Grad Coach

What (Exactly) Is Discourse Analysis?

A Plain-Language Explanation & Definition (With Examples)

By: Jenna Crosley (PhD). Expert Reviewed By: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | June 2021

Discourse analysis is one of the most popular qualitative analysis techniques we encounter at Grad
Coach. If you’ve landed on this post, you’re probably interested in discourse analysis, but you’re not sure
whether it’s the right fit for your project, or you don’t know where to start. If so, you’ve come to the
right place.

Discourse analysis 101

Overview: Discourse Analysis Basics

In this post, we’ll explain in plain, straightforward language:

What discourse analysis is

When to use discourse analysis

The main approaches to discourse analysis

How to conduct discourse analysis

What is discourse analysis?

Let’s start with the word “discourse”.

In its simplest form, discourse is verbal or written communication between people that goes beyond a
single sentence. Importantly, discourse is more than just language. The term “language” can include all
forms of linguistic and symbolic units (even things such as road signs), and language studies can focus on
the individual meanings of words. Discourse goes beyond this and looks at the overall meanings
conveyed by language in context. “Context” here refers to the social, cultural, political, and historical
background of the discourse, and it is important to take this into account to understand underlying
meanings expressed through language.
A popular way of viewing discourse is as language used in specific social contexts, and as such language
serves as a means of prompting some form of social change or meeting some form of goal.

Discourse analysis goals

Now that we’ve defined discourse, let’s look at discourse analysis.

Discourse analysis uses the language presented in a corpus or body of data to draw meaning. This body
of data could include a set of interviews or focus group discussion transcripts. While some forms of
discourse analysis center in on the specifics of language (such as sounds or grammar), other forms focus
on how this language is used to achieve its aims. We’ll dig deeper into these two above-mentioned
approaches later.

As Wodak and Krzyżanowski (2008) put it: “discourse analysis provides a general framework to problem-
oriented social research”. Basically, discourse analysis is used to conduct research on the use of
language in context in a wide variety of social problems (i.e., issues in society that affect individuals
negatively).

For example, discourse analysis could be used to assess how language is used to express differing
viewpoints on financial inequality and would look at how the topic should or shouldn’t be addressed or
resolved, and whether this so-called inequality is perceived as such by participants.

What makes discourse analysis unique is that it posits that social reality is socially constructed, or that
our experience of the world is understood from a subjective standpoint. Discourse analysis goes beyond
the literal meaning of words and languages

For example, people in countries that make use of a lot of censorship will likely have their knowledge,
and thus views, limited by this, and will thus have a different subjective reality to those within countries
with more lax laws on censorship.

social construction

When should you use discourse analysis?

There are many ways to analyze qualitative data (such as content analysis, narrative analysis, and
thematic analysis), so why should you choose discourse analysis? Well, as with all analysis methods, the
nature of your research aims, objectives and research questions (i.e. the purpose of your research) will
heavily influence the right choice of analysis method.

The purpose of discourse analysis is to investigate the functions of language (i.e., what language is used
for) and how meaning is constructed in different contexts, which, to recap, include the social, cultural,
political, and historical backgrounds of the discourse.

For example, if you were to study a politician’s speeches, you would need to situate these speeches in
their context, which would involve looking at the politician’s background and views, the reasons for
presenting the speech, the history or context of the audience, and the country’s social and political
history (just to name a few – there are always multiple contextual factors).

The purpose of discourse analysis

Discourse analysis can also tell you a lot about power and power imbalances, including how this is
developed and maintained, how this plays out in real life (for example, inequalities because of this
power), and how language can be used to maintain it. For example, you could look at the way that
someone with more power (for example, a CEO) speaks to someone with less power (for example, a
lower-level employee).

Therefore, you may consider discourse analysis if you are researching:

Some form of power or inequality (for example, how affluent individuals interact with those who are
less wealthy

How people communicate in a specific context (such as in a social situation with colleagues versus a
board meeting)

Ideology and how ideas (such as values and beliefs) are shared using language (like in political speeches)

How communication is used to achieve social goals (such as maintaining a friendship or navigating
conflict)
As you can see, discourse analysis can be a powerful tool for assessing social issues, as well as power and
power imbalances. So, if your research aims and objectives are oriented around these types of issues,
discourse analysis could be a good fit for you.

discourse analysis is good for analysing power

Discourse Analysis: The main approaches

There are two main approaches to discourse analysis. These are the language-in-use (also referred to as
socially situated text and talk) approaches and the socio-political approaches (most commonly Critical
Discourse Analysis). Let’s take a look at each of these.

Approach #1: Language-in-use

Language-in-use approaches focus on the finer details of language used within discourse, such as
sentence structures (grammar) and phonology (sounds). This approach is very descriptive and is seldom
seen outside of studies focusing on literature and/or linguistics.

Because of its formalist roots, language-in-use pays attention to different rules of communication, such
as grammaticality (i.e., when something “sounds okay” to a native speaker of a language). Analyzing
discourse through a language-in-use framework involves identifying key technicalities of language used
in discourse and investigating how the features are used within a particular social context.

For example, English makes use of affixes (for example, “un” in “unbelievable”) and suffixes (“able” in
“unbelievable”) but doesn’t typically make use of infixes (units that can be placed within other words to
alter their meaning). However, an English speaker may say something along the lines of, “that’s un-
flipping-believable”. From a language-in-use perspective, the infix “flipping” could be investigated by
assessing how rare the phenomenon is in English, and then answering questions such as, “What role
does the infix play?” or “What is the goal of using such an infix?”

Need a helping hand?

See how Grad Coach can help you...

Book An Initial Consultation

Approach #2: Socio-political

Socio-political approaches to discourse analysis look beyond the technicalities of language and instead
focus on the influence that language has in social context, and vice versa. One of the main socio-political
approaches is Critical Discourse Analysis, which focuses on power structures (for example, the power
dynamic between a teacher and a student) and how discourse is influenced by society and culture.
Critical Discourse Analysis is born out of Michel Foucault’s early work on power, which focuses on power
structures through the analysis of normalized power.

Normalized power is ingrained and relatively allusive. It’s what makes us exist within society (and within
the underlying norms of society, as accepted in a specific social context) and do the things that we need
to do. Contrasted to this, a more obvious form of power is repressive power, which is power that is
actively asserted.

Sounds a bit fluffy? Let’s look at an example.

Consider a situation where a teacher threatens a student with detention if they don’t stop speaking in
class. This would be an example of repressive power (i.e. it was actively asserted).

Normalized power, on the other hand, is what makes us not want to talk in class. It’s the subtle clues
we’re given from our environment that tell us how to behave, and this form of power is so normal to us
that we don’t even realize that our beliefs, desires, and decisions are being shaped by it.

In the view of Critical Discourse Analysis, language is power and, if we want to understand power
dynamics and structures in society, we must look to language for answers. In other words, analyzing the
use of language can help us understand the social context, especially the power dynamics.

words have power

While the above-mentioned approaches are the two most popular approaches to discourse analysis,
other forms of analysis exist. For example, ethnography-based discourse analysis and multimodal
analysis. Ethnography-based discourse analysis aims to gain an insider understanding of culture,
customs, and habits through participant observation (i.e. directly observing participants, rather than
focusing on pre-existing texts).

On the other hand, multimodal analysis focuses on a variety of texts that are both verbal and nonverbal
(such as a combination of political speeches and written press releases). So, if you’re considering using
discourse analysis, familiarize yourself with the various approaches available so that you can make a
well-informed decision.

How to “do” discourse analysis

As every study is different, it’s challenging to outline exactly what steps need to be taken to complete
your research. However, the following steps can be used as a guideline if you choose to adopt discourse
analysis for your research.

Step 1: Decide on your discourse analysis approach

The first step of the process is to decide on which approach you will take in terms. For example, the
language in use approach or a socio-political approach such as critical discourse analysis. To do this, you
need to consider your research aims, objectives and research questions. Of course, this means that you
need to have these components clearly defined. If you’re still a bit uncertain about these, check out our
video post covering topic development here.

While discourse analysis can be exploratory (as in, used to find out about a topic that hasn’t really been
touched on yet), it is still vital to have a set of clearly defined research questions to guide your analysis.
Without these, you may find that you lack direction when you get to your analysis. Since discourse
analysis places such a focus on context, it is also vital that your research questions are linked to studying
language within context.

Based on your research aims, objectives and research questions, you need to assess which discourse
analysis would best suit your needs. Importantly, you need to adopt an approach that aligns with your
study’s purpose. So, think carefully about what you are investigating and what you want to achieve, and
then consider the various options available within discourse analysis.

It’s vital to determine your discourse analysis approach from the get-go, so that you don’t waste time
randomly analyzing your data without any specific plan.

Action plan

Step 2: Design your collection method and gather your data

Once you’ve got determined your overarching approach, you can start looking at how to collect your
data. Data in discourse analysis is drawn from different forms of “talk” and “text”, which means that it
can consist of interviews, ethnographies, discussions, case studies, blog posts.

The type of data you collect will largely depend on your research questions (and broader research aims
and objectives). So, when you’re gathering your data, make sure that you keep in mind the “what”,
“who” and “why” of your study, so that you don’t end up with a corpus full of irrelevant data. Discourse
analysis can be very time-consuming, so you want to ensure that you’re not wasting time on information
that doesn’t directly pertain to your research questions.

When considering potential collection methods, you should also consider the practicalities. What type of
data can you access in reality? How many participants do you have access to and how much time do you
have available to collect data and make sense of it? These are important factors, as you’ll run into
problems if your chosen methods are impractical in light of your constraints.

Once you’ve determined your data collection method, you can get to work with the collection.

Collect your data

Step 3: Investigate the context

A key part of discourse analysis is context and understanding meaning in context. For this reason, it is
vital that you thoroughly and systematically investigate the context of your discourse. Make sure that
you can answer (at least the majority) of the following questions:

What is the discourse?

Why does the discourse exist? What is the purpose and what are the aims of the discourse?

When did the discourse take place?

Where did it happen?

Who participated in the discourse? Who created it and who consumed it?

What does the discourse say about society in general?

How is meaning being conveyed in the context of the discourse?

Make sure that you include all aspects of the discourse context in your analysis to eliminate any
confounding factors. For example, are there any social, political, or historical reasons as to why the
discourse would exist as it does? What other factors could contribute to the existence of the discourse?
Discourse can be influenced by many factors, so it is vital that you take as many of them into account as
possible.

Once you’ve investigated the context of your data, you’ll have a much better idea of what you’re
working with, and you’ll be far more familiar with your content. It’s then time to begin your analysis.

Time to analyse

Step 4: Analyze your data

When performing a discourse analysis, you’ll need to look for themes and patterns. To do this, you’ll
start by looking at codes, which are specific topics within your data. You can find more information
about the qualitative data coding process here.

Next, you’ll take these codes and identify themes. Themes are patterns of language (such as specific
words or sentences) that pop up repeatedly in your data, and that can tell you something about the
discourse. For example, if you’re wanting to know about women’s perspectives of living in a certain
area, potential themes may be “safety” or “convenience”.

In discourse analysis, it is important to reach what is called data saturation. This refers to when you’ve
investigated your topic and analyzed your data to the point where no new information can be found. To
achieve this, you need to work your way through your data set multiple times, developing greater depth
and insight each time. This can be quite time consuming and even a bit boring at times, but it’s essential.

Once you’ve reached the point of saturation, you should have an almost-complete analysis and you’re
ready to move onto the next step – final review.

review your analysis

Step 5: Review your work

Hey, you’re nearly there. Good job! Now it’s time to review your work.

This final step requires you to return to your research questions and compile your answers to them,
based on the analysis. Make sure that you can answer your research questions thoroughly, and also
substantiate your responses with evidence from your data.

Usually, discourse analysis studies make use of appendices, which are referenced within your thesis or
dissertation. This makes it easier for reviewers or markers to jump between your analysis (and findings)
and your corpus (your evidence) so that it’s easier for them to assess your work.

When answering your research questions, make you should also revisit your research aims and
objectives, and assess your answers against these. This process will help you zoom out a little and give
you a bigger picture view. With your newfound insights from the analysis, you may find, for example,
that it makes sense to expand the research question set a little to achieve a more comprehensive view
of the topic.

Need a helping hand?

See how Grad Coach can help you...

Book An Initial Consultation

Let’s recap…

In this article, we’ve covered quite a bit of ground. The key takeaways are:

Discourse analysis is a qualitative analysis method used to draw meaning from language in context.

You should consider using discourse analysis when you wish to analyze the functions and underlying
meanings of language in context.

The two overarching approaches to discourse analysis are language-in-use and socio-political
approaches.

The main steps involved in undertaking discourse analysis are deciding on your analysis approach (based
on your research questions), choosing a data collection method, collecting your data, investigating the
context of your data, analyzing your data, and reviewing your work.

If you have any questions about discourse analysis, feel free to leave a comment below. If you’d like 1-
on-1 help with your analysis, book an initial consultation with a friendly Grad Coach to see how we can
help.

Psst… there’s more (for free)

This post is part of our research writing mini-course, which covers everything you need to get started
with your dissertation, thesis or research project.

Check out the free course

You Might Also Like:

What (Exactly) Is Thematic Analysis?

What (Exactly) Is Thematic Analysis?

What (Exactly) Is A Dissertation Abstract?

What (Exactly) Is A Dissertation Abstract?

What (Exactly) Is A Literature Review?

What (Exactly) Is A Literature Review?

16 Comments

Blessings sinkala

Blessings sinkala on October 11, 2021 at 1:26 pm

This was really helpful to me

Reply

Nancy Hatuyuni

Nancy Hatuyuni on October 13, 2021 at 3:52 am

I would like to know the importance of discourse analysis analysis to academic writing

Reply

Nehal Ahmad

Nehal Ahmad on January 18, 2022 at 4:12 pm

In academic writing coherence and cohesion are very important. DA will assist us to decide cohesiveness
of the continuum of discourse that are used in it. We can judge it well.

Reply

Donald David

Donald David on November 26, 2022 at 9:38 am

Fantastically helpful! Could you write on how discourse analysis can be done using computer aided
technique?

Many thanks
Reply

Tarien Human

Tarien Human on November 9, 2021 at 10:00 am

Thanks, we are doing discourse analysis as a subject this year and this helped a lot!

Reply

ayoade olatokewa

ayoade olatokewa on June 3, 2022 at 11:13 am

Please can you help explain and answer this question?

With illustrations,Hymes’ Acronym SPEAKING, as a feature of Discourse Analysis.

Reply

Devota Maria SABS

Devota Maria SABS on August 7, 2022 at 12:03 pm

What are the three objectives of discourse analysis especially on the topic how people communicate
between doctor and patient

Reply

David Marjot

David Marjot on November 28, 2021 at 10:02 pm

Very useful Thank you for your work and information

Reply

omar

omar on December 17, 2021 at 10:33 pm

thank you so much , I wanna know more about discourse analysis tools , such as , latent analysis , active
powers analysis, proof paths analysis, image analysis, rhetorical analysis, propositions analysis, and so
on, I wish I can get references about it , thanks in advance

Reply

Asma Javed

Asma Javed on January 22, 2022 at 6:34 am

Its beyond my expectations. It made me clear everything which I was struggling since last 4 months.
👏👏👏👏

Reply

WAMBOI ELIZABETH

WAMBOI ELIZABETH on November 18, 2022 at 8:51 am

Thank you so much … It is clear and helpful

Reply

Tedros

Tedros on March 30, 2022 at 4:01 pm

This very helpful and interesting information

Reply

Mr Abi

Mr Abi on June 12, 2022 at 12:39 pm

This was incredible! And massively helpful.

I’m seeking further assistance if you don’t mind.

Reply

Just Me

Just Me on August 12, 2022 at 2:18 pm

Found it worth consuming!

Reply

Gloriamadu

Gloriamadu on September 16, 2022 at 10:42 am

What are the four types of discourse analysis?

Reply

mia

mia on December 4, 2022 at 3:22 am

very helpful. And I’d like to know more about Ethnography-based discourse analysis as I’m studying arts
and humanities, I’d like to know how can I use it in my study.

Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Comment *

Name *
Email *

Website

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Home About Services FAQs Reviews Contact Blog Terms Privacy Scholarship

All Content Copyright © Think Digital Limited t/a Grad Coach · 1-on-1 Dissertation & Thesis Help · Tutors'
Association ID: 55870609

Join Grad Coach On: Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | LinkedIn

Share This

Get 1-On-1 Help With Your Research From

A Friendly, PhD-Qualified Grad Coach.

Awesome, tell me more!No, I don't need help

Andovar Localization Blog - tips & content for global growth

Key Differences Between Spoken and Written Languages and How it Affects Subtitling

Written by Steven Bussey | Jun 2, 2022 5:48:03 AM

Written language and spoken language differ in several ways. Those differences affect subtitling, a
practice that has become more prevalent recently as a way to translate what the speaker is saying for
those of other languages or who are deaf.
Spoken vs. Written Language

A key difference between written and spoken languages is that written language tends to be more
formal and complex than spoken language. Other differences are:

Writing is more permanent and less easily changed. Once something is printed, or on the Web, it is out
there permanently. Unless the speaker is recorded, however, they can restate their position.

Except in the case of formal speeches, spoken language is more impromptu. Because of that, it often
includes repetitions, interruptions, and incomplete sentences. Writing is more polished.

Because written language is more complex, it requires punctuation. Punctuation has no equivalent in
spoken language.

Writing communicates across time and space for as long as the medium exists and that particular
language is understood. Speech is more immediate.

Except with text messages, computer chats, or similar technology, writers can't receive immediate
feedback to know whether their message is understood or not. Speakers do receive feedback and can
clarify or answer questions as needed.

Written and spoken communication use different types of language. Slang and tags, for example, are
more often used when speaking.

Spoken language involves speaking and listening skills, while written language requires writing and
reading skills.

The spoken language uses tone and pitch to improve understanding; written language can only use
layout and punctuation.

Subtitling
Subtitling is turning spoken language into writing so that individuals read it and understand what is
being said on the screen. Subtitles are important in engaging viewers who speak a different language in
the video. On average, about 66% of videos are actually watched to completion; however, adding
subtitles increases this to 91 percent, according to one report. Subtitles also generate 15 percent more
shares on social media and improve SEO.

Subtitling must be easy and quick to read; a subtitle is on the screen no longer than about six seconds.
Timing is critical. The subtitle should appear when the person starts talking and disappear when they
stop.

Each language has a limited space in which it can convey what the speaker has said with subtitles. For
example, English usually has only about 70 characters (two lines) to translate the spoken word of one
language into the written language of another. Ideally, the subtitles and spoken word on the screen
should be so well synchronized that they don't even realize they are reading rather than hearing the
spoken word. Subtitling then becomes an abridgement of what was said that conveys the meaning
rather than a word-for-word translation.

The subtitle creation process requires several phases. These are:

Spotting, which is the process of determining how to synchronize the subtitles with the audio and
adhere to duration times.

Translation, which is translating and localizing from the source language within the number of allowable
characters

Correction, which is making the text natural, punctuating it properly, and splitting the subtitles to be
easily understood and not distract the viewer.

Simulation, in which the film is screened and modifications are made

Challenges and Managing Them

Because subtitling converts spoken text into written text within tight constraints, it has challenges that
don't appear in other types of translations.

One challenge is what to do about slang and tags. While these are very much a part of speech, they
aren't typically part of written speech. They provide insight into the personality of the speaker but often
don't translate well into another language. Also, the tags may take up characters that the translator
could better use to convey the speaker's meaning. The subtitler will weigh the pros and cons of including
slang and tags and, if they include them, will localize them for the target region.

Likewise, the translator/subtitler must balance the desire to give identity to the speaker with the need
to be clear when dealing with repetitions or incomplete sentences. Sometimes, the pendulum might
shift toward maintaining the integrity of the dialogue, while at other times, it might shift toward
completing the sentences. For example, dialogue is key to movies. Movie dialogue subtitles would more
likely include incomplete sentences than would subtitling of a training video, for example.

Punctuation presents another challenge. Since the viewer can't use tone and pitch to determine
meaning, they must rely on punctuation to help them discern this. The translator and subtitler also must
find other ways to awaken the same emotions through the subtitle text in the target language that the
speaker did in the source language.

Do-It-Yourself or Outsource?

Subtitling is a specialty. If the subtitles are in a different language than the spoken word, adequately
creating them requires knowledge of how to subtitle and knowledge of the spoken and written
languages in both the source and target countries.
Subtitling also is time-consuming. Adding subtitles to a video takes about five times the length of the
video. For example, if the video is five minutes long, adding subtitles will require 25 minutes. The time
spent doing these subtitles is time away from other activities, such as developing and executing a
marketing strategy, researching a better way to make or deliver your product, producing the product or
service, and selling it. Many businesses will find that outsourcing makes sense even if they have
expertise in-house to produce the subtitles. Outsourcing allows executives and employees to devote
more of their time to the core functions of their business.

When you partner with Andovar for your translation and subtitling needs, you'll be partnering with a
team that has considerable experience in this type of work. In fact, our team members do subtitles
every day. They are efficient and accurate. We have more than 140 full-time employees and 3,000
translators located all over the world. Someone who speaks the same language as your targeted
audience will edit and review your subtitles. Fill out our contact form today to receive a call from an
expert on our team.

View full post

Skip to main content

Home About Collections How to Order Library Resources COUNTER Contact Us Help Metadata
Accessibility Open AccessLog In

Bloomsbury Collections at the heart of research

My Collections

Enter Search Terms

Advanced Search
Browse by Subject

Recently Viewed (0)

Recent Searches (0)

Back to Search

Go to Page

Go

Pages 1 .. 114

Front matter

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. Theories and common concerns

Chapter 3. Four examples of discourse analysis

Chapter 4. The usefulness of discourse analysis for social science researchers

Chapter 5. The challenges of discourse analysis

Chapter 6. Criticisms of discourse analysis

Chapter 7. Summary

Back matter

Book Cover

What is Discourse Analysis?

Stephanie Taylor

Bloomsbury Academic 2013

Open access

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons license

S
M

Favourite

Download

Cite

Print

Email

Share

Search within this book

Search7111 views

Chapter DOI10.5040/9781472545213.ch-001

Page Range1–6

Chapter 1. Introduction

This book has been written as an introduction, to explain and demonstrate some of the possibilities
which discourse analysis offers for contemporary social research. It is for novices as well as experienced
researchers in the social sciences and related disciplines who want to read about other people’s
discourse analytic research and perhaps conduct their own similar projects. The two major themes of
the book are as follows: discourse analysis does not refer to a single approach or method, and its varied
forms cannot be distinguished without an understanding of their premises. The aim is therefore to help
readers understand the connections between the theoretical assumptions which a discourse researcher
makes about the social world, the research topic or problem being investigated, the data chosen for
analysis and the aspects of the data which are studied. Any research project represents a unique
combination of these features, and indeed part of the attraction of discourse analysis is the wide range
of possibilities which it encompasses.

chapter 1 develops an initial definition of discourse analysis and then outlines the content of the
subsequent chapters, with some suggestions for using the book effectively as a practical guide, and
building on its content.
What is discourse analysis?

This question is difficult to answer succinctly because the term ‘discourse analysis’ refers to a range of
approaches in several disciplines and theoretical traditions. Discourse analysts in sociolinguistics,
sociology and social psychology, to mention just a few possibilities, are likely to differ in the sources they
refer to, and also, to some extent, in the problems and research questions which they set out to
investigate. This variety is potentially confusing, but also positive in that it expands the possibilities for
new researchers and projects. This book provides an overview of discourse analytic research as a rich
and interdisciplinary field which continues to change and develop in new directions. Later chapters will
discuss some of the theoretical background and examples of research studies. This section begins a
discussion on the meaning of the term discourse analysis.

One starting point is that discourse analysis usually refers to a research approach in which language
material, such as talk or written texts, and sometimes other material altogether, is examined as
evidence of phenomena beyond the individual person. To understand this, imagine looking at some old
letters, written several decades or even centuries ago. Each letter will of course be interesting for what it
conveys about the writer’s situation, opinions and feelings. However, it can also provide more general
evidence of society at that earlier time. For instance, passing references may suggest what is taken for
granted, including the priorities and values shared by members of society. Some of the words used may
even be offensive to a contemporary reader, for instance, because they are linked to assumptions about
class or gender or race which have since been questioned. In addition, some of the writing may seem
‘old-fashioned’ in its style and level of formality because there have been changes in the directness with
which people express opinions or state disagreements. If letters between both parties to the
correspondence have survived, they will provide further insights into how people communicated at that
time, including the conventions which operate in particular relationships, business or personal. In short,
each letter, however private its original purpose, is potentially of interest as evidence of social
phenomena, in a way that the writer could not have anticipated. This is the level of interpretation
employed by a discourse analyst.

To explain the variety of discourse analytic research, it is useful to distinguish two lines of academic
work. They do not encompass all the variations in discourse analysis and in practice, they tend to
converge particularly around the study of difference and inequality and the workings of power in
society, as some of the studies discussed later in the book will indicate. Nonetheless, the distinction is
helpful as a starting point.

The focus of the first line of academic work is the nature of language. Traditionally, linguistics, or
‘linguistics proper’, can be defined narrowly as ‘the study of “grammar” in a broad sense: the sound
systems of language (“phonology”), the grammatical structure of words (“morphology”) and of
sentences (“syntax”) and more formal aspects of meaning (“semantics”)’ (Fairclough, 2001a, p. 5).
However, sociolinguists and many other academics consider language as inseparable from its social
contexts. Among many other aspects of language use, they study differences in how people speak (and
write) which are linked to class and other social categories, or to a particular activity, situation, role and
purpose. Summarized somewhat crudely, this line of writing and research can therefore be said to have
extended from the concerns of ‘linguistics proper’ to explore features of language linked, again, to social
phenomena. Discourse analytic research in this line includes investigations of the details of how
language varies across contexts and can mark social difference, and how children acquire competence in
language use and, again, how that competence is linked to identity and social difference.

The second academic line can be said to have originated in the study of society and people as social
beings, especially in sociology and social psychology, and then developed to incorporate a focus on
language. In other words, the move has been in the opposite direction, from social phenomena to
language. For example, discourse researchers have analysed public and private language use as a way of
accessing the collective, though not necessarily coherent, ‘world view’ of a society. Some aspects would
be the ways in which people and their activities are categorized, valued and located in relationships of
dominance and subservience. Language use may also be analysed as one activity or practice (some
would say, the most important practice) which people engage in as part of their ongoing social lives and
relationships. Through the analysis of language and language use, the researcher therefore builds up a
picture of society and how it functions.

The variety in discourse analytic research is also partly given by the kinds of data used by researchers.
Discourse analysts can study other forms of representation from language, such as pictures and film, or
consider language use alongside other practices, but most work with some kind of language data (the
focus of this book). Some researchers investigate historical material, like the old letters already
mentioned, but most take as their data contemporary material related to language and communication.
As already noted, this is analysed following the principle that language provides evidence of social
phenomena. For example talk, perhaps from focus groups or people participating in interviews, will be
of interest not (just) as straightforward reporting, like witness statements. (Many analysts will also avoid
interpreting it as a direct report of the speaker’s inner thought processes and feelings.) Instead, the
analysis may focus on how the interaction of speakers is shaped and constrained by its social contexts,
from the immediate conversational interaction to the larger situation of the place, time, state of the
nation and so on. The analysis may explore the styles of speaking, and the ‘to and fro’ of the talk. It may
consider the details of how the talk is constructed, including grammatically, and the implications of the
choice of one possible word or structure over an alternative. It may consider the functions of the talk, or
examine the assumptions which apparently underlie what is said. Words, expressions and arguments
may be analysed as social and cultural resources associated with certain social groups and contexts,
recycled and modified by individual language users in particular instances of communication. The
analysis may explore more dramatic aspects of the talk, for instance, when someone speaks ‘as’ a
certain character or role (a concerned parent, an authoritative expert) or appears to repeat a well-
rehearsed anecdote, or address an audience beyond the immediate situation. Some of these foci are
associated with particular named approaches to discourse analysis, but in many or even the majority of
studies, the features to be studied will be decided according to the priorities of the research, drawing on
the wide range of possibilities given by previous published work.

The remainder of this book looks more closely at some of these possibilities. To assist the exploration, it
will be useful to give an initial answer to the question ‘What is discourse analysis?’ as follows: Discourse
analysis is the close study of language and language use as evidence of aspects of society and social life.
Later chapters of the book return to this definition and extend it.

The chapters

chapter 2, ‘Theories and common concerns’, presents an overview of the main theoretical traditions
relevant to discourse analysis in the social sciences. Although the focus is on key ideas, not individual
theorists, the chapter does introduce some of the ‘names’ readers may encounter in their reading of
other sources. It is intended as a starting point for further reading which researchers can build on as
they follow their own interests and develop new projects.

chapter 3, `Four examples of discourse analysis’, discusses four recent articles published in academic
journals, each of which presents findings from a discourse analytic study. The examples have been
chosen to demonstrate the variety of discourse analytic approaches and also of the kinds of research
problems they have been used to address. Together, the four articles refer to a range of subject fields,
project designs and types of data. The first article, by Kirsten Bell, is based on a study conducted with
people attending cancer support groups; the second, by Jovan Byford, on an investigation of political
rhetoric; the third, by Elizabeth Stokoe, on a close analysis of talk from neighbours engaged in disputes;
and the fourth, by Ruth Wodak, Winston Kwon and Ian Clarke, on a study of meetings in a business
organization. The four articles variously discuss racism and prejudice, health, risk and personal
responsibility, morality and gender, and leadership and consensus. The chapter provides an overview of
each research project, its theoretical grounding, the empirical work and the data which were analysed,
and the discourse analytic or discursive approach which the researcher has adopted.

chapter 4, ‘The usefulness of discourse analysis for social science researchers’, begins with a general
discussion of the reasons for using this form of research and for analysing language data. The chapter
also discusses two ‘half-reasons’ which are based on a partial misunderstanding of the premises of a
discourse analytic approach. The chapter then describes some of the different kinds of data which can
be analysed discursively and considers practical aspects of obtaining discourse data. The chapter
includes sections on the collection of new data, the selection of already existing or ‘found’ material as
data and the production of transcripts.

chapter 5 considers some of the problems or challenges faced by the discourse analyst. These include
deciding on the right discourse analytic approach, and beginning to analyse data and develop an
interpretation and argument. The discussions of interpretation and analysis continue the practical
guidance provided in chapter 4.

Every research approach has its critics and chapter 6 addresses some common criticisms of discourse
analysis. For example, the chapter answers the challenges sometimes made that discourse analysis is
out of date as an approach or is ‘just’ about words, or that it does not take enough account of people or
has limited practical applications. The chapter also discusses some more specific criticisms, such as that
discourse analysts should not collect data through interviews.

chapter 7 summarizes the key points covered in previous chapters and presents a list of suggestions and
references for readers who would like to build on the practical introduction to discourse analysis which
is presented in this book. The book also includes a glossary of key terms.

Using this book

Like other text books, ‘What is discourse analysis?’ has been written as a guide and reference tool.
Readers are likely to turn to chapters and sections which seem pertinent to their immediate concerns
and practical problems. However, the book has also been written to be read from start to finish. The
concepts and terms which are introduced in chapter 2 are referred to in the very detailed discussions of
empirical studies presented in chapter 3. The discussions in Chapters 4 and 5 refer back to those studies,
and to previous chapters, and the arguments presented in chapter 6 presume some awareness of
theories and concepts introduced earlier in the book. Readers are therefore recommended to work
through the chapters in order, at least initially. It will also be useful to refer to the glossary of key terms
at the end of the book.

Summary

chapter 1 has introduced the topic of the book, offered an initial answer to the question ‘What is
discourse analysis?’ and outlined the contents of the remaining chapters.
Bloomsbury

Privacy & Cookies

Terms & Conditions

Copyright © 2022

Bloomsbury Publishing

Registered in England No. 01984336

twitter

facebook

rss

newsletter

Skip to main content

Home About Collections How to Order Library Resources COUNTER Contact Us Help Metadata
Accessibility Open AccessLog In

Bloomsbury Collections at the heart of research

My Collections

Enter Search Terms

Advanced Search

Browse by Subject

Recently Viewed (0)

Recent Searches (0)

Back to Search

Go to Page

Go

Pages 1 .. 114

Front matter

Chapter 1. Introduction

Chapter 2. Theories and common concerns

Chapter 3. Four examples of discourse analysis

Chapter 4. The usefulness of discourse analysis for social science researchers

Chapter 5. The challenges of discourse analysis

Chapter 6. Criticisms of discourse analysis

Chapter 7. Summary

Back matter

Book Cover

What is Discourse Analysis?

Stephanie Taylor

Bloomsbury Academic 2013

Open access

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons license

L
Favourite

Download

Cite

Print

Email

Share

Search within this book

Search7111 views

Chapter DOI10.5040/9781472545213.ch-001

Page Range1–6

Chapter 1. Introduction

This book has been written as an introduction, to explain and demonstrate some of the possibilities
which discourse analysis offers for contemporary social research. It is for novices as well as experienced
researchers in the social sciences and related disciplines who want to read about other people’s
discourse analytic research and perhaps conduct their own similar projects. The two major themes of
the book are as follows: discourse analysis does not refer to a single approach or method, and its varied
forms cannot be distinguished without an understanding of their premises. The aim is therefore to help
readers understand the connections between the theoretical assumptions which a discourse researcher
makes about the social world, the research topic or problem being investigated, the data chosen for
analysis and the aspects of the data which are studied. Any research project represents a unique
combination of these features, and indeed part of the attraction of discourse analysis is the wide range
of possibilities which it encompasses.

chapter 1 develops an initial definition of discourse analysis and then outlines the content of the
subsequent chapters, with some suggestions for using the book effectively as a practical guide, and
building on its content.

What is discourse analysis?

This question is difficult to answer succinctly because the term ‘discourse analysis’ refers to a range of
approaches in several disciplines and theoretical traditions. Discourse analysts in sociolinguistics,
sociology and social psychology, to mention just a few possibilities, are likely to differ in the sources they
refer to, and also, to some extent, in the problems and research questions which they set out to
investigate. This variety is potentially confusing, but also positive in that it expands the possibilities for
new researchers and projects. This book provides an overview of discourse analytic research as a rich
and interdisciplinary field which continues to change and develop in new directions. Later chapters will
discuss some of the theoretical background and examples of research studies. This section begins a
discussion on the meaning of the term discourse analysis.

One starting point is that discourse analysis usually refers to a research approach in which language
material, such as talk or written texts, and sometimes other material altogether, is examined as
evidence of phenomena beyond the individual person. To understand this, imagine looking at some old
letters, written several decades or even centuries ago. Each letter will of course be interesting for what it
conveys about the writer’s situation, opinions and feelings. However, it can also provide more general
evidence of society at that earlier time. For instance, passing references may suggest what is taken for
granted, including the priorities and values shared by members of society. Some of the words used may
even be offensive to a contemporary reader, for instance, because they are linked to assumptions about
class or gender or race which have since been questioned. In addition, some of the writing may seem
‘old-fashioned’ in its style and level of formality because there have been changes in the directness with
which people express opinions or state disagreements. If letters between both parties to the
correspondence have survived, they will provide further insights into how people communicated at that
time, including the conventions which operate in particular relationships, business or personal. In short,
each letter, however private its original purpose, is potentially of interest as evidence of social
phenomena, in a way that the writer could not have anticipated. This is the level of interpretation
employed by a discourse analyst.

To explain the variety of discourse analytic research, it is useful to distinguish two lines of academic
work. They do not encompass all the variations in discourse analysis and in practice, they tend to
converge particularly around the study of difference and inequality and the workings of power in
society, as some of the studies discussed later in the book will indicate. Nonetheless, the distinction is
helpful as a starting point.

The focus of the first line of academic work is the nature of language. Traditionally, linguistics, or
‘linguistics proper’, can be defined narrowly as ‘the study of “grammar” in a broad sense: the sound
systems of language (“phonology”), the grammatical structure of words (“morphology”) and of
sentences (“syntax”) and more formal aspects of meaning (“semantics”)’ (Fairclough, 2001a, p. 5).
However, sociolinguists and many other academics consider language as inseparable from its social
contexts. Among many other aspects of language use, they study differences in how people speak (and
write) which are linked to class and other social categories, or to a particular activity, situation, role and
purpose. Summarized somewhat crudely, this line of writing and research can therefore be said to have
extended from the concerns of ‘linguistics proper’ to explore features of language linked, again, to social
phenomena. Discourse analytic research in this line includes investigations of the details of how
language varies across contexts and can mark social difference, and how children acquire competence in
language use and, again, how that competence is linked to identity and social difference.

The second academic line can be said to have originated in the study of society and people as social
beings, especially in sociology and social psychology, and then developed to incorporate a focus on
language. In other words, the move has been in the opposite direction, from social phenomena to
language. For example, discourse researchers have analysed public and private language use as a way of
accessing the collective, though not necessarily coherent, ‘world view’ of a society. Some aspects would
be the ways in which people and their activities are categorized, valued and located in relationships of
dominance and subservience. Language use may also be analysed as one activity or practice (some
would say, the most important practice) which people engage in as part of their ongoing social lives and
relationships. Through the analysis of language and language use, the researcher therefore builds up a
picture of society and how it functions.

The variety in discourse analytic research is also partly given by the kinds of data used by researchers.
Discourse analysts can study other forms of representation from language, such as pictures and film, or
consider language use alongside other practices, but most work with some kind of language data (the
focus of this book). Some researchers investigate historical material, like the old letters already
mentioned, but most take as their data contemporary material related to language and communication.
As already noted, this is analysed following the principle that language provides evidence of social
phenomena. For example talk, perhaps from focus groups or people participating in interviews, will be
of interest not (just) as straightforward reporting, like witness statements. (Many analysts will also avoid
interpreting it as a direct report of the speaker’s inner thought processes and feelings.) Instead, the
analysis may focus on how the interaction of speakers is shaped and constrained by its social contexts,
from the immediate conversational interaction to the larger situation of the place, time, state of the
nation and so on. The analysis may explore the styles of speaking, and the ‘to and fro’ of the talk. It may
consider the details of how the talk is constructed, including grammatically, and the implications of the
choice of one possible word or structure over an alternative. It may consider the functions of the talk, or
examine the assumptions which apparently underlie what is said. Words, expressions and arguments
may be analysed as social and cultural resources associated with certain social groups and contexts,
recycled and modified by individual language users in particular instances of communication. The
analysis may explore more dramatic aspects of the talk, for instance, when someone speaks ‘as’ a
certain character or role (a concerned parent, an authoritative expert) or appears to repeat a well-
rehearsed anecdote, or address an audience beyond the immediate situation. Some of these foci are
associated with particular named approaches to discourse analysis, but in many or even the majority of
studies, the features to be studied will be decided according to the priorities of the research, drawing on
the wide range of possibilities given by previous published work.
The remainder of this book looks more closely at some of these possibilities. To assist the exploration, it
will be useful to give an initial answer to the question ‘What is discourse analysis?’ as follows: Discourse
analysis is the close study of language and language use as evidence of aspects of society and social life.
Later chapters of the book return to this definition and extend it.

The chapters

chapter 2, ‘Theories and common concerns’, presents an overview of the main theoretical traditions
relevant to discourse analysis in the social sciences. Although the focus is on key ideas, not individual
theorists, the chapter does introduce some of the ‘names’ readers may encounter in their reading of
other sources. It is intended as a starting point for further reading which researchers can build on as
they follow their own interests and develop new projects.

chapter 3, `Four examples of discourse analysis’, discusses four recent articles published in academic
journals, each of which presents findings from a discourse analytic study. The examples have been
chosen to demonstrate the variety of discourse analytic approaches and also of the kinds of research
problems they have been used to address. Together, the four articles refer to a range of subject fields,
project designs and types of data. The first article, by Kirsten Bell, is based on a study conducted with
people attending cancer support groups; the second, by Jovan Byford, on an investigation of political
rhetoric; the third, by Elizabeth Stokoe, on a close analysis of talk from neighbours engaged in disputes;
and the fourth, by Ruth Wodak, Winston Kwon and Ian Clarke, on a study of meetings in a business
organization. The four articles variously discuss racism and prejudice, health, risk and personal
responsibility, morality and gender, and leadership and consensus. The chapter provides an overview of
each research project, its theoretical grounding, the empirical work and the data which were analysed,
and the discourse analytic or discursive approach which the researcher has adopted.

chapter 4, ‘The usefulness of discourse analysis for social science researchers’, begins with a general
discussion of the reasons for using this form of research and for analysing language data. The chapter
also discusses two ‘half-reasons’ which are based on a partial misunderstanding of the premises of a
discourse analytic approach. The chapter then describes some of the different kinds of data which can
be analysed discursively and considers practical aspects of obtaining discourse data. The chapter
includes sections on the collection of new data, the selection of already existing or ‘found’ material as
data and the production of transcripts.
chapter 5 considers some of the problems or challenges faced by the discourse analyst. These include
deciding on the right discourse analytic approach, and beginning to analyse data and develop an
interpretation and argument. The discussions of interpretation and analysis continue the practical
guidance provided in chapter 4.

Every research approach has its critics and chapter 6 addresses some common criticisms of discourse
analysis. For example, the chapter answers the challenges sometimes made that discourse analysis is
out of date as an approach or is ‘just’ about words, or that it does not take enough account of people or
has limited practical applications. The chapter also discusses some more specific criticisms, such as that
discourse analysts should not collect data through interviews.

chapter 7 summarizes the key points covered in previous chapters and presents a list of suggestions and
references for readers who would like to build on the practical introduction to discourse analysis which
is presented in this book. The book also includes a glossary of key terms.

Using this book

Like other text books, ‘What is discourse analysis?’ has been written as a guide and reference tool.
Readers are likely to turn to chapters and sections which seem pertinent to their immediate concerns
and practical problems. However, the book has also been written to be read from start to finish. The
concepts and terms which are introduced in chapter 2 are referred to in the very detailed discussions of
empirical studies presented in chapter 3. The discussions in Chapters 4 and 5 refer back to those studies,
and to previous chapters, and the arguments presented in chapter 6 presume some awareness of
theories and concepts introduced earlier in the book. Readers are therefore recommended to work
through the chapters in order, at least initially. It will also be useful to refer to the glossary of key terms
at the end of the book.

Summary

chapter 1 has introduced the topic of the book, offered an initial answer to the question ‘What is
discourse analysis?’ and outlined the contents of the remaining chapters.

Bloomsbury

Privacy & Cookies

Terms & Conditions

Copyright © 2022

Bloomsbury Publishing

Registered in England No. 01984336

twitter

facebook

rss

newsletter