Week 10 Lecture 1

1. CDA-related Theories and Their Attendant Concepts

This is to discuss CDA-related theories and their attendant concepts. This includes Critical

Linguistics, van Dijk’s (1980) approach to semantic macrostructure, van Dijk’s (1998) theory of

ideology, Fairclough’s approach to discourse and social change, and Wodak’s discourse-historical

approach. These are covered due to their importance and relevance to CDA.

1. CDA 相关理论及其附带概念

本文将讨论与 CDA 相关的理论及其相关概念。其中包括批判语言学、van Dijk（1980

年）的语义宏观结构方法、van Dijk（1998 年）的意识形态理论、Fairclough 的话语与社会变

迁方法以及 Wodak 的话语历史方法。由于这些方法对 CDA 的重要性和相关性，我们对其进行

了论述。

Fairclough’s Approach (1992; 1995a, 1995b; 2001b; 2003)

In a series of studies conducted by Fairclough (1992; 1995a, 1995b; 2001b; 2003), he argued

that discourse analysis requires social analysis along linguistic analysis. Within this context, he

defined discourse as a spoken or written language use, and this language use is a form of social

practice (at least 2 individuals) rather than an individual activity . For example, classroom teaching is

a social practice which involves action and interaction mediated 介 导 的 through language and

where social relations between the teacher and his/her students are defined in terms of power

relations; this in turn constitutes the type of discourse. This classroom scenario goes through text

production and interpretation which is called discourse practice.

费尔克拉夫的方法（1992 年；1995a、1995b；2001b；2003 年）

在费尔克拉夫（1992；1995a，1995b；2001b；2003）进行的一系列研究中，他认为话

语分析需要在进行语言分析的同时进行社会分析。在此背景下，他将话语定义为口头或书面的

语言使用，这种语言使用是一种社会实践（至少 2 个人）而不是个人活动。例如，课堂教学是

一种社会实践，它涉及以语言为中介的行动和互动，教师和学生之间的社会关系由权力关系决

1
定；这反过来又构成了话语的类型。这种课堂情景经历了文本生产和解释，这就是所谓的话语

实践。

Fairclough also contended that contemporary society has been experiencing dramatic social

and cultural changes at economic, political, educational, and technological levels (covid-19:

offline, ChatGPT, transpotation). This means that society is being transformed to adapt to the new

life style which can be realised through the developments in medicine, technology, economy, and

education. Such developments and changes influence the way text is produced, distributed and

interpreted. For example, Fairclough (1995a) examined a British university prospectus 招股说明书

and found out that power relations are hardly defined clearly in the text and are contested 竞 争

between the authority of university and the applicant as a consumer who is looking for what better

suits him/her in this market. Therefore, the applicant’s requirements are not overtly explained.

费尔克拉夫还认为，当代社会在经济、政治、教育和技术层面经历了巨大的社会和文

化变革（covid-19：离线，ChatGPT，转引）。这意味着社会正在发生变革，以适应新的生活

方式，而新的生活方式可以通过医学、技术、经济和教育的发展来实现。这些发展和变化影响

着文本的制作、传播和解读方式。例如，Fairclough（1995a）研究了英国一所大学的招股说明

书，发现文本中几乎没有明确界定权力关系，大学权威与作为消费者在市场中寻找更适合自己

的东西的申请者之间存在竞争。因此，申请人的要求没有得到明确的解释。

Fairclough (1995a) studied connections between language, power and ideology and drew up

a framework which he referred to as a CDA framework. He stated that ideology is embedded in the

text implicitly and that ideology does not necessarily express factual statements as knowledge

does. This is so because ideology provides certain representations of the world manifested in the

text from a particular angle based on the individual’s perspective and interests. Such ideological

representations are expressed through syntactic and lexical structures. Consequently, language-

ideology relation should be conceptualised within the framework of discoursal and sociocultural

change discussed above because the concept of ideology here focuses on its effects on how to sustain

2
/ mantain/undermine 持 续 or undermine 破 坏 power relations. - superiority and inferiority (bs of

selfishness)

费尔克拉夫（1995a）研究了语言、权力和意识形态之间的联系，并制定了一个框架，

他称之为 "意识形态分析 "框架。他指出，意识形态隐含在文本中，意识形态不一定像知识那

样表达事实陈述。之所以如此，是因为意识形态基于个人的视角和兴趣，从特定角度提供了文

本中所体现的世界的某些表征。这种意识形态表征是通过句法和词汇结构来表达的。因此，语

言与意识形态的关系应在上文讨论的话语和社会文化变迁的框架内加以概念化，因为这里的意

识形态概念侧重于其对如何维持/维护/持续或破坏权力关系的影响。- 优越感和自卑感

Fairclough (1995a) argued that language studies should not neglect social, critical, and

historical accounts. The first two accounts were discussed earlier. For the latter, he posited that

discourse is historical in nature as it often makes references and allusions 典 故 to past events in a

discursive 漫 无 边 际 way as in news reports. The recourse to such references and allusions which

exist in prior texts is called intertextuality1. In other words, it is realised in a text which incorporates

parts of other texts. For example, it is manifested in a news report when the journalist uses

quotations taken from the interviewees.

Fairclough (1995a) 认为，语言研究不应忽视社会、批判和历史方面的论述。前两种说

法已在前面讨论过。对于后者，他认为话语具有历史性，因为它经常以一种话语的方式引用和

典故过去的事件，就像新闻报道中的那样。对先前文本中存在的参考文献和典故的引用被称为

互文性（ intertextuality ） [ 这是克里斯蒂娃在 20 世纪 60 年代末创造的术语（见 Fairclough,

1992, p.101 ）。 ]. 换句话说，它是在包含其他文本部分的文本中实现的。例如，在新闻报道

中，当记者使用采访对象的引文时就体现了这一点。

In his approach, intertextuality plays a pivotal 关键的 role in that it focuses on discourse in

social change. Because linguistic analysis is descriptive - active, passive, nominalisation -

persuasion in nature, it requires an intertextual analysis to bridge the gap between text and discourse

practice. Hence, the need of intertextuality is urgent as it also plays the role of historical analysis

1
It is a term coined by Kristeva in the late 1960s (see Fairclough, 1992, p. 101).

3
(Fairclough, 1992; 1995b). Moreover, intertextual analysis can enhance the analysis of context by

drawing on other relevant texts so that it helps to understand the discourse under investigation (Wood

and Kroger, 2000). This takes the discussion to the conclusion that the notion of intertextuality

discussed above within Fairclough’s framework resembles Wodak’s discourse-historical method of

analysis which will be presented later.

在他的方法中，互文性起着关键的作用，因为它关注社会变革中的话语。由于语言分

析具有描述--主动、被动、名词化--说服的性质，因此需要进行互文性分析，以弥合文本与话

语实践之间的差距。因此，对互文性的需求十分迫切，因为它还扮演着历史分析的角色

（Fairclough, 1992; 1995b）。此外，互文分析可以通过借鉴其他相关文本来加强对语境的分

析，从而有助于理解所研究的话语（Wood 和 Kroger，2000 年）。因此，讨论得出的结论是，

上文在费尔克拉夫框架内讨论的互文性概念类似于沃达克的话语历史分析方法，该方法将在下

文中介绍。

To sum up, Fairclough’s (1992; 1995a, 1995b; 2001b; 2003) approach is interesting in

dealing with sociocultural changes occurring in contemporary society, and how developments at

different levels have influenced and shaped discourse production and interpretation. However,

what is missing in his framework is the analysis of theme. Fairclough did not explain how to derive

a thematic structure from a text as a whole. His focus was on clausal theme only. That is, whatever

elements which occupy the initial position of the clause become the topic of the clause whether it

is active or passive. He also mentioned that themes are structured in the main clause of the sentences.

This is a shortcoming. To further elaborate this point, Fairclough focused on themes at the

sentential level only; whereas, van Dijk argued that the overall topic of discourse is important as

it captures the gist of the whole text.

总之，费尔克拉夫（1992；1995a，1995b；2001b；2003）的方法在处理当代社会中发

生的社会文化变化，以及不同层面的发展如何影响和塑造话语生产和阐释方面很有意义。然

而，他的框架中缺少对主题的分析。费尔克拉夫没有解释如何从文本整体中推导出主题结构。

他只关注分句主题。也就是说，占据分句初始位置的任何元素都会成为分句的主题，无论它是

4
主动还是被动。他还提到，主题被结构在句子的主句中。这是一个缺陷。为了进一步阐述这一

点，Fairclough 只关注句子层面的主题；而 van Dijk 则认为，话语的整体主题很重要，因为

它抓住了整个文本的要点。