Discourse studies háve grown into a vast and mullifaceted domain of academie research. Vacillating belween interdisciplinary and eclectic, discourse studies spin around a certain common denominator which seems to be related to the very essence of discursive phenomena. Saussure, Benveniste, Harris, Humboldt and olhers had pinpointed the opposition of process vs. product, or language as it is vs. language in sociál environment, the latter being considered, e.g. by Halliday as its most natural statě and form ofexistence. Discourse studies in Russia háve evolved from multiple roots: text linguistics, psycholinguistics, stylistics, lexicology, etc. An interdisciplinary and integrational approach admits viewing discourse from both similarly “opposing” sides. Technically it is concatenating words into utterances, utterances into chains, unities, fragments, texts, etc. Functionally and effectively it is leading to new meanings being bom. The ensuing discursive effecl is a result of combining elements into a whole at some point of lime and place, by someone possessing certain sociál and individual characterislics, to achieve certain aims, etc. Discursive practices form a foundation for human praxis in generál. They serve for organizing, categorizing, archiving and interpreting human behavior.The duál nátuře of discourse might suggest a basis for dialogue and reconciliation between systemie and anthropocentrical approaches in linguistics, or even between Sciences and the humanities, in generál.
This paper gives an overview of the theoretical underpinnings and current work in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). It defines CDA as a transdisciplinary, text-analytical approach to critical social research, aimed at revealing the power imbalance reflected in the use of language and patterns of dominance imposed through the use of language. Describing the most important schools and models in CDA, the paper demonstrates how critical approaches draw on recent developments in different areas of linguistics, such as pragmatics, cognitive linguistics and corpus studies. At the same time, it shows how the interdisciplinary research agenda of CDA attracts the ‘classic’ theories and tools of linguistics to new empirical territories in political/public discourse. The final part of the paper illustrates the explanatory power of the legitimization-proximization model in CDA in a case study of the discourse of the war-on-terror.
3
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
This paper explores how a Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies (CADS) approach can be utilised to investigate representations of gender as well as potential gender bias in radiology reporting, which constitutes a form of professional, medical discourse. The database collected for this purpose consists of three specialised German sub-corpora (332,901 cranial, thoracic, and whole-body computed tomographies, with more than 61 million tokens), which were extracted from a larger medical corpus called MedCorpInn that was built as part of an interdisciplinary project conducted jointly by the University of Innsbruck and Innsbruck Medical University. As a basic premise, CTs are assumed discursive, linguistic events, which are infl uenced by social and institutional factors. They represent an essential everyday communicative practice among radiologists and referring doctors and they function both as documentation and as a legal record of imaging procedures. To investigate whether there are differences and/or subtle similarities (Taylor 2018; Brezina 2018) in the largely standardised reports on female vs on male patients, a CADS-approach focusing on gender is applied. Keywords, collocation, and concordance techniques will be introduced and used to explore how male and female patients are discussed in the medical discourse studied here. Research into internal clinical communicative practices could also be of interest from the perspective of gender medicine.
There are two imporlant areas in modern Linguistics: traditional stylistics and discourse studies. We need identify their common interests and differentiate them. They both find out text, context, genre. But traditional stylistics find out these categories as mental and aesthetic phenomena, and discourse studies - as pragmatic and sociál.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.