view and expressing involvement or distance. From what perspective are these nominations, attributions, arguments expressed? Mitigation and Intensification Modifying the illocutionary force of utterances in respect to their epistemic or deontic status. Are the respective utterances articulated overtly, are they intensified or mitigated?  Lecture-04 Discourse Historical Approach-II Topic-16: The Concept of Critique The term “critical discourse analysis” was introduced in the 1980s in order to mark a difference with allegedly descriptive discourse analysis. What Fairclough, van Dijk and others had in mind when they stood up for “Critical Discourse Analysis” initially was particularly the political meaning of social critique. Political critique means to judge the status quo, e.g., a specific discourse or (dis)order of discourse, against the background of an alternative (ideal) state and preferred values, norms, standards or criteria with respect to shortcomings or contradictions. At least three theoretical sources are relevant for the understanding of “critique”, as it prevails in the DHA. (a) Critical Theory of the first generation (Adorno, Horkheimer, Benjamin) - inspires the DHA where it comes to criticising oppressive, discriminatory and exploitative ideologies, power abuse as well as the culture industry. Here, ideologies are suspected of justifying particular interests and social inequalities under the guise of common public interests. (b) The relationship to Foucault can be characterised as a relationship of strong interest with various reservations. Foucault’s understanding of critique as an attitude and “the art of not being governed in this specific way and at this specific price” (Foucault 1990: 12) is taken up. This critique challenges the naturalisation of social relationships. (c) Further central points of reference are the later Critical Theory of Jurgen Habermas, his discourse ethics and his theory of deliberative democracy (see Forchtner 2010, 2011). The four validity claims originally distinguished by Habermas serve as criteria for a differentiated concept of critique in the DHA: (theoretical) truth, (expressive) truthfulness, Normative rightness, comprehensibility The validity claim of comprehensibility forms the basic claim for every communication. Particularly, the question of comprehensibility is in the center of research on language barriers in various social institutions (e.g., in doctor-patient interactions in hospitals; see Wodak, Menz and Lalouschek 1989). The question of truthfulness becomes especially crucial in studies on political or rhetorical manipulation and in studies of lying. However, the suspicion that a discourse participant could be lying involves not just the validity claim of truthfulness, but also the validity claim of truth. The two validity claims of (theoretical) truth and normative rightness are central in almost all discourse-historical studies. Truth will often be at stake in political discourses about the past, in discourses about national identities (e.g., referring to national stereotypes) and in discourses about the causes and consequences of climate change. Questions of normative rightness are salient in political discourses justifying or criticising human actions in the past, in deliberative discourses evolving around the question of what should be done or shouldn’t be done, in discourses involving discrimination, in discourse on climate change, etc. The DHA proposes to include critique in all of its stages, i.e., in the context of discovery, of justification and of application. Three forms of critique in the DHA are: the text or discourse immanent critique, the socio-diagnostic critique the prospective critique (see Reisigl and Wodak 2001: 32–35). (a) Text or discourse immanent critique is primarily knowledge-related. It assesses conflicts, contradictions and inconsistencies in the text. e.g. with respect to cohesion, presuppositions, argumentation and turn-taking structures. This form of critique relies on rhetorical, text- linguistic, pragmatic, politico-linguistic and argumentation theoretical norms. (b) Socio-diagnostic critique is both epistemic and deontic. It aims at exposing manipulation in and by discourse, at revealing ethically problematic aspects of discursive practices. It focusses on discrepancies between discursive and other social practices and functions as a form of social control. It relies on social, historical and political background knowledge. This critique includes the critique of ideology, the critique of the ethos of social actors, pragmatic critique, political critique and “social critique” (relating, for instance, to social recognition). (c) Prospective critique is strongly application-oriented. It is practical, aimed at reducing dysfunctional communication and language barriers, at improving communication within public institutions by elaborating proposals and guidelines on the basis of careful fieldwork. Topic-17: The Concept of Discourse Ten features characterise the concept of discourse, as it is proposed by the Discourse- Historical Approach. (i) Discourse is a socially constituted as well as constitutive semiotic practice. In order to grasp the practical character of discourses, functionally oriented pragmatics is central. (ii) With respect to its socially constitutive character, discourse represents, creates, reproduces and changes social reality. (iii) With respect to its semiotic and pragmatic character, a discourse is a communicative and interactional macro-unit that transcends the unit of a single text or conversation. (iv) A discourse is composed of specific groups of actual texts, conversations, interactions and other semiotic events as well as action units. These concrete semiotic units are tokens, i.e., singular signs (in Peirce’s terms, sinsigns). They serve specific purposes in social contexts, and are produced by somebody, distributed by somebody and received by somebody. (v) These actual discursive units relate to specific genres and other semiotic action patterns, i.e., to types (in Peirce’s terms, legisigns). (vi) The discursive units belonging to a specific discourse are intertextually linked by a macro- topic that diversifies into various discourse topics, sub-topics, content-related argumentation schemes (topoi), etc. (vii) Discourses are situated within (political, economic, etc.) fields of action. The discursive units are functionally connected within these fields of action. Fields of action form the frames of discourses. (viii) Within these functional frames, discourses become parts of dispositifs and contribute to the constitution of social order are goal-oriented complexes or networks of discourse, knowledge, power and subject constitution. As parts of dispositifs, discourses help to organise, (re)produce and transform social relationships (including power relations) and social positions, institutions, knowledge and ideologies, identities and subjects, etc. (ix) Discourses develop around social problems. The problems become starting points of argumentation. Argumentation is both a verbal (partly also visual) and cognitive pattern of problem-solving (see Kopperschmidt, 2000; Reisigl, 2014). These patterns surround claims of truth and/or claims of normative rightness. The claims are dealt with from different perspectives. Thus, a discourse involves multiple perspectives. (x) Discourse undergoes historical change relating to social change. Historical change deserves special attention in the DHA. Discursive strategies may be included: Nomination, Predication, Argumentation, Perspectivisation, Mitigation and Intensification Topic-18: The Concept of Context Context is a key notion of Critical Discourse Studies (CDS). It has become a defining moment of discourse, because (critical) discourse analysts frequently conceive of discourse as “text in context”. CDS pay special attention to the social, political, historical and cognitive context. Context can be broken down into a macro, meso and micro-dimension. The Discourse- Historical Approach distinguishes among four dimensions of “context”: (i) The immediate, language internal co-text and co-discourse regards thematic and syntactic coherences, lexical solidarities, collocations, connotations, implications, presuppositions and local interactive processes. (ii) The intertextual and interdiscursive relationship between utterances, texts, genres and discourses (e.g. with respect to discourse representation, allusions, evocations) is a further contextual research dimension. (iii) Social factors and institutional frames of a specific context of situation include: Degree of formality, place, time, occasion, addressees, interactive and political roles, political and ideological orientation, gender, age, profession, level of education, ethnic, regional, national, religious identities, etc. (iv) On a meso- and macro-level, the broader sociopolitical and historical context is integrated into the analysis.  At this point, fields of action and the history of the discursive event as well as of discourse topics are looked at. (a) The Discourse-Historical Approach pays special attention to the fourth dimension, the historical context. Three ways of doing a discourse-historical analysis can be distinguished: A discourse fragment or utterance is taken as a starting point, and its prehistory is reconstructed by relating the present to the past. To give an example: At the first glance, an utterance such as “We take care of your Carinthia” produced by three Austrian politicians of the right-wing populist party BZO in a regional election campaign in 2009 may seem to be “harmless”. The seemingly “innocent” character gets lost if a discourse-historical analysis – interested in recontextualisation – a crucial concept for the analysis of the historical dimension of discourses. (b) A diachronic series or sequence of thematically or/and functionally connected discourse fragments or utterances is taken as a starting point, and their historical interrelationships are reconstructed within a specific period. This way, specific discourse elements can be related to each within a particular period of the past, e.g., a period of some months, years, etc. (c) A third way consists in the critical analysis of how different social actors, e.g., politicians in contrast to historians, talk, write, sing, etc. about the past, and in the comparison of the different semiotic representations with respect to claims of truth, normative rightness and truthfulness.  Lecture-05 Fairclough’s Model of CDA Topic-19: Introduction: Theoretical Positionof CDA Fairclough (1993) defines CDA as discourse analysis that aims to explore relationship of causality and determination between discursive practices, events and texts. And how discursive practices, events and texts are ideologically shaped by relation of ‘power’ and ‘struggle over power’. Fairclough’s Definition A critical discourse analysis differs from ‘lay’ critique in its ‘systematic approaches to inherent meanings’. Its reliance on ‘scientific procedures’ and the necessity as it sees it to include the ‘self-reflection of the researchers themselves’ (Fairclough and Wodak 1997: 279). Theorists’ View on CDA Fairclough claims that there are some approaches to CDA which neglect or play down the discourse practice dimension and intertextuality. For example, the work of (Boden and Zimmerman 1991, Drew and Heritage 1992). On relationships between 'talk-in interaction' and social structure. Schegloff (1992) has given a criteria under which appeal to the traditional categories of social structure in textual analysis can be minimized, for example: In a mixed gender job interview the category of participant gender may apparently be irrelevant or inconsequential on Schegloff's criteria. Various approaches to Discourse Analysis, i.e. Birmingham school (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975), ignore an important type of variability in language use (discourse), e.g. Appropriateness theory of language variability - which assumes a rather straightforward matching between types of social situation and language varieties (Fairclough, 1995). For example, the hidden variability is the variability of practice within particular social situations – within the lesson, within the medical consultation, within the media interview. According to Fairclough, the category of power, social class and Ideology should also be kept in mind while doing Discourse Analysis. Fairclough has adapted the concept of order of discourse from Foucault (1981) to refer to the ordered set of discursive practices associated with a particular social domain or institution, e.g. the lecture, the seminar, counselling, and informal conversation, in an academic institution; and boundaries and relationships between them (Fairclough, 1995). Discursive practices may have their own limitations in different relationships. As different discursive practices are used in different social situations, but they may also be alternatives in the same social situation, and may be in relationships of opposition on the basis of theoretical or ideological positions. Fairclough has described the discourse practice dimension of the framework as concerned with the production, consumption and distribution of texts. Distribution, how texts circulate within orders of discourse, can be investigated in terms of 'chain' relationships (as opposed to paradigmatic or 'choice' relationships) within discourse- orders. There are more or less settled chains of discursive practices within and between orders of discourse across which texts are shifted and transformed in systematic ways (Fairclough 1992). For instance, in the mass media, there are chains connecting various public orders of discourse (politics, law, science, etc.) Ideological analysis has recently been criticized from various perspectives, i.e. any form of ideological critique presupposes that the critic has privileged access to the truth (Foucault 1979). Topic-20: Aspects of Fairclough's Model 3D Approach Fairclough’s 3D model consists of three stages: description, interpretation and explanation. 1. In the first stage description, the text should be described as rigorously and as comprehensively as possible relative to the analytical focus. (Fairclough, 1995). Linguistic features such as choices in vocabulary (wording), grammar (transitivity, passivization) and text structure (thematic choice, turn-taking system) are systematically analysed. Concerned with formal properties of text. How people encode their thoughts through words. Systematicity in the description stage is important since this helps ground interpretation of how the text might lead to different discourses for different readers in different situations of language use, e.g. a political speech, a chat between strangers at a bus stop or a debate on Twitter. 2. The focus in the interpretation stage is concerned with the ways to hypothesize the cognition of readers/listeners, how they might mentally interact with the text. Fairclough refers to this as ‘processing analysis’. Relationship between the discourse and its production and its consumption should be interpreted. Discourse is not only regarded as text but also a discursive practice in this stage. Apart from analyzing linguistic features and text structure, attention may be drawn to other factors such as speech acts and intertextuality. These factors link the text to its context. Criticism on interpretation stage is that some significant information related to cognition may be absent from a particular text, which leads to the reader either being misled or not being fully apprised of the most relevant facts. (Chouliaraki and Fairclough 1999: 33). Interpretation stage also seeks to show how wider social and cultural contexts and power relations within them. 3. In explanation, CDA critically explains connections between texts and discourse circulating in the wider social and cultural context; the ‘sociocultural practice’. Critique here involves showing how the ‘ideological function of the misrepresentation or unmet need’ helps ‘in sustaining existing social arrangements’ (Chouliaraki and Fairclough 1999: 33). Further Debate Fairclough considers ‘language’ and ‘order of discourse’ as two centripetal forces in any discursive event. Inter-textual analysis links the text and discourse practice dimensions of the framework, and shows how a text actualizes and extends the potential within orders of discourse. But in referring to language use as discourse, Fairclough has investigated it in a social- theoretically informed way, as a form of social practice. Fairclough thinks that we need a suitable theory of language for discourse analysis, such as Halliday's (1978, 1985) because: Language use is always simultaneously constitutive of (i) social identities, (ii) social relations and (iii) systems of knowledge and belief - though with different degrees of salience in different cases. According to Fairclough, language use is constitutive in both conventional, socially reproductive ways, and creative, socially transformative ways, with the emphasis upon the one or the other in particular cases depending upon their social circumstances (Fairclough, 1995). Topic-21: Discourse and Socio-cultural Change Fairclough mentions macro domain of discourse, i.e. political talk, government policies while, keeps discourse at place work in micro-domain. He has used a term “technologization of discourse” as top-down intervention to change discursive within orders of discourse, i.e. from politics (macro) to ‘work place (micro). Fairclough has argued that the link between sociocultural practice and the other two dimensions involves the integration of 'macro' and 'micro' analysis of discursive events, where the former includes analysis of discourse technologization processes (Fairclough, 1995). On one side, no instance of discursive practice can be interpreted without reference to its context; On the other hand, 'macro' phenomena such as technologization of discourse cannot be properly analyzed without the evidence of their actual effects on practice, which comes from analysis of discursive events. Specifically, he considers the role of discourse in a range of major contemporary cultural changes which have been thematized in recent sociological analysis: shifts towards 'post traditional' forms of social life, more reflexive forms of social life, and a 'promotional culture’ (Fairclough, 1995). Fairclough extracted examples from advertisements for academic posts, materials for a conference, a curriculum vitae, and undergraduate prospectuses for his research. For CDA he also focused on conversation between institutional managements and academic staff or students. Fairclough has suggested that humour is a design feature of the mixed genre of the programme; participants are shown to be orientating to a ground rule that requires any serious political talk to be lightened with humor (Fairclough, 1995). Being a student of CDA, you can also look forward to these domains for your research. Topic-22: Textual Analysis in Social Research Textual analysis in social researches is seen as comprising two different, and complementary, forms of analysis: linguistic analysis and intertextual analysis. Linguistic analysis covers traditional levels of analysis within linguistics, i.e. phonology, grammar up to the level of the sentence, and vocabulary and semantics, etc. Linguistic-Analysis also covers textual organization above the sentence, including inter-sentential cohesion and various aspects of the structure of text including properties of dialogue such as the organization of turn-taking, etc. (Fairclough, 1995). According to Fairclough, in social researches, textual analysis is better than other methods to capture sociocultural processes in the course of their occurrence, in all their complex, contradictory, incomplete and often messy materiality. CDA is not just another form of academic analysis. But it also helps to create critical awareness of language for those ordinary people who are not familiar with linguistic-discursive forms of domination and exploitation (Fairclough, 1995). Bakhtin's writings on text and genre (especially Bakhtin, 1986) contain a sustained argument for intertextual analysis as a necessary complement to linguistic analysis, and that argument has recently been vigorously supported by, amongst others, social semioticians such as Kress and Threadgold (1988) and Thibault (1991). Intertextual analysis; text is dependent on society and history in the form of the resources made available within the order of discourse, genres, discourses, etc. Genres according to Bakhtin are 'the drive belts from the history of society to the history of language' (1986: 65). Intertextual analysis consequently presupposes accounts of individual genres and types of discourse, e.g. the accounts of conversation which have been produced by conversation analysts, or accounts of what are sometimes called 'registers’, such as language of doctors and engineer may be considered different. In social researches, intertextual analysis crucially mediates the connection between language and social context, and facilitates bridging of the gap between texts and contexts, referring to Fairclough’s 3D framework for discourse analysis in which intertextual analysis occupies this mediating position (Fairclough, 1989, 1992a).  Lecture-06 CDA and Context Topic-23: Definition of Context Blommaert (2005: 251) defines context as “the totality of conditions under which discourse is being produced, circulated and interpreted”. Van Dijk (2005: 237) defines context as “the cognitive, social, political, cultural and historical environments of discourse” (original emphasis). Further Characterization Early approaches used various metaphors to depict context. Goodwin and Duranti (1992) adopt the metaphor of figure as text and ground as context. Other researchers prefer to focus on levels of context. Halliday & Hasan (1985) distinguish text, co-text, context of situation and context of culture. In addition to co-text, Wodak (2002) includes in her model of context the other texts and discourses; the conditions of text production, distribution and reception, the wider socio-political context (Flowerdew, 2018). Text and context are generally construed to be in a “mutually reflexive” relationship where text influences context and context influences text (Goodwin and Duranti 1992: 31; also van Dijk 2008). Analysis, according to this view, involves a continual shunting between text and context (Fairclough, Mulderrig and Wodak 2011). The process by which text and context come together in the creation of meaning is referred to as contextualization, i.e. by text, we nowadays mean any semiotic feature, including signs, symbols and physical embodiment (Flowerdew, 2018). According to van Dijk (2008), contextualization is regulated by ‘K-device’: which is the mutual knowledge shared by speaker and hearer. Knowledge – which may be personal, interpersonal, group, institutional, national or cultural – is invoked in the discourse processing (Van Dijk, 2005). Context is dynamic, changing as the discourse progresses (Goodwin and Duranti 1992; O’Halloran, Tan and E 2014). It is also negotiated between the participants in a discourse, depending upon their mental models. Where mental models do not match, there may be misunderstanding. Power, which, as Foucault emphasizes, is another important contextual feature (e.g., Rabinow 1991) may decide which interpretation is to prevail. A particular type of contextual relation that has received a lot of attention in CDS is that of intertextuality (Bakhtin 1981; Kristeva 1980), the process whereby textual features of one text reappear in another. This means that an individual text may not be analyzed without considering other prior texts with which it may relate. Identity is the image one has of oneself or is held by others and which can apply to individuals or to groups, although not usually mentioned as a feature of context, is also an important contextual factor, because the image one has of oneself or of others will affect one’s interpretation of their actions and motivations (Flowerdew, 2018). Topic-24: Early Models of Context Malinowski, Firth, Halliday, Sapir and Whorf Since de Saussure’s (1977 ) distinction between langue and parole and Chomsky’s later (1965) separation of competence from performance, there has been a trend in linguistic theory to deny a role for context and to focus on the decontextualized sentence. At the same time, however, other, more socially oriented linguists emphasized the importance of context in the interpretation of utterances. As the anthropologist Malinowski famously stated: A word without linguistic context is a mere figment and stands for nothing by itself, so in the reality of a spoken living tongue, the utterance has no meaning except in the context of situation. Firth and Halliday emphasized on the role of context, distinguishing between the context of situation and the broader context of culture (Halliday 1999: 7). At the same time, Sapir and Whorf, more cognitive in orientation, developed the idea of a language representing the mental life of its speakers. Thus, Sapir-Whorf hypothesis states that the culture underlying a language represents the context within which that language will be interpreted (e.g. Pinker, 1994). Hymes Another influential model of context has been represented by Hymes’s (1962) speaking mnemonic, a set of features that can be used in interpreting any utterance. Hymes’s model was originally developed for his ethnography of communication, but has also been applied more widely. Following are the speaking mnemonics proposed by Hymes: Setting: Physical or abstract setting (e.g. office service) Participants: Speaker, hearer, overhearer Ends: purpose, goals and outcomes. Act Sequence: form the event taken place, ordering of speech acts, etc. Key: Tone, manner, spirit of the speech acts. Instrumentalities: Channel or mode (e.g., telephone, spoken or written) Norms: Norms of interaction and interpretation. Genre: Type of speech event (e.g. story, joke, lecture). Pragmatics: Gricean pragmatics assigns an essential role in communication to context (Grice 1989 ; Sperber and Wilson, 1995). Grice’s cooperative principle - the interpretation of utterances is an inferential process, based on rational thought and context. (1989 ). As Polyzou puts it, “cognitive pragmatics accounts provide the potential for accounting for the impact of context on discourse and of discourse on context, mediated by the cognitions of the participants in discursive and social action” (John Flowerdew, 2018). Presupposition, indirect speech acts, irony, and face and politeness phenomena are other features dealt within pragmatics which depend upon context for their interpretation. Analysis of such contextual features makes it possible to reveal the implicit assumptions that may lay behind a given utterance. One critique of pragmatic approaches to CDS is that, while pragmatics does involve inference and therefore context, it is too individualistic and takes an idealized view of communication and fails to take into account socio-contextual factors and power imbalances in interaction (Fairclough 2001). Topic-25: Recent Models of CDA Conversation Analysis (CA) CA views context as constructed moment by moment through conversational moves (Bhatia, Jones and Flowerdew 2008: 16). There are in fact two views here: a strong view and a weak view. Strong view of Schegloff (e.g. 1987) emphasizes that the evidence of context needs to be located in the sequence of speaker turns. The weaker view argues for going outside the immediate interactional context to the institutional context to arrive at a more grounded analysis (e.g. Drew and Heritage, 1993). CA allows critical discourse analysts to do fine-grained analysis of naturally occurring data in real-life contexts. Given the critique of the strong view of not going outside the text, combining CA with other social research methodologies, such as ethnography, may help to counter these criticisms (Flowerdew 2012). Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) An approach to grammar and discourse that has a three-dimensional model of context: Field of discourse, i.e. the subject matter of the text. Tenor of discourse, i.e. the relations between the participants and their attitudes (as presented in the discourse). Mode of discourse -the channel, i.e. speech or writing and rhetorical role (i.e. didactic, persuasive, aggressive, etc.) (Bloor and Bloor, p. 154). These three dimensions work together to constitute different varieties of language, i.e., registers (Halliday, Mclntosh and Strevens 1964). Systemic Functional Linguistics enables critical discourse analysts to identify form-function links and thereby to relate language form to context (Fairclough, 2003). Proponents of SFL argue that SFL is still the only school with a robust model to link text and context systematically (Flowerdew, 2018). Ethnographic Approaches These approaches owe much to American anthropological linguistics (e.g. Hymes 1962) and regard social context as the central aspect of communication. Influence on CDS encouraging analysts to rely relatively less on close analysis of linguistic data and more on text- external social and contextual factors. Cognitive Linguistics The cognitive linguistics approach to discourse views contexts as mental models as ultimately constructed in the cognitive systems of interacting group members (van Dijk, 2009). Evidence for the mental conceptualization of context can be found by tracking patterns in language use. For example, the study of conceptual metaphor can reveal ideological functions (Charteris-Black, 2004) or, in a rather different approach, grammatical patterning may also be related to ideological functions (Hart, 2014). Includes a cognitive interface between discourse and society - an analysis of the interpretation stage of discourse. Corpus Linguistics It is the study of the text/context interface in order to compare the use of language in a specific corpus of text and a reference corpus, to show how language-use in a specific context varies from general context. Corpus Linguistics allows CDS to work with much larger data volumes, thus reducing researcher bias (Hardt-Mautner 1995). CDA and genreAllows CDS to qualitatively and quantitatively examine a given language feature’s collocational environments, semantic patterns and discourse functions (Hardt-Mautner 1995). Corpus Linguistics has been criticized for decontextualizing data and for limiting the analysis to a bottom-up type of investigation (Widdowson, 2004). Multi-Modal Discourse Analysis (MMDA) This type of analysis involves all semiotic systems, not just language use. MMDA is influenced by the work of Halliday (1978) and was pioneered by Kress and van Leeuwen (1996) (both followers of Halliday and CDS practitioners). MMDA focusses “specifically on how different semiotic resources are deployed in the re-contextualization of social practices for ideological purposes”. An interesting example of critical MMDA is study on televised and online news - construe discourse, context and culture” (O’Halloran, 2014: 249).  Lecture-07 CDA and Genre (I) Topic-26: Introduction of Genre Genres are ways in which people ‘get things done’ through their use of spoken and written discourse. We use language in particular ways according to the content and purpose of the genre, the relationship between us and the audience we are writing for or speaking to. Looking at the use of language in particular genre, we also need to focus on social and cultural context. In the era of technology, internet introduced new forms of communication such as WhatsApp groups, chat rooms, blogs and online discussion forums which can have different genres (Paltridge, 2002). Defining Genre Martin’s ( 1984 : 25) defines genre as ‘a staged, goal-oriented, purposeful activity in which speakers engage as members of our culture’. We participate in genres with other people; goal-oriented because we use genres to get things done; staged because it usually takes us a few steps to reach our goals. Swales (2004 : 61) prefers the notion of ‘metaphor’ for talking about genres, rather than ‘definition’. He considers that definitions are often not ‘true in all possible worlds and all possible times’ and can ‘prevent us from seeing newly explored or newly emerging genres for what they really are’. Miller’s ( 1984 ) notion of ‘genre as social action’ has been especially important in the area known as rhetorical genre studies (Artemeva 2008 , Schryer 2011). In this view, a genre is defined, not in terms of ‘the substance or the form of discourse but on the action it is used to accomplish’ (Miller 1984: 151). This action is recognized by other people and the genre is accepted, over time, as a way of doing something. Genre, thus, is a kind of ‘social agreement’ (Miller and Bazerman 2011 ) about ways of doing things with language in particular social and cultural settings. Miller also discusses the notion of typification. Typification is, there are typical forms a genre might take as well as typical content and typical action that the genre performs, all of which we recognize and draw on as we engage with the use of genres (Paltridge, 2002). Topic-27: Choice and Constraints in the Use of Genre Drawing on the work of Devitt (1997), Swales (2004 ) - the view of genre in which there are both choices and constraints, regularity and chaos. Genres are dynamic and open to change, but it is not a case of ‘free for all’ or ‘anything goes’. As Devitt ( 2004 : 86) explains, conformity among genre users ‘is a fact of genre, for genres provide an expected way of acting’ and further argue is that constraint and choice, are necessary and positive components of genres. In Bhatia’s (1998 : 25–6) words: Practicing a genre is almost like playing a game, with its own rules and conventions. Bhattia considers the art of genre as a game in which writers and readers play skillfully and succeed by their manipulation and exploitation. Therefore, it is important to learn not only language; but the rules of that game in order to exploit and manipulate them to fulfil professional and disciplinary purposes. Topic-28: Relationship between Genres According to Paltridge, the use of one genre may assume or depend on the use of a number of other interrelated genres. An example of this is the academic essay which may draw from and cite a number of other genres such as academic lectures, specialist academic texts and journal articles (Paltridge, 2002). Uhrig ( 2012 ) in one of his researches, found that genre differed for each Law and MBA student in their final assessment, i.e. In law, informal study group sessions, summaries of legal cases were especially important, whereas for MBA students class discussions and oral presentations of business cases made important contributions to their assessment outcomes. Uhrig argues that in order to assist students examine just the final assessments, we need to find out more about the genres they take part in as they prepare for these assessments. Cope ( 2009 ) found a complicated genre in the application process for the students who intend to apply for admission to vocational colleges (Paltridge, 2002). The students had to engage in a range of spoken and written genres each of which was interconnected with the other, as well as have almost an insider’s understanding of how to stand the greatest chance of being admitted to their preferred course of study. Some courses had ‘walk-in’ enrolment where students are allocated a place on a first-come, first-served basis. This type of genre forced them to stand up in the queue early in the morning, at 6 am or so, or they stood no chance of being admitted to the course, no matter how well they had read the course guide, how well they had sought advice from the student counsellor or how well they had completed the application form (Paltridge, 2002). Job interviews contain a network of genre including job advertisement, the position description, the letter of application and the resumé which show interrelatedness of genres. They are also followed by an offer of appointment and, a negotiation of offer, each of which interrelate closely with the genres which precede them. Topic-29: Genre Analysis and Various Forms of Writing Some recent studies have examined the discourse structures of research articles, master’s theses and doctoral dissertations, job application and sales promotion letters, legislative documents, the graduate seminar, academic lectures, poster session discussions and the texts that students read in university courses (Swales, 1981, 1990). One model that has had a particular impact in this area is what has come to be known as the CARS (Create a research space) framework (Feak and Swales, 2011). This framework describes the typical discourse structure of the Introduction section of research articles. Swales shows how in this section of research article introductions authors establish the territory for their research by showing how it is important and relevant in some way, indicate the gap in previous research that the study aims to address and how the study being described will fill the gap that the earlier sections of the Introduction have identified. Other analyses have focused on how microgenres (Martin and Rose 2008 ), or rhetorical types, such as arguments and descriptions, etc. come together in the writing of academic genres such as student assignments and essays, etc. (Paltridge 1996 , 2002, Paltridge et al. 2009). Language and Academic Writing There have been a number of views on the nature of genre-specific language. Hutchinson and Waters (1987) made a distinction between the language of an area of specialization and the language of the genres found in these particular areas - the use of technical and specialized vocabulary rather than in its use of genre-specific language. Biber (1988) concludes a study that different kinds of texts are complex in different ways and that many earlier conclusions that have been reached about specific purpose language reflect our incomplete understanding of the linguistic characteristics of discourse complexity (Biber, 1992). In his view, there clearly are language differences between genres. These differences, however, can only be revealed through the examination of actual texts rather than through any intuitions we may have about them. Academic Writing and Meta-Discourse The term meta-discourse was first coined by the linguist Zellig Harris ( 1959 ) to describe the way in which a writer or speaker tries to guide their audience’s perception of their text (Hyland, 2005). According to Hyland (1998), meta-discourse includes interactive rhetorical features which reflect the writer’s awareness of their audience, its interests and expectations and interactional rhetorical features which include the ways in which authors convey judgements and align themselves with their readers (Hyland 2005). Interactive meta-discourse resources further guide the readers how to understand ways of expressing relations between clauses, the stages of the text, information that is in other parts of the text, information that has been drawn from other texts and ways of elaborating on meanings in the text (Paltridge, 2002). Interactional meta- discourse resources further include the ways in which writers express their stance towards what they are saying as well as how they explicitly engage with or address their readers in their texts (Hyland, 2005). Stance is the ways in which writers present themselves and convey their judgements, opinions and commitments to their own and other people’s work. In doing this, a writer may either ‘intrude to stamp their personal authority onto their arguments, or step back and disguise their involvement’. Engagement is the strategy writers use to acknowledge and recognize the presence of their readers, ‘pulling them along with their argument, focusing their attention, acknowledging their uncertainties, including them as discourse participants and guiding them to interpretations’ (Hyland 2005: 176). Topic-30: Steps in Genre Analysis Bhatia (1993) and Bawarshi and Reiff (2010) present steps for carrying out the analysis of genres, in their case, written genres. For example, we may decide to take a ‘text first’ or a ‘context-first’ approach to the analysis of a particular genre (Flowerdew, 2002, 2011). The first step, however, is to collect samples of the genre the researcher is interested in. Bhatia suggests taking a few randomly chosen texts for exploratory investigation, a single typical text for detailed analysis, or a larger sample of texts if we wish to investigate a few specified features (Paltridge, 2002). The next step is to consider what is already known about the particular genre. This includes knowledge of the setting in which it occurs or conventions associated with genre. For information on this, we can go to existing literature such as guide books and manuals as well as seek practitioner advice on the particular genre. We next need to refine the analysis by defining the speaker or writer of the text, the audience of the text and their relationship with each other. That is, who uses the genre, who writes in the genre, who reads the genre and what roles the readers perform as they read the text (Paltridge, 2002). We also need to consider the goal, or purpose, of the texts. That is, why do writers write this genre, why do readers read it and what purpose does the genre have for the people who use it? For example, some particular advertisements are written to manipulate a particular social class or a gender. A further important consideration is typical discourse patterns for the genre. That is, how are the texts typically organized, how are they typically presented in terms of layout and format and what are some language features that typically re-occur in the particular genre? In genre analysis, we also need to focus on the values, beliefs and assumptions (Bawarshi and Reiff, 2010). We should also think about the networks of texts that surround the genre and to what extent knowledge of these is important in order to be able to write or make sense of a particular genre (Paltridge, 2002). Topic-31: The Social and Cultural Context of Genres An important stage in genre analysis is to examine the social and cultural context in which the genre is used. In the case of a written text, factors that might be considered include: setting, focus and perspective of text, role and purpose of text, background knowledge or values/beliefs, etc. (Paltridge, 2002). Here, a context analysis of theses and dissertations is being presented as an example. Setting of the text The kind of university and level of study, the kind of degree (e.g. honours, master’s or doctoral, research or professional) Study carried out in a ‘hard’ or ‘soft’, pure or applied, convergent or divergent area of study (Becher and Trowler, 2001). Focus and perspective of the text Quantitative, qualitative or mixed method research claims that can be made; claims that cannot be made faculty views on what is a ‘good’ research. Purpose of the text To answer a question, to solve a problem, to prove something, to contribute to knowledge, to display knowledge and understanding, to demonstrate particular skills, to convince a reader, to gain admission to a particular area of study (Paltridge, 2002). Audience, role and purpose in reading the text To judge the quality of the research. Primary readership of one or more examiners; secondary readership of the supervisor and anyone else the student shows their work to. How readers will react to what they read, the criteria they will use for assessing the text? Relationship between writers and readers of the text Students writing for experts, for admission to an area of study (the primary readership), students writing for peers, for advice (the secondary readership). Expectations, conventions and requirements for the text An understanding and critical appraisal of relevant literature. A clearly defined and comprehensive investigation of the research topic. Appropriate the use of research methods and techniques for the research question. Ability to interpret results, develop conclusions and link them to previous research. Level of critical analysis, originality and contribution to knowledge expected. Literary quality and standard of presentation expected. Level of grammatical accuracy required. How the text is typically organized, how the text might vary for a particular research topic, area and kind of study and research perspective. What is typically contained in each chapter. The amount of variation allowed in what and how should be addressed. The university’s formal submission requirements in terms of format, procedures and timing. Background knowledge, values and understandings It is assumed students will share with their readers – what is important to their readers, what is not important to their readers. What issues students should address, what boundaries students can cross. Relationship the text has with other texts How to show the relationship between the present research and other people’s research on the topic, what counts as valid previous research, acceptable and unacceptable textual borrowings, differences between reporting and plagiarizing (Paltridge, 2002).  Lecture-08 CDA and Genre (II) Topic-32: The Discourse Structure of Genres Discourse structure of genres can be analyzed through different ways, i.e. by identifying its generic structure based on its genre category membership such as letter to the editor, doctoral dissertation, etc. Another way is to look at rhetorical types such as argument, description and problem–solution that occur within the text. Two different perspectives, can be offered on the structure of texts: one that identifies the text’s generic structure based on its genre category and another that describes its rhetorical structure based on its patterning of rhetorical organization. These rhetorical types together make up larger, more complex texts. Paltridge’s study shows that, rather than there being just the one single type of discourse pattern that is typical for theses and dissertations, there are at least four different types of patterns that writers typically choose from depending on the focus and orientation of their thesis or dissertation. Paltridge presents a comparison made between the texts in order to see if there is a recurring pattern of structural organization across the set of texts. Following previous research on the topic, these four thesis and dissertation types are labelled ‘simple traditional’, ‘complex traditional’, ‘topic-based’ and ‘compilations of research articles’. In his book, Paltridge has focused on the analysis of an abstract from a doctoral dissertation in terms of both its generic and rhetorical structures. In this example, the text follows the typical generic structure for a dissertation abstract (Paltridge and Starfield 2007 , Swales and Feak 2009 ). It is also an example of a problem–solution text (Hoey 1983 , 2001 ). Topic-33: Current theory and research in genre analysis-1 Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) assume that linguistic choices are related to all the major social functions of language transmitting the meta-functions. Their analysis is essential not only for the study of textual construction but also for understanding how a text may disseminate ideological beliefs and the social effect this may have. In this stage of genre analysis, we are particularly concerned with the relationship that can be established between textual features and their role in helping a text to adjust to social expectations. In a broader understanding of Halliday’s (2004) textual meta-function – usually concerned with explaining how texture is achieved through cohesion and coherence – we are, at this point, interested in the textual choices which help in making a text fulfil social expectations such as beliefs, traditions or other cultural aspects etc. Thus, instead of adopting a purely descriptive view of the textual choices characterizing different types, or genres, of political texts, we shall also try to explain the social role that those choices have in different social contexts. Genres can be viewed as “global linguistic patterns which have historically developed in a linguistic community for fulfilling specific communicative tasks in specific situations” Laura Filardo Llamas and Michael S. Boyd (Chilton and Schäffner 2002: 19). According to Fairclough (1989: 29–37), each social domain has an associated “order of discourse” or a structured collection of discursive practices connected with particular social domains (Fairclough 1989: 29 37). For example, socio-political genre would have different domain as compared to academic genres. CDA is particularly interested in the role that certain genres play “in the exercise of power and influence in the very definition of politics and political institutions” (Chilton and Schäffner 2002: 21). Shifting nature of political genres make it necessary for them to be constantly adapted and redefined. An example of the “fluid and shifting character” of (mediatised) political genres (Cap and Okulska 2013: 6) can be found in blogs. In her study of Polish and UK official political blogs, Kopytowska (2013: 381) sees such mediatized blogs as an emerging genre in PD that breaks down “the ontological divisions between the public and the private.” Her analysis considers the importance of mediatization and proximation which combine to reduce the distance between (political) blogs and their audiences through the creation of a virtual community. Topic-34: Current Theory and Research in Genre Analysis II Genre analysis can be made for speeches and other political genres, such as debates (Boyd 2013) and interviews, which are broadcasted on YouTube as short fragments or in their entirety (Reisigl 2008: 259), often leading to the reshaping of these genres (Boyd 2011, 2014a, 2014b; Cap and Okulska 2013: 8–9). Political genres are now more widely accessible and, importantly, the reception factors have been altered significantly by new communication paradigms such as text and video commenting, sharing, or liking, which encourage different forms of user-mediated interaction (Boyd 2011, 2014). Cap and Okulska (2013: 9) question the actual role of “authorship” (production) as a defining feature of political genres due to the “intensity of migration” into new media. For example, most of the talk-shows are preplanned; and experts/speakers are invited accordingly to show dominancy of one party on another. All of this implies a “re-imagining” (Fairclough 2010) of the political genres, as their distinguishing features are arguably now less clear-cut, and their textual construction shall be analyzed not only by looking at a unitary text, but also by considering the “genres and combinations” new media genres and texts draw upon (Fairclough, 2006: 33). According to van Dijk’s (1997) dichotomy between political participants/possible political effect. Intertextual relations between different types of genres are of key importance for understanding how political genres can evolve, and how this can affect other socio-political practices. Filardo-Llamas (2012) presents an analysis of a political campaign in the streets of Norhern Irish cities. Llamas claims that the relation can be established between the multiple political genres that can be part of one single political campaign, i.e. murals and commemorative plaques of Irish political party. For example, polysemy can be found in the use of the word “deal” by the Democratic Unionist Party in 1998 to imply both the political meaning of agreement and the metaphorical meaning of economic negotiation as a means to delegitimize the peace agreement that had been signed in Northern Ireland (Filardo-Llamas 2014). Even if the double political and metaphoric meaning was the most common use, the word was visually recontextualized, and a new type of “deal” was referred to in one of the political manifestos produced by the same party five years later, during the election campaign for Northern Ireland’s Assembly. Topic-35: Application of Genre Analysis Hammond and Macken Horarick ( 1999 ) argue that genre-based teaching can help students gain access to texts and discourses which will, hopefully, help them participate more successfully in second language spoken and written interactions. Luke ( 1996 ), argues that teaching ‘genres of power’ such as academic essays or dissertations leads to uncritical reproduction of text and does not necessarily provide the kind of access we hope it might provide for our learners. Others, such as Christie (1993) and Martin (1993) argue that not teaching genres of power is socially irresponsible in that it is the already disadvantaged students who are especially disadvantaged by programmes that do not address these issues. One thing should be kept in mind in genre-based teaching that it may limit student-expression if it is done through using model texts and a focus on audience expectations. Teachers equally need to think about how they can help students bring their own individual voices into their use of particular genres (Swales 2000). Students should avoid over-generalization, they should not apply one genre technique to another (Hyon 2001, Johns 2008). Devitt (2004) points out, the ways in which students draw on prior genre knowledge to create a further instance of the particular genre are not at all straightforward and may take place in a number of different ways. Kay and Dudley- Evans (1998) consider that teachers need to highlight the kind of variation that occurs in particular genres. They also focused on the importance of contextualizing genres in classrooms by discussing purpose, audience and underlying beliefs and values before moving on to focus on the language features of a text. They said learners should be exposed to a wide range of sample texts and that these should be both authentic and suitable for the learners. They also felt a genre- based approach should be used in combination with other approaches, such as process and communicative approaches to language teaching and learning. According to Scott and Groom ( 1999 ), the teaching of generic forms does not discount the use of models, but rather sees models as part of a of wider repertoire of resources that students can draw on and adapt, as appropriate, to support their meaning making (Paltridge, 2012). Tardy (2006) examines the research into genre-based teaching, in both first and second language contexts. As she points out, genre theory has gone beyond looking at genres as just ‘text types’ to considerations of genre as ‘a more social construct which shapes and is shaped by human activity’. Dressen-Hammouda’s (2008) study of a geology student’s experiences in learning to write showed how he benefitted from a focus on genre, especially in relation to the acquisition of disciplinary identity. She argues, along with others, that the teaching of genres should include more than just linguistic and rhetorical features of genres. It should also focus on the disciplinary community’s ways of perceiving, interpreting and behaving; that is, the ‘ways of being, seeing and acting’ (238) that are particular to the student’s disciplinary community. Kongpetch found that the genre-based approach she employed had a significant impact on the quality of her students’ writing (Paltridge, 2012). Johns (2008) points out, however, that in all these students need to develop both genre awareness and rhetorical flexibility. That is, they need to learn the expectations of particular genres in particular settings, as well as remain flexible when applying this knowledge to the requirements of the particular text they are producing (Paltridge, 2012). Genres, then, provide a frame (Swales, 2004) which enables people to take part in, and interpret, particular communicative events. Explicit knowledge of genre can make the learners able enough to communicate successfully in particular situations. It can also provide learners with access to socially powerful forms of language.  Lecture-09 Multimodality and CDA Topic-36: What is Multi-modality? Multi-modality has become more common in CDA as scholars began to introduce visual, sound and material design alongside their analysis of texts. But doing Multi-modal CDA (MCDA) is a field essentially still in its infancy. A few book titles have started to appear where multi-modality has been specifically formulated alongside CDA, such as Mayr and Machin (2012); Machin and Mayr (2012); Djonov and Zhao (2014); Abousnnouga and Machin (2013); and a journal special edition Machin (2013). There is a need to develop and establish clear, robust concepts that can be used as part of CDA with its emphasis on digging out the discourses buried in texts to reveal the kinds of power relations and ideologies that they represent. In fact, multi-modality, since emerging from linguistics in the late 1990s, still remains, in itself, rather fragmented. There is a need to work on concepts that how they are used for specific purposes. There is also an increasing sense that clearer links need to be made with existing fields of research into the visual, the sonic and the material, into whose longer traditions of investigation multimodality is now entering. In this context it is important for CDA to identify which of an array of competing concepts are most suitable for its own needs. MCDA needs to depart from a fundamentally social question: What semiotic resources are drawn upon in communication, or discourse, in order to carry out ideological work? And the social here as a point of departure is highly important in order to distinguish this approach from other kinds of multi-modal work which have a very different starting point. Following are the important steps to important to indicate the necessity for a social approach. First, it allows us to show what might be the most productive ways to proceed for CDA. Secondly, we may show exactly how this approach would work by carrying out an analysis of a set of university performance management documents which contain writing, photography, layout, tables, bulleted lists and numbers. Social practices such as cultural differences, etc. can’t be understood without focusing on semiotic resources. We shall discuss that how different kinds of semiotic resources are deployed to do very different things – because each has very specific affordances, which can be deployed for the purposes of re- contextualization. The different kinds of semiotic resources should not be conceived as independent modes as they always operate, and indeed evolved, in relationship to others. Topic-37: Origins/background of Multimodality Two books of Kress and van Leeuwen’s ‘Reading Images’ (1996) and O’Toole’s ‘The Language of Displayed Art’ (1994) has been appreciated as founding the field of multi-modality. The hugely different nature of these books characterizes much of the variation that is now found in writing presented as multimodality. The books were greatly influenced by the work of Michael Halliday (1978), where emphasis was on the social use of language. This differed from other theories of language. There was an emphasis on how language should be understood as being shaped through its cultural, historical and social uses. There was also a shift away from the idea of a more rigid, or formal, grammar, to one of a system of semantic choices, or alternatives. Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) sees language as an overall system of choices made up of layers of smaller subsystems which build into the whole. An important endeavor in SFL is to model these systems and subsystems called ‘systemic networks’. These networks are seen as being based on three meta-functions underlying semiosis. Semiotic modes (connected systems of resources) are simultaneously used to: say something about the world - the ideational meta-function; to signal our relationships - the interpersonal meta-function; and marshal these into a structured whole - the textual meta-function (Halliday and Hasan 1985). ‘Reading Images’ and ‘The Language of Displayed Art’ extended the social interpretation of language and its meanings to different aspects of visual communication. Reading Images draws on Hallidayan concepts but is also highly interdisciplinary, using semiotics and visual psychology. ‘Reading Images’ focuses on the uses of semiotic resources to make situated meaning and the ideologies and values that these carry, with an attempt to place these in the institutional contexts and interests that they serve. Signs are never fixed but have affordances which are always realized in communicative interactions, which will carry traces of the power relations underlying them. ‘The Language of Displayed Art’ is oriented to show how concepts and forms of analysis used in linguistic-based systemic functional linguistics can be used to describe and model the systems that underlie works of art and sculpture. Such works produce systems networks of the found patterns, or show how different modes fulfil Halliday’s communicative meta-functions. For example, O’Halloran (2008) shows how mathematics can be understood as multi-semiotic discourse involving language, visual images and symbolism. Topic-38: Approaches to MDA A viewpoint about multimodality is the cognitive approach, inspired mainly by the work of Forceville (1996). This approach studies how visual metaphors, in film, advertising and cartoons, for example, as with metaphors in language (Charteris Black, 2014), can be used to shape perceptions of particular phenomenon. This approach has been taken on by some critical discourse analysts to show some visual metaphorical patters in the representation of immigrants (Catalano and Waugh, 2013). A further strand of multimodality is Interactional Analysis, developed mainly through the innovative work of Scollon and Norris (2004, 2011). This strand of multimodality is a form of ethnographic work that draws attention to the way that meaning making is done through a highly subtle interplay of different semiotic resources such as language, gesture and posture, and in relation to context, proximity and rich cues in the environment. Looking at the subtleties of the specific multi modal ensembles can reveal how different meanings are communicated at different levels, for example identity cues in social interactions (Norris 2011). In sum, multi-modality shifts away from an emphasis on language as a site of meaning making, taking the traditions of the fine grained analysis of linguistics to look at the use, and nature of, other semiotic resources. This has the potential to produce predictive models of the building blocks of different forms of communication, of graphic design, gesture, space, art, etc., and in turn create a more powerful tool for analysis of the actual use of resources in context. Kress (2010: 104) argues that: “A multimodal social-semiotic approach assumes that all modes of representation are, in principle, of equal significance in representation and communication, as all modes have potential for meaning, though differently with different modes”. Topic-39: Criticism of Multimodality Forceville (2010) thinks that there is a lack of consistency in how terms are used, where authors tend to come up with their own unique meanings. Reynolds (2012) expressed concern that multi-modal analysis may suffer from producing lots of descriptive concepts but fall short on showing how these actually produce clear insights. It has been argued that multimodality must avoid the ‘tunnel vision’ (Forceville 2010; Machin 2013) of seeing all research matters through one single theory of language. Need to engage with the fields which can offer guiding principles into which the finer kinds of analysis multi-modality can be organized, such as in film studies and media studies. Also, to engage with practitioners and take an ethnographic approach might be fruitful in order to explore the actual use of semiotic resources such as typography or layout. Systematic Functional Linguistics – SFL helps to explore these semiotic recourses. SFL also tends to use texts and other semiotic materials in order to establish ‘the grammar’, the underlying systemic resources, departing from the assumption that the semiotic behavior of sign-makers is guided by more or less the same conventions, regardless of the contexts and semiotic modes involved. Bateman (2013) argues it is always possible to simply take a set of categories such as the meta-functions to look at an object, but this may be the very kind of imposing of concepts for which multi-modality has been criticized. Not all kinds of semiotic resources are suitable to be described by the three meta-functions. Therefore, it can carry out ideological work through positioning and the creating of relationships between elements. There will, of course, be a kind of ideational and interpersonal consequences or qualities involved in layout but it does not realize them in itself and it is not the case that layout relies on the three meta-functions carrying out equal semiotic work. We also believe that it is fruitful to view different kinds of semiotic resources as existing in a way that is always tightly interwoven. Semiotic resources are co articulated in communication and evolved in this multi- or inter-semiotic way. Breaking this into isolated modes risks compromising this idea. That modes exist in the independent way was recognized by Halliday (1975). When observing his son learning language, he saw that the evolving textual meta-function was in many ways realized outside grammar, or was paralinguistic. So we become coherent in speech with prosody, body language, posture, etc. – which all carry important interpersonal functions. Finally, and crucially for multi-modal CDA, an approach to modes which focuses on the systemic part of communication can serve to downplay the situated semiosis unfolding in time and space. This risks a sociological or contextual blindness, since utterances are viewed as resulting from grammatical systems and become detached from the interests of real people. Topic-40: The Re-contextualization of Social Practice Re contextualization of social practice is useful as it draws particular attention to the sequences of activity, or ‘scripts’ that can be understood as the ‘doing’ of discourses (van Leeuwen and Wodak 1999). Here discourse can be thought of as representing knowledge of what goes on in a particular social practice, ideas about why it is the way it is, who is involved and what kinds of values they hold. Discourses tell us why these scripts are reasonable ways of acting in the world. Van Leeuwen and Wodak (1999) argue that social practices can be re contextualized in language through substitutions, additions, deletions and re-ordering of the sequences that comprise events. Social practices may have: participants, ideas, values and attitudes; activities; social relations; objects and instruments; time and setting and causality. For example, in a university document, in order to see that what kind of social practices are re- contextualized, we may look upon: which causality and identities have been deleted or substituted or added. It helps to focus a critical socially driven multi-modal analysis where we reveal the ideologies buried in the use of different kinds of semiotic resources. For universities, new trend is to use promotional tools in order to develop customer relations (Teo 2007; Zhang O’Halloran 2013). Such processes allow the universities to become better value for