Discourse Analysis Before giving a simplistic definition of

Discourse Analysis Before giving a simplistic definition of "discourse analysis ", it is expedient to look at some definitions and quotations from well –known scholars in the field of discourse analysis. The idea of introducing these definitions and quotations at the beginning of this section is: -

i)To introduce you to some of the basic concepts and terms in the field of discourse analysis. (ii)To introduce you to some wellknown linguists whose names are associated with various aspects of discourse analysis. (iii)To draw your attention to fact that there is not a single theory about or a single approach to discourse analysis

Defining Discourse Study the following definitions and quotations carefully: (i)Coulthard (1977: 6) In any spoken text there at least four major levels of organization – phonology, grammar, discourse and nonlinguistic. The structure in each of these levels can be expressed in terms of small units combining to form larger units …

(ii)Halliday and Hasan (1976 : 1) The word text is used in linguistics to refer to any passage, spoken or written. A text may be spoken or written, prose or verse, dialogue or monologue. It may be anything from a single proverb to a whole play. from a momentary cry for help to an all-day discussion on a committee. A text is a unit of language in use.

Hatim and Mason (1990 : 240 ) Discourse : Modes of speaking and writing which involve participants in adopting a particular attitude towards areas of sociocultural activity ( e. g. , racist discourse , official , etc. ) Stubbs (1983 : 1) Discourse is language above the sentence or above the clause.

Text vs. Discourse Two of the above definitions use the term • discourse and text to refer both to the spoken and written language. Thin is the position which most linguists and • researchers adopt nowadays.

At some point some researchers / linguists used the term text to refer to the written language and discourse to the spoken language. = We shall follow the main trend and use the term discourse to refer to both the spoken and the written language.

Two of the above definitions (Coulthard & Stubbs ) view discourse as language above the sentence. In fact this is the view which some linguists and sociolinguists still adhere to. Other researchers do not accept this view.

They argue that any appropriate / relevant speech /writing event that serves a communicative function is an example of discourse regardless of its constituents. This could be a word , as in the case of greetings , or one phrase as in the case of SMS or an e-mail massage.

Discourse analysis = DA Study the following statements carefully : 1. Schiffrin (1994: 5 ) Discourse analysis is widely recognized as one of the most vast , but also one of least defined , areas in linguistics …

One reason for this is that our understanding of discourse is based on scholarship from a number of academic disciplines that are actually very different from one another. Included are not just disciplines in which models for understanding … discourse first developed ( i. e. linguistics , anthropology , sociology , philosophy) But also disciplines that have applied … such models …e. g. communication , social psychology and artificial intelligence…

2. Coulthard ( 1977: 1 ) …the serious study of spoken discourse is only just beginning and currently much of the work is being undertaken not by linguists but by sociologists , anthropologists and philosophers.

3. Brown an Yule ( 1983: 1 ) …the analysis of discourse , is necessarily , the analysis of language in use. As such , it can not be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which these forms are designed to serve in human affairs.

The conclusions that can be drown from the above definitions may be categorized under three major headings : 1. Objectives of discourse analysis 2. Approaches to discourse analysis 3. Disciplines concerned with discourse analysis.

Below is a brief discussion of each of the aforementioned categories. 1. Objective of discourse analysis. The main objective is to study all aspects related to language use , or strictly speaking language in use , i. e. language as used in real communicative situations by real people and the contexts in which communication takes place.

Approaches to DA. As mentioned before there is not one single approach to discourse analysis. The most Well-Known approaches are the following:

(a) Speech Act Theory = SAT A theory developed by two philosophers , namely John Austin & John Searle , from the basic contention that human language is used to perform actions – It should be kept in mind that some issues in speech act theory are directly linked to discourse analysis.

(ii) Ethnography of communication. (iii) Conversational Analysis. (iv) Pragmatics. Disciplines concerned with discourse analysis. Although discourse analysis deals with language in use , this issue is not restricted to linguistic analysis. This is due to the fact that language is not simply a formal mathematical system. It is more than that :

(a) L is a human behavior , and this is of interest to psychologists and psycholinguists , (b) L is a social activity , and hence sociologists are interested in it , (c) The basic function of language is communication and hence anthropologists are also interested in it. (d) L is assumed to be linked to thinking , and this es an area of interest for philosophers.