Transcript Grounded theory, discourse analysis and hermeneutics

Grounded theory, discourse
analysis and hermeneutics
Part Two – Discourse Analysis
ERPM001 Interpretive Methodologies
Dr Alexandra Allan
A brief history and outline...
A whole family of methodological
techniques
Conversation
analysis
Discursive
psychology
Discourse
analysis
Critical
discourse
analysis
Foucauldian
discourse
analysis
A brief history and outline...
Language as a vehicle for information transfer between people and as a set of
symbols for conveying information
J.L. Austin
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Language is not a
medium that reflects
the world. Language
as a tool box.
Language as a
dynamic,
constructive and
constitutive
medium
Language as social and
dynamic. Contrastive
and performative
utterances
What is discourse analysis?
• The analysis of language use in itself
• Involves the examination of all types of verbal
and textual materials – spoken and written
accounts, letters, journals, newspaper reports,
etc.
• The aim is to explore the way discourse is
constructed and to explore the functions
served by particular constructions
What is discourse analysis?
• Discourse: ‘ a particular way of talking
about and understanding the world’
• Language is structured according to
different patterns that people’s
utterances follow when they take part in
social life
• Discourse analysis explores these
patterns
What it is not...
• The point is not to get behind the discourse or
to find out what people really mean
• It cannot be used with all kinds of theoretical
frameworks
• It is not just an approach to analysis
• It is not just one approach
Theoretical underpinnings
Saussure and
structuralism
The meaning we attach to words is not
inherent to them but a result of social
conventions where we connect meanings
with certain sounds, e.g. dog.
Post-structuralism
Signs do not derive their meaning
through relations to relaity but it rejects
the idea that language is stable and
unchangeable
Theoretical underpinnings
‘Language, then, is not merely a channel through which
underlying mental states and behaviour or facts about
the world are communicated. On the contrary,
language is a ‘machine’ that generates, and as a result
constitutes, the social world. This also extends to the
constitution of social identities and social relations. It
means that changes in discourse are a means by
which the social world is changed. Struggles at the
discursive level take part in changing, as well as
reproducing social reality’
Phillips and Jorgensen
Some key principles...
• Language is not a reflection of a pre-existing reality
• Language is structured in patterns of discourses –
there is not just one general system of meaning but
series of discourse
• These discursive patterns are maintained and
transformed in discursive practices
• The maintenance and transformation of patterns
should therefore be explored through analysis in
specific contexts in which language is in action
Some different approaches...
1) Discursive psychology – work on the relationship
between language and inner mental entities or
processes. Used to describe action orientation of
discourse.
2) Critical discourse analysis – concerned to analyse
how social and political inequalities are manifest in
discourse. An overt political stance drawing heavily
on linguistics.
3) Foucauldian discourse analysis – Clear political intent
to focus on power relations. A focus on how
discourses facilitate what can be said, by whom,
where and when.
Critical discourse analysis
1. The character of social and cultural processes in
partly linguistic-discursive
2. Discourse is both constitutive and constituted
3. Language should be empirically analysed within its
social context
4. Discourses function ideologically
5. Critical research
Critical discourse analysis
An interdisciplinary perspective:
1) Detailed textual analysis with a field of linguistics
(Halliday – functional grammar)
2) Macro sociological analysis of social practice
(Foucault – power relations)
3) Micro-sociological interpretative tradition
(ethnomethodology and conversation analysis)
Fairclough’s three-dimensional model for
critical discourse analysis
• Every instance of language use is
a communicative event consisting of
three dimensions:
Text production
•Text
•Discursive practice
•Social practice
• All three dimensions need to be
covered in discourse analysis:
Text
Text consumption
Discursive practice
Social practice
•The linguistic feature of the
text
•The processes relating to the
proiduction and consumption of
the text
•The wider social practice to
which the communicative event
belongs
An example of critical discourse analysis
in research practice
1. Choice of research problem
2. Formulation of research questions
3. Choice of material
4. Transcription
An example of critical discourse analysis in
research practice
5. Analysis - completed at three levels though not as seperate
processes:
•
Discourse: How texts are produced and consumed. E.g. what
kinds of processes does a text go through before it is printed? Can
an intertextual chain be traced? How do readers understand text?
•
Text: detailed analysis of the linguistic characteristics using tools
like interactional control, ethos, metaphors, wording and
grammar. E.g. transivity and modality
•
Social practice: examining the broader social practice of these
dimensions, e.g. mapping the non-discursive that constitute the
wider context of the discursive practice
An example of critical discourse analysis
in research practice
1. Choice of research problem
2. Formulation of research questions
3. Choice of material
4. Transcription
5. Analysis
6. Results
Activity
Read through the two examples of texts that I have provided for you and try
to answer the following questions:
1.
Can you identify aspects of interdiscursivity and intertextuality
in this text?
(I.e. What different discourses are drawn on in the text and what texts
might these texts draw on?)
2.
How is the text connected with subjects and objects?
(I.e. How do the words used represent the reader and the institution
itself? What evidence can you find for this?)
3.
What conclusions could you draw about the discourses being
drawn on in these texts?
(I.e. What do they tell us about universities? How could they be related
to wider social theory to make more sense?)