Introduction to Discourse Analysis

Pr. Madani/Kebir/El Harraki

Introduction
What knowledge do we need in order to make sense of an extract? In the first place, we need
to understand the grammar and vocabulary used in constructing the sentences, which make up
each text. Of course, the sentences that make up a text need to be grammatical, but grammatical
sentences alone will not ensure that the text itself makes sense. In addition to the structure and
meaning of sentences, we need to know how the sentences relate to each other. Some are
connected by means of anaphoric (that is, backward referring) devices of several kinds (e.g.
such, its, this), or by simple repetition.

The difference between coherent pieces of discourse and disconnected sentences is to be found
in the words and phrases that connect each sentence with one or more of the sentences that
come before it. In addition to what we might call ‘linguistic knowledge’ (that is, knowledge of
how sentences are formed internally, and combined with each other externally), there is also
‘non-linguistic knowledge’ (that is, knowledge of the subject matter or content of the text in
question). It would seem that discourse can be defined as a stretch of language consisting of
several sentences which are perceived as being related in some way. Sentences can be related,
not only in terms of the ideas they share, but also in terms of the jobs they perform within the
discourse — that is, in terms of their functions.

I. Definition and Scope of Discourse Analysis

Discourse analysis is the study of language beyond the sentence level, focusing on how
language is used in communication. Unlike traditional linguistic studies that analyze individual
words, phrases, or grammatical structures, discourse analysis examines how language
functions in different contexts, including spoken and written forms.
The scope of discourse analysis includes:
1. Conversation analysis – Examining spoken interactions, turn-taking, interruptions, and
repairs in conversation.
2. Text analysis – Investigating cohesion, coherence, and structure in written texts such as
essays, reports, and news articles.
3. Pragmatics – Understanding how context influences meaning, including implicatures,
politeness strategies, and speech acts.
4. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) – Analyzing how language reflects power, ideology,
and social structures, particularly in political and media discourse.
Example:
• A discourse analyst studying political speeches might examine how politicians use
persuasive language, repetition, or rhetorical questions to influence public opinion.
• In social media discourse, analysts may study how users construct identity and engage
in digital interactions through hashtags and emojis.
 II. Sentence vs. Discourse Analysis
While sentence analysis focuses on grammar, syntax, and meaning within a single sentence,
discourse analysis looks at how sentences connect to create meaning within a larger context.
1. Sentence Analysis:
o Focuses on well-formed sentences (syntax, semantics).
o Ignores the broader context in which language is used.
o Example: "John ate an apple." (Grammatically correct but lacks context.)
2. Discourse Analysis:
o Examines how sentences relate in real communication.
o Considers context, speaker intention, and audience interpretation.
o Example: "John was hungry. He ate an apple. Then he felt better." (Shows
coherence and logical progression of ideas.)
Example:
Consider the two texts below:
1. "She left the house. It was raining."
2. "She left the house because it was raining."
Both convey similar information, but the second example explicitly shows the relationship
between the two clauses, demonstrating cohesion and coherence—key elements in discourse
analysis.

III. Overview of Brown and Yule (1983)

Brown and Yule’s book Discourse Analysis (1983) is one of the foundational texts in the field.
They distinguish between two primary functions of language:
1. Transactional function – Language is used to convey information efficiently and
clearly.
o Example: "The train departs at 6 PM." (The focus is on factual communication.)
2. Interactional function – Language is used to establish and maintain social relationships.
o Example: "How was your weekend?" (The focus is on social interaction rather
than information exchange.)
Key contributions of Brown and Yule (1983) include:
• Differentiation between spoken and written discourse (spoken is more interactive,
while written is more structured).
• Introduction to contextual meaning, emphasizing that language interpretation depends
on situational factors.
• Discussion on cohesion and coherence as essential components of discourse.
Example from Brown and Yule:
A news report and a casual conversation about the same event will use different linguistic
structures and styles, even if they convey the same information. This demonstrates the impact
of discourse type and function on language use.
IV. Discourse versus Text
1. ‘Discourse: A continuous stretch of (especially spoken) language larger than a sentence,
often constituting a coherent unit, such as a sermon, argument, joke or narrative.’
(Crystal 1992: 25)
 2. ‘Text: A piece of naturally occurring spoken, written, or signed discourse identified for
purposes of analysis. It is often a language unit with a definable communicative
function, such as a conversation, a poster.’ (Crystal 1992: 72)
For some writers, the terms seem to be used almost interchangeably; for others, discourse refers
to language in context. All, however, seem to agree that both text and discourse need to be
defined in terms of meaning, and that coherent texts/pieces of discourse are those that form a
meaningful whole. Some people argue that discourse is language in action, while a text is the
written record of that interaction. According to this view, discourse brings together language,
the individuals producing the language, and the context within which the language is used. The
assertion here is that the analysis of discourse involves the analysis of language in use —
compared with an analysis of the structural properties of language divorced from their
communicative functions (which Cook (1989), among others, refers to as text analysis).

V. Context
It is obvious that context is an important concept in discourse analysis. Context refers to the
situation, giving rise to the discourse, and within which Introducing Discoure Analysis the
discourse is embedded. There are two different types of context. The first of these is the
linguistic context — the language that surrounds or accompanies the piece of discourse under
analysis. The second is the non-linguistic or experiential context within which the discourse
takes place. Non-linguistic contexts include: the type of communicative event (for example,
joke, story, lecture, greeting, conversation); the topic; the purpose of the event; the setting,
including location, time of day, season of year and physical aspects of the situation (for
example, size of room, arrangement of furniture); the participants and the relationships between
them; and the background knowledge and assumptions underlying the communicative event.

VI. Spoken versus written language

Although spoken language emerged before written language, written texts are much
more than merely ‘talk written down’. According to Halliday (1985b), writing emerged in
societies because of cultural changes, which created new communicative needs. These needs
could not be readily met by the spoken language. In particular, with the emergence of cultures
based on agriculture rather than hunting and gathering, people needed permanent records,
which could be referred to repeatedly. This led to the emergence of a new form of language —
writing.
Written language does perform a similar range of broad functions to those performed
by spoken language — that is, it is used to get things done, to provide information and to
entertain. However, the contexts for using written language are very different from those in
which spoken language is used. For example, in the case of information, written language is
used for those occasions on which a permanent or semi-permanent record is required. While
most people in other cities or countries could be communicated with by telephone for instance.
The differences between spoken and written modes are not absolute, and the characteristics
that we tend to associate with written language can sometimes occur in spoken language and
vice versa. This means that some spoken texts will be more like written texts than others, while
some written texts will be more like spoken texts than others.
 VII. Lexical density
Spoken and written language also differs in the ratio of content words to grammatical or
function words. (Content or lexical words include nouns and verbs, while grammatical words
include such things as prepositions, pronouns and articles.) The number of lexical or content
words per clause is referred to as lexical density. Spoken and written language also differs in
terms of the demands that they make on the listener or reader. With written language, there is
no common situation, as there is in face-to-face interaction. The situation therefore has to be
inferred from the text. In addition, the words themselves must carry all of the shades of meaning
which in face-to-face interaction can be conveyed by non-verbal behavior. Then again, there is
no opportunity for the readers to signal that they do not understand. The writer must make
assumptions about the reader’s state of knowledge. If incorrect assumptions are made, then
communication may be seriously impaired. Finally, as we have already seen, written language
is more densely packed with information than spoken language. This can create problems for
the immature reader, for individuals who are reading in a second or foreign language, or for
those reading about unfamiliar concepts.

One way in which the texts could be divided up is into dialogue and monologue. Another
division would be into those that are transactional in nature, and those that are interpersonal.
Transactional language is that which occurs when the participants are concerned with the
exchange of goods and services. Interpersonal language, on the other hand, occurs when the
speakers are less concerned with the exchange of goods and services, than with socializing.
This is not to say that a given text will only exhibit one or other of these functions. Many
interactions that are essentially transactional in nature will also exhibit social functions, while
essentially social interactions can contain transactional elements.£

Conclusion
Discourse analysis extends beyond isolated sentences to explore how language functions in
real-world communication. It differentiates between sentence-level grammar and discourse-
level meaning, considering context, speaker intent, and audience interpretation. Brown and
Yule (1983) laid the foundation for modern discourse analysis by distinguishing between
transactional and interactional language functions, emphasizing the importance of context and
coherence in discourse.

References
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge University Press
Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. Routledge
Harris, Z. (1952). Discourse analysis. Language, 28(1), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.2307/409987