Post-Foucauldian discourse and dispositif analysis, a methodological approach inspired by the work of Michel Foucault and developed in Western Europe, over the last decade has gained an increasing amount of attention from Eastern European researchers. Yet, this interest has not been accompanied by sufficient reflection on the post-Foucauldian perspective’s adequacy for studying power, governance, and subjectification in post-socialist societies. In particular, there is little criticism that would take into account the current discussion on Foucault’s ambivalent attitude towards neoliberalism. The goal of this article is to examine this line of criticism of Foucault’s late works and to point to its importance for dispositif analysis carried out in Eastern and Central European societies (e.g., Poland) in comparison to analyses carried out in Western Europe (e.g., Germany). I propose a number of methodological recommendations that aim at adapting post-Foucauldian research instruments to facilitate analyzing power relations in the post-socialist context; these include: an interdisciplinary combination of discourse analysis and an analysis of macroeconomic and macrosocial factors; an analysis of the practices of normalization in post-socialist societies with reference to the Center-Periphery relationship; introducing elements of semiology, anthropology of the contemporary and cultural identity analysis to dispositif analysis.
Wybór Donalda Tuska na przewodniczącego Rady Europejskiej wywołał w Polsce kolejną żarliwą, ogólnonarodową debatę. Z jednej strony odezwały się głosy mówiące o sukcesie premiera, z drugiej natomiast dało się słyszeć komentarze zgodnie, z którymi mamy tu do czynienia z tchórzliwą ucieczką od odpowiedzialności. Samego Donalda Tuska przedstawiano albo jako męża stanu, dla którego nowe stanowisko jest ukoronowaniem wspaniałej kariery, albo jako skompromitowanego polityka, który unika politycznej odpowiedzialności godząc się na lukratywne, ale mało istotne stanowisko polityczne. Autor artykułu podejmuje próbę analizy tej debaty wykorzystując jako teoretyczny układ odniesienia koncepcję metody dokumentarnej Harolda Garfinkla oraz kategorie analityczne zaczerpnięte z analizy dyskursu.
EN
Election of Donald Tusk as President of the European Council has elicited another vehement, nationwide debate in Poland. During this discussion two opposite points of view have been presented. Representatives of the first of them, have claimed that this election should be interpreted as a huge success of prime minister, whereas supporters of the second perspective have argued that it is just cowardly escape from responsibility. In consequence Donald Tusk has been presented both, as a statesman for whom this election is culmination of brilliant career, and as a compromised politician, who accepted lucrative but extremely unimportant job. The author attempts to analyse this debate using Harold Garfinkel’s conception of the documentary method and categories taken from discourse analysis as a theoretical framework.
In LSP, Discourse Analysis seems to be an indispensable element in determining the aims and content of education. It is part of the needs analysis of a given audience. However, most people who learn foreign languages for professional purposes, use ready-made materials rather than specially designed courses. LSP textbooks, including those used business language education, are developed for a wide audience. This, however, has negative consequences for the discursive aspects of this education, as illustrated in the corpus of textbooks for the Français des affaires, often seen as French in the company or French for professional communication. This broadly defined scope de facto covers different types of discourse. This is not so much a problem if discursive conditions are shown through didactic dialogues embedded in one company: discursive behaviors could then be patterned onto their models in a real company with similar parameters. However, the analyzed body of text shows that the authors of the textbooks examined focus more on introducing the necessary language forms and explaining the mechanisms of language functioning than on the mechanisms of matching the message to the context. An example of this is the neglect of the form that could mediate between tutoiement and vouvoiement, ie the use of name + vous. Recourse to discourse analysis would help avoid this and other reservations mentioned in the text.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.