Seminar 3

1. The development of the notion of discourse. Approaches to defining the

notion of "discourse”.
The notion of "discourse" is a complex and multifaceted concept that has been
approached and analyzed from various perspectives within linguistics,
communication studies, philosophy, and other fields. Here are some key approaches
to the notion of discourse and the main properties associated with it:
Linguistic Approach:
Discourse as Text: In linguistics, discourse is often considered a type of
extended text, encompassing connected and meaningful stretches of language that
go beyond individual sentences. It includes conversations, narratives, written texts,
and other forms of language use.
Cohesion and Coherence: Discourse analysis focuses on the linguistic devices
and strategies that establish cohesion (grammatical links between sentences) and
coherence (logical and meaningful connections between ideas) within a discourse.
Sociolinguistic Approach:
Discourse as Social Practice: Sociolinguistic approaches view discourse as a
social practice embedded in cultural, social, and contextual contexts. Language is
seen as a means of constructing and enacting social identities and relationships.
Discourse Communities: Researchers study how discourse is shaped by the
norms and conventions of specific discourse communities, such as academic
discourse, professional discourse, or online communities.
Pragmatic Approach:
Discourse as Communication: A pragmatic approach to discourse focuses on
language as a tool for communication, emphasizing how speakers use language to
convey meaning and achieve specific communicative goals.
Grice's Cooperative Principle: Pragmatic theories like Grice's Cooperative
Principle examine how speakers and listeners cooperate in communication to infer
implied meaning and to make sense of utterances.
Critical Discourse Analysis:
Discourse as Power: Critical discourse analysis (CDA) examines how discourse
can reflect and perpetuate power structures, ideologies, and social inequalities. It
considers how language can be used to manipulate, persuade, and control.
Ideology and Hegemony: CDA analyzes the role of ideology and hegemony in
discourse, exploring how dominant discourses can shape public opinion and
maintain social hierarchies.
Foucauldian Approach:
Discourse as Knowledge and Power: Drawing from Michel Foucault's work, this
approach views discourse as a nexus of knowledge and power. It highlights how
language and discourse are used to construct and regulate knowledge within
specific historical and social contexts.
Archaeology of Knowledge: Foucault's archaeological approach seeks to
understand how discourses emerge, evolve, and influence societal practices. It
emphasizes the historical contingencies of knowledge and the rules governing the
formation of statements.
Main Properties of Discourse:
Contextual: Discourse is inherently context-dependent, influenced by the
situational, cultural, and social contexts in which it occurs.
Coherent: Discourse exhibits logical and meaningful connections between its
elements, maintaining a flow of information and ideas.
Dynamic: Discourse is dynamic and unfolds over time, with speakers and
listeners engaged in an ongoing communicative process.
Multimodal: Discourse may involve not only spoken or written language but
also non-verbal elements, such as gestures, images, and visual or auditory cues.
Variable: Discourse varies depending on the purpose, audience, medium, and
genre of communication.
Interpretative: Discourse requires interpretation, as listeners and readers must
make sense of the meaning conveyed within the context.
The study of discourse is a highly interdisciplinary endeavor, and researchers
use a variety of analytical tools and methodologies to explore how language
functions in different contexts, both as a means of communication and as a
reflection of sociocultural and power dynamics.

2. M. Foucault and his theory of archeology of knowledge.

The notion of "discourse" and Michel Foucault's theory of the "archaeology of
knowledge" have had a significant impact on the study of language, knowledge, and
power. Let's explore the history of the development of the notion of discourse and
Foucault's archaeological approach:
Early Development of the Notion of Discourse:
The concept of "discourse" in the context of language and communication can
be traced back to ancient Greece and was discussed by philosophers like Plato and
Aristotle. They considered the nature of language and its role in conveying
knowledge and truth.
Modern Linguistics:
In modern linguistics, the term "discourse" began to take on a more systematic
and analytical meaning, particularly in structuralist and post-structuralist traditions.
Structuralism, associated with linguists like Ferdinand de Saussure, focused on the
study of language as a system of signs.
Post-structuralist thinkers, such as Roland Barthes and Jacques Derrida,
extended the concept to encompass the larger contexts of meaning-making,
including social and cultural influences.
Michel Foucault and the Archaeology of Knowledge:
Michel Foucault, a French philosopher and social theorist, made significant
contributions to the development of the notion of discourse. In his work, "The
Archaeology of Knowledge" (1969), he proposed a novel approach to the study of
discourses.
 Archaeology of Knowledge: Foucault's archaeological method sought to
understand the formation and transformation of discourses, which he defined as
systems of statements that produce and regulate knowledge within particular
historical and social contexts.
Discursive Formations: Foucault argued that discourses are not merely
expressions of truth but are power-laden formations that regulate and produce
knowledge. He examined how knowledge is organized, classified, and legitimized
within specific discursive fields.
Discontinuity and Epistemes: Foucault's approach highlights the discontinuities
and shifts in discourses over time. He introduced the notion of "epistemes," which
are historical, foundational systems of knowledge that structure a given period.
Foucault's work sought to reveal how different epistemes give rise to different
systems of knowledge and the associated rules and discursive practices.
Discursive Analysis:
Foucault's approach to discourses involves detailed analysis of the production
of statements and the rules governing their formation.
He examined how institutions, disciplines, and power structures shape and
control the creation of knowledge and meaning.
Foucault's archaeological approach to the study of knowledge and discourse
has been influential in various fields, including linguistics, sociology, cultural studies,
and critical theory. It encourages scholars to explore how knowledge and meaning
are constructed within specific historical and cultural contexts, and how they are
used to shape social realities and power relationships. His work has provided a
foundation for critical analyses of the role of language, discourse, and knowledge in
the exercise of power and control in society.

3. Discourse theories in foreign linguistics.

Discourse theories in foreign linguistics encompass various frameworks like
Conversation Analysis, Discourse Analysis, and Pragmatics. They explore how
language is used in social contexts, examining meaning beyond individual sentences,
focusing on how communication shapes and is shaped by culture, power dynamics,
and social structures within and across languages. These theories delve into how
context, including cultural norms and societal influences, influences communication.
1. Conversation Analysis (CA): This approach studies the structure and organization
of conversation, focusing on turn-taking, adjacency pairs, repair sequences, and
overall structure within conversations. CA aims to uncover the underlying rules and
patterns governing everyday talk.
2. Discourse Analysis (DA): DA examines larger units of language beyond the
sentence level, exploring how language is used to convey meaning in various social
contexts. It considers how power, identity, and social structures influence
communication. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a subset of DA that emphasizes
the relationship between language, power, and ideology.
3. Pragmatics: Pragmatics investigates how context influences the interpretation of
language. It focuses on implied meanings, implicatures, and the way speakers convey
meaning beyond the literal interpretation of words. Pragmatics studies how
language users navigate social situations and convey intended meanings based on
context.
These theories collectively aim to understand language as a tool for communication
within its social and cultural context, acknowledging that communication isn't
merely about words and grammar but is deeply intertwined with social structures,
power dynamics, and cultural norms.

3.1. Power and ideology in the discourse theory of T. van Diik.

Teun A. van Dijk, a prominent figure in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), emphasizes
the role of power and ideology in discourse. His approach involves analyzing
language use to uncover how power relations and ideologies are constructed,
maintained, and reproduced through discourse.
Van Dijk's work highlights how language isn't neutral but rather reflects and
reinforces power dynamics within society. He explores how certain groups or
institutions use language strategically to maintain their dominance and control over
others. His framework involves dissecting texts to reveal underlying structures that
perpetuate unequal power relations.
He focuses on the role of ideology, examining how ideologies are transmitted and
sustained through discourse. Van Dijk's approach involves uncovering implicit
meanings, assumptions, and biases within language that reflect and reinforce
societal ideologies. This includes exploring how language may be used to marginalize
certain groups or reinforce dominant societal norms.
Van Dijk's discourse theory within CDA provides a lens through which analysts can
examine how language functions not just as a means of communication but as a tool
for exercising and perpetuating power and ideology within society.
In the context of Teun A. van Dijk's discourse theory within Critical Discourse Analysis
(CDA), the ideology revolves around uncovering and challenging power imbalances,
social injustices, and dominant narratives within society. This theory doesn't adhere
to a singular ideology but rather aims to critically examine how language, discourse,
and communication reflect and perpetuate unequal power relations and societal
hierarchies.
The ideology underlying van Dijk's discourse theory involves:
It involves critically analyzing language and discourse to uncover implicit power
structures, biases, and ideologies present in communication. This scrutiny aims to
reveal how language is used to maintain unequal power relations and reinforce
dominant societal norms.
By revealing these hidden structures, the theory seeks to empower individuals and
groups to recognize and challenge oppressive discourses. It aims to raise awareness
about how language can be used to perpetuate inequality and marginalization.
The ideology leans towards promoting social justice and advocating for change by
highlighting and critiquing the ways in which language is used to uphold and justify
unfair societal structures. It encourages a reevaluation of dominant discourses and
the promotion of more inclusive and equitable communication.
In essence, the ideology underlying van Dijk's discourse theory within CDA aligns
with a critical stance aimed at unveiling, challenging, and transforming unequal
power relations and ideologies perpetuated through language and discourse.

3.2. Problems of racism and discrimination in the theory of discourse of R.

Wodak
Ruth Wodak, another influential figure in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA),
extensively explores issues of racism, discrimination, and exclusion within her
discourse theory. Her work focuses on uncovering how language and discourse
perpetuate and reinforce discriminatory ideologies and practices.
Wodak's discourse theory addresses problems related to racism and discrimination
in various ways:
1. Language and Social Exclusion: She investigates how language is used to
marginalize and exclude certain social groups. This includes analyzing discursive
strategies that reinforce stereotypes, create 'othering' effects, and perpetuate
prejudices against marginalized communities based on race, ethnicity, gender, or
other social factors.
2. Power Dynamics in Discourse: Wodak's work highlights power imbalances
embedded in language use, demonstrating how dominant groups wield linguistic
power to reinforce their superiority and maintain discriminatory structures. She
explores how these power dynamics are reflected and perpetuated through
discourse.
3. Normalization of Discriminatory Practices: Her discourse theory delves into how
discriminatory ideologies become normalized through language and discourse. She
investigates how certain language patterns, narratives, or discursive strategies
contribute to the normalization and acceptance of discriminatory attitudes and
behaviors.
4. Critical Engagement and Change: Wodak's approach aims to raise awareness and
foster critical engagement regarding the role of language in perpetuating
discrimination. By highlighting these issues, she advocates for social change and
challenges discriminatory discourses, aiming to promote inclusivity, equality, and
social justice.
Wodak's discourse theory within CDA offers insights into how language is intricately
tied to the perpetuation of racism and discrimination, urging for critical analysis and
societal change to counteract these harmful discourses and promote more inclusive
and equitable communication.

3.3. Language and power in N. Fairclough's discourse theory.

In Fairclough's discourse theory, language is viewed as a multifaceted and dynamic
social practice that shapes and is shaped by various social contexts. Some key
aspects of language within Fairclough's approach include:
- Language as Social Action: Fairclough emphasizes that language is not just a means
of conveying information but a form of social action. It's used strategically to achieve
specific goals, exert influence, and negotiate social relations. Language is seen as a
tool that performs actions and shapes social reality.
- Textual Analysis: Fairclough's approach involves detailed analysis of texts to
uncover underlying power structures, ideologies, and social meanings. Texts,
whether written or spoken, are seen as representations of social practices and
power relations. Analyzing texts reveals how language constructs and reflects social
reality.
- Intertextuality and Context: Language is not isolated but interconnected with other
texts and broader socio-cultural contexts. Fairclough examines intertextuality, how
texts refer to and are influenced by other texts, and stresses the importance of
understanding language in its specific contexts to grasp its intended meanings and
effects.
- Critical Language Awareness: Fairclough's theory promotes critical language
awareness, encouraging individuals to be aware of how language can perpetuate
power imbalances, ideologies, and discrimination. It emphasizes the need to
critically analyze language use to challenge dominant discourses and strive for social
change.
Fairclough's approach to language within discourse theory recognizes its role beyond
simple communication, acknowledging its power to shape perceptions, reproduce
social structures, and influence interactions within society. Through critical analysis
of language, Fairclough aims to unveil the intricate ways in which language both
reflects and perpetuates social inequalities and power dynamics.
In Fairclough's discourse theory, power is a complex and pervasive force that
operates through language and discourse within social contexts. Some key aspects of
power within Fairclough's approach include:
- Power as Discursive Practice: Fairclough views power as a discursive practice that
operates through language. It's not solely about overt control but also about
influencing perceptions, shaping ideologies, and maintaining social hierarchies
through language use.
- Hegemony and Dominance: Fairclough examines hegemonic discourses—those
dominant ideologies that become accepted and normalized in society. These
discourses maintain the status quo by legitimizing the interests of powerful groups
and reinforcing existing social structures.
- Power Relations in Texts: Power relations are reflected and reproduced in texts
through various linguistic features such as vocabulary choices, grammar, discourse
structures, and rhetorical strategies. Fairclough analyzes how these linguistic
elements are used to position different social groups and assert dominance.
- Agency and Resistance: Fairclough acknowledges that while language can be a tool
for reinforcing power imbalances, it also holds potential for resistance and change.
Individuals or marginalized groups might use language to challenge dominant
discourses and power structures, exerting agency through alternative discursive
practices.
- Critical Awareness of Power: Fairclough's theory emphasizes developing critical
awareness of how power operates through language. This involves questioning and
challenging the ways in which language is used to maintain unequal power relations,
encouraging a more equitable and just society.
Fairclough's discourse theory views power as inherently linked to language,
emphasizing how language is a site where power is negotiated, contested, and
reproduced. Through critical analysis of language and discourse, Fairclough aims to
reveal power dynamics, encourage critical awareness, and potentially contribute to
societal change by challenging existing power structures.

4. Correlation between the notions of discourse and text, discourse and

functional style.
The notions of discourse and text are closely related and often used
interchangeably in various contexts, but they also have distinct meanings and
nuances. Understanding their correlation can help clarify how they are
interconnected and how they differ:
Discourse:
Discourse is a broader concept that encompasses any extended and coherent
use of language, whether spoken or written, that conveys meaning and
communicates in a specific context.
Discourse can refer to spoken conversations, written essays, political speeches,
interviews, novels, social media posts, and more.
It is a dynamic and context-dependent construct, typically involving interactions
among speakers or writers, listeners or readers, and the surrounding social, cultural,
and situational context.
Discourse can include multiple texts, statements, or utterances that are
organized to convey a particular message or engage in a specific communicative act.
Discourse analysis focuses on the structural, functional, and sociocultural
aspects of language use within a specific context.
Text:
A text is a discrete, self-contained unit of language that can be analyzed
independently. A text can be a single written document, a spoken monologue, a
paragraph, or even a sentence.
Texts have a defined beginning and end, making them distinct from discourse,
which involves ongoing communication or conversation.
Texts are often the object of study in textual analysis, literary analysis, and
linguistic analysis. They are subject to examination for features like grammatical
structure, vocabulary, style, and coherence.
Texts may form part of a larger discourse, where multiple texts are
interconnected to create a coherent and extended communication, such as in a
written argument or a series of dialogues in a play or novel.
Correlation:
The correlation between discourse and text is that texts are the building blocks
of discourse. A discourse is composed of multiple texts, either spoken or written,
that are combined to convey meaning and contribute to a broader communicative
context.
 Texts within a discourse are interconnected and organized to maintain
coherence and convey a message effectively.
Both discourse and text can be studied and analyzed for their linguistic,
structural, and functional properties, as well as for their contextual and sociocultural
influences.
In summary, discourse refers to the broader context of communication that
includes multiple texts or utterances, while a text is a discrete unit of language that
contributes to the structure and content of a discourse. The correlation between the
two lies in the way texts are used within discourses to convey meaning,
communicate ideas, and create coherent, communicative acts.
Discourse theories in modern linguistics encompass a range of approaches and
frameworks that explore the structure, function, and sociocultural context of
discourse, which includes spoken and written language in communication. These
theories are used to understand how language operates beyond the level of
individual sentences and to examine how communication is shaped by contextual
and social factors. Some prominent discourse theories in modern linguistics include:
Speech Act Theory:
Developed by philosophers like J.L. Austin and John Searle, speech act theory
focuses on the illocutionary acts within discourse, such as assertions, directives, and
commissives. It examines how language is used to perform actions, not just convey
information.
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA):
CDA, influenced by the work of scholars like Norman Fairclough, focuses on the
relationship between language and power, ideology, and social structures. It
examines how discourse can be used to maintain or challenge dominant narratives
and social hierarchies.
Discourse Markers:
Discourse marker theory looks at the role of words and phrases like "well," "so,"
"however," and "you know" in structuring conversation and signaling relationships
between sentences and ideas.
Rhetorical Analysis:
Rhetorical analysis focuses on the persuasive and argumentative aspects of
discourse, often within written texts. It explores how rhetorical devices, figures of
speech, and appeals are used to influence the audience's interpretation.
Genre Theory:
Genre theory examines how discourse is organized into genres or text types, such as
narratives, reports, editorials, and academic essays. It considers how generic
conventions and expectations shape discourse production and interpretation.
Narrative Analysis:
Narrative analysis is concerned with the structure, content, and function of stories
and narratives in discourse. It explores how stories are used to construct identities,
convey experiences, and communicate cultural values.
Sociolinguistics:
Sociolinguistic approaches to discourse consider the influence of social variables
(e.g., gender, class, ethnicity) on language use and variation. They investigate how
discourse reflects and constructs social identity.
Interactional Sociolinguistics:
Interactional sociolinguistics focuses on the sociocultural aspects of discourse in
everyday interactions. It examines how speakers use language to negotiate identity,
power, and social roles in specific contexts.
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL):
SFL, developed by Michael Halliday, offers a comprehensive framework for analyzing
discourse by examining how language choices contribute to the realization of
communicative functions within different social contexts.
These are just a selection of discourse theories within modern linguistics.
Researchers often draw from multiple theories and frameworks to analyze discourse,
depending on their specific research questions and objectives. Discourse analysis is
an interdisciplinary field that extends beyond linguistics, often incorporating insights
from sociology, anthropology, psychology, and communication studies to provide a
holistic understanding of language in use.

The notions of "discourse" and "functional style" are related, as they both pertain to
the study of language in context, but they address different aspects of language use
and analysis. Here is the correlation between these two concepts:
Discourse:
Discourse refers to the broader context of language use, encompassing spoken or
written communication that goes beyond individual sentences or texts. Discourse
includes conversations, narratives, dialogues, speeches, essays, and more.
Discourse analysis focuses on how language functions in context, examining the
structure, organization, and sociocultural aspects of language in use. It takes into
account how language serves specific communicative, social, and cultural functions.
Functional Style:
Functional style, on the other hand, is a concept related to the style of language
used in specific types of communication or text genres. It involves the use of
language that conforms to the conventions and expectations of a particular context,
purpose, or communicative situation.
Functional styles are characterized by their typical linguistic features, such as
vocabulary, grammar, tone, and structure, which are used to achieve specific
communicative goals within particular discourse types.
Correlation:
The correlation between discourse and functional style lies in the fact that functional
styles are a subset of discourse. In other words, functional styles are a way of
categorizing and analyzing the variations in language use within different discursive
contexts.
Discourse analysis can involve the study of how functional styles are used within
particular discursive practices. Researchers examine how different genres and
communicative contexts employ functional styles to achieve specific communicative
functions, such as persuading, informing, or expressing emotions.
Functional styles are one aspect of how language is adapted and used in discourse.
The choice of a functional style within a discourse is influenced by the context,
audience, and communicative purpose. Discourse analysis considers how these
factors shape the selection of functional styles in language use.
In summary, discourse and functional style are related in that they both pertain to
the study of language in context, but they focus on different aspects of language use.
Discourse analysis is concerned with the broader context of language use, while
functional style analysis focuses on how language style varies within specific
communicative genres and contexts. Researchers may examine how functional styles
are employed within discourse to achieve specific communicative goals and
functions.
5. Approaches to discourse analysis.
The systemic-functional approach to the study of discourse is a linguistic
framework that explores how language functions within the broader context of
communication and how it serves various social, cultural, and communicative
purposes. This approach was developed by Michael Halliday, and it is often
associated with his theory of systemic functional linguistics (SFL). The systemic-
activity approach focuses on the analysis of language as it operates within
communicative activities. Here are key aspects of the systemic-activity approach to
the study of discourse:
Contextual Perspective:
The systemic-activity approach emphasizes the importance of considering the
context in which language is used. It views language as a tool for engaging in
activities, and it seeks to understand how language choices are shaped by the social,
cultural, and situational context.
Functional Analysis:
Central to this approach is the idea that language has various functions, beyond
conveying information. Language can be used to express interpersonal relationships,
establish social roles, negotiate meaning, and create coherence in discourse.
It identifies three broad metafunctions of language:
Ideational: Concerned with the expression of content or the representation of
reality.
Interpersonal: Focused on the negotiation of social relationships and roles in
discourse.
Textual: Concerned with how language structures discourse for clarity and
cohesion.
Register Analysis:
Register analysis is a key component of the systemic-activity approach. A
register is a specific variety of language used in particular social domains or
contexts. This approach examines how language varies across different registers and
how it is adapted to suit the communicative needs of those contexts.
 Registers can be distinguished based on field (the subject matter), tenor (the
social roles and relationships of participants), and mode (the channel of
communication, such as spoken or written).
Genre Analysis:
Genre analysis examines the way language is organized within specific text
types or genres, such as academic essays, news reports, conversational narratives,
and more. The systemic-activity approach seeks to understand the conventions and
communicative purposes associated with different genres.
Functional Grammar:
This approach employs a functional grammar that looks beyond sentence
structure to study how language works within the broader discourse. It analyzes
grammatical features in terms of their functional roles in discourse and
communication.
Transitivity Analysis:
Transitivity analysis focuses on the processes that participants are engaged in,
the circumstances surrounding these processes, and the roles of participants in
discourse. It helps reveal how meaning is constructed and conveyed in discourse.
Multimodality:
The systemic-activity approach also takes into account various modes of
communication, including not only spoken and written language but also visual
elements, gestures, and other semiotic resources.
By adopting the systemic-activity approach, researchers can investigate how
language operates in context, how it serves a wide range of functions, and how it
contributes to the realization of communicative goals within specific discursive
practices. This approach provides a valuable framework for analyzing and
understanding the social and communicative aspects of discourse in various
contexts and settings.