Discourse Analysis – Explained Simply and Clearly

Let’s begin with a fun observation by Jerry Seinfeld. He points out something interesting about
how people ask for favors. If someone says, “Can you do me a favor and hand me that pencil?”—
they say it all in one breath. That’s a small favor. But if they say, “Can you do me a favor…” and
then pause for eight seconds, that’s usually a big favor—and you know whatever they ask next
will be more of a hassle. The longer the pause, the more you know it’s going to cost you
something.

Seinfeld is actually highlighting something important about how we use language, not just what
we say. Even pauses carry meaning. This connects to a field of linguistics called pragmatics,
which looks at how people understand each other’s intentions through language (we talked
about this in Chapter 10).

But when we dive deeper—like asking how we understand a whole conversation, or how we make
sense of what we read—we step into the world of discourse analysis.

What Is Discourse Analysis?

Discourse means “language beyond the sentence.” So, discourse analysis is the study of how
language is used in longer pieces of communication, such as texts and conversations.

In previous chapters, we focused on grammar—what’s right or wrong in terms of sentence

structure. But in real life, we don’t just notice whether a sentence is grammatically correct. We
also naturally understand incomplete bits of language like newspaper headlines:
• “Trains collide, two die.”
Even though it’s not a full sentence, we instinctively understand that the first part caused the
second.

Or signs like:
• “No shoes, no service.”
We understand this as: If you’re not wearing shoes, you won’t be served.

Even from broken or incorrect language, we often understand the intended meaning.

Interpreting Discourse
Take this real example from a student learning English:

My natal was in a small town, very close to Riyadh capital of Saudi Arabia. The distant between
my town and Riyadh 7 miles exactly. The name of this Almasani that means in English Factories.
It takes this name from the peopl’s carrer. In my childhood I remmeber the people live. It was
very simple. Most the people was farmer.

Even though this text has grammar mistakes and misspellings, you probably understood the
writer’s meaning quite easily. That’s because, as language-users, we don’t just reject texts that
are grammatically wrong. Instead, we try to interpret what the speaker or writer meant.

That effort—the mental process of making sense of what someone is trying to say—is at the
heart of discourse analysis. And to do this, we use much more than just grammar knowledge.

Cohesion: How Texts Stick Together

One important feature in a well-constructed text is cohesion—the way parts of the text are
connected through grammar and vocabulary.

Example:

My father once bought a Lincoln convertible. He did it by saving every penny he could. That car
would be worth a fortune nowadays. However, he sold it to help pay for my college education.
Sometimes I think I’d rather have the convertible.

Notice how this story is tied together:

• People: My father → he → he → he → my → I
• Things: A Lincoln convertible → That car → it → the convertible
• Money theme: bought → saving every penny → worth a fortune → sold → pay
• Time references: once → nowadays → sometimes
• Verb tenses: Past (bought, did, could, sold) and then present (think)

These are called cohesive ties—they connect ideas and help the text flow.

However, cohesion alone isn’t enough to make a text meaningful.

⸻
When Cohesion Doesn’t Work: A Strange Example

Here’s a text that has cohesive ties, but still doesn’t make much sense:

My father bought a Lincoln convertible. The car driven by the police was red. That color doesn’t
suit her. She consists of three letters. However, a letter isn’t as fast as a telephone call.

Even though this text links words (like “Lincoln – car,” “red – that color,” “her – she,” “letters – a
letter”), it feels disconnected. That’s because it lacks something even more important than
cohesion: coherence.

Coherence: Making Meaning Beyond Words

Coherence is what makes a text make sense. It doesn’t come from the words themselves.
Instead, it comes from the reader or listener who is trying to build a meaningful interpretation.

Let’s say you read this headline:

“Woman robs bank with sandwich.”
You immediately think:
– Is she holding a sandwich?
– Is she threatening people with the sandwich, like it’s a weapon?

Your mind tries to create a plausible story to explain the strange combination of “robbing” and
“sandwich.” This process of filling in the gaps is what coherence is all about. It shows that we
rely heavily on our knowledge of the world to interpret language.

Understanding Conversations

We also rely on coherence when talking with people. In many conversations, what is meant is not
said directly, and yet we still understand each other.

Example (from Widdowson, 1978):

• HER: That’s the telephone.
(She’s making a request: “Can you answer it?”)
• HIM: I’m in the bath.
(He’s giving a reason why he can’t answer it.)
• HER: OK.
(She accepts his reason.)

There are no clear grammatical links between the lines. But the conversation still makes perfect
sense, because we understand the intentions behind the words. This is an example of speech
acts (from Chapter 10), and it shows how much we rely on background knowledge about how
conversations work.

Conversation Analysis

In general, a conversation is when two or more people take turns speaking. Usually, only one
person speaks at a time, and people try to avoid silence between turns (though this isn’t true in
every culture).

If two people start talking at once, one usually stops:

A: Didn’t you know wh–

B: [But he must’ve been there by two
A: Yes but you knew where he was going

(Here, the [ bracket shows overlapping speech.)

Speakers signal when they’re done talking by finishing a sentence, asking a question, or pausing.
Listeners show they want to speak by making small noises like “uh, yeah,” or using facial
expressions or body movements.

Turn-Taking and Holding the Floor

Different cultures and people have different ways of managing turn-taking. Some people (often
called long-winded speakers) use special strategies to keep talking and avoid giving others a
chance to interrupt.

One common strategy is to avoid pauses at the ends of sentences. Instead, they:
• Keep talking using words like and, so, but, and then
• Pause only in the middle of ideas (so it’s clear the message isn’t finished)
• Use hesitation markers like uh, er, em, ah to fill the silence

This way, they signal that their turn isn’t over yet—even when they’re thinking of what to say
next.

In Summary
• Discourse analysis studies how we use and understand language beyond single
sentences.
• Cohesion refers to the formal links between words and sentences.
• Coherence is the logical flow of ideas that readers or listeners create using their world
knowledge.
• Conversations rely on shared rules about turn-taking, speech acts, and interpreting
intentions, not just on grammar.

Discourse is a complex, collaborative process—and you’re already a natural at it!

Pauses and Filled Pauses

When people speak, they often pause in ways that don’t match the structure of written
sentences. Look at this example:

A: that’s their favorite restaurant because they… enjoy French food and when they were. in
France they couldn’t believe it that… you know that they had… that they had had better meals
back home

Here, the speaker pauses before and after verbs (like “enjoy” or “had”), rather than at natural
breaks like the end of a sentence. This can make the meaning hard to follow until you hear what
comes after each pause.

There are also filled pauses—things like em, er, and you know—that speakers use when they’re
hesitating. In this example, speaker X hesitates and almost loses their turn in the conversation:

X: well that film really was ….. [wasn’t what he was good at
Y: when di-
X: I mean his other… em his later films were much more… er really more in the romantic style and
that was more what what he was… you know… em best at doing
Y: so when did he make that one?

This shows how speakers often use fillers to hold on to their turn in a conversation.
⸻

Adjacency Pairs

Despite how messy conversation can seem, we often follow familiar and predictable patterns.
One key pattern is called an adjacency pair—a two-part exchange where one utterance naturally
calls for a response. Some examples:

First part Second part

You: Good morning. Me: Good morning.
You: Where’s Mary? Me: She’s at work already.
You: Thanks for your help. Me: You’re welcome.
You: Talk to you later. Me: Bye.

However, responses don’t always come right after the first part. Sometimes, one question is
answered only after another small exchange. That’s where insertion sequences come in.

Insertion Sequences

An insertion sequence is an extra question-answer exchange that happens between the first and
second parts of another adjacency pair.

Example:

You: Do you want some milk? (Q1)

Me: Is it soy milk? (Q2)
You: Of course. (A2)
Me: Okay, thanks. (A1)

Here, your original question gets delayed while we insert a mini dialogue.

In longer exchanges, especially in situations like ordering food (called service encounters),
conversations can get more complex with multiple insertions:

BUD: Can I order pizza to go? (Q1)

DAN: What kind would you like? (Q2)
BUD: Do you have any special deals? (Q3)
DAN: Well, you can get two veggie supremes for the price of one. (A3)
BUD: Okay, I’d like that deal. (A2)
DAN: Sure thing. We’ll have that ready in no time. (A1)

So the original request isn’t answered directly—it waits for other questions and answers to
happen first.

Conversational Expectations & The Co-operative Principle

Most of the time, we don’t notice these patterns because we just expect them to happen. That’s
because conversation follows a set of unspoken social rules. One is the Co-operative Principle,
proposed by philosopher Paul Grice. It says:

“Make your contribution as appropriate as needed at each stage of the conversation, based on
the purpose of the exchange.”

Grice also introduced four conversational maxims—rules that cooperative speakers try to follow:
1. Quantity: Say as much as needed—but not more or less.
2. Quality: Don’t say things that are false or that you lack evidence for.
3. Relation: Be relevant.
4. Manner: Be clear, brief, and orderly.

Example:
If someone asks, “How’s the sandwich?” and the reply is:

“A sandwich is a sandwich.”

It sounds meaningless. But under the Co-operative Principle, the speaker is likely trying to imply
something—maybe that the sandwich is unremarkable or not worth discussing. Even though it
sounds like a tautology (a statement that adds no new info), the listener picks up on the implied
meaning thanks to the maxims, especially Quantity and Quality.

Hedges

We often use certain phrases, called hedges, when we’re unsure or when we want to soften what
we’re saying. These help us stay cooperative even when we’re uncertain.

Hedges show we’re not 100% confident about the truth or completeness of what we’re saying.
Examples:
 • His hair was kind of long.
• The book cover is sort of yellow.

Other hedges include:

• As far as I know…
• Correct me if I’m wrong, but…
• I’m not absolutely sure, but…

Also, we often avoid strong, certain claims. For example:

• Saying Jackson is guilty implies certainty and evidence.
• Saying I think it’s possible Jackson may be guilty shows caution and lack of full
certainty.

Implicatures

An implicature is a meaning that’s suggested (or implied) rather than directly stated. Hedges
often carry implicatures. So do vague or indirect responses.

Example:

CAROL: Are you coming to the party tonight?

LARA: I’ve got an exam tomorrow.

Lara didn’t say “no,” but we still understand that she’s likely not coming. How?

We assume Lara is being relevant (Relation maxim) and informative (Quantity maxim). So we
infer that “exam tomorrow” implies “study tonight,” which means “can’t party tonight.” The
unstated meaning—that she won’t come—is the implicature.

Background Knowledge

Understanding implicatures often requires shared background knowledge. For example:

John was on his way to school last Friday.

He was really worried about the math lesson.

Most people assume John is a student. That info isn’t in the sentence—it’s something we infer
using our world knowledge.

Then, the next line:

Last week he had been unable to control the class.

Now we assume he’s a teacher. That makes sense in context. But…

It was unfair of the math teacher to leave him in charge.

Now we switch back—maybe he’s a student again.

After all, it is not a normal part of a janitor’s duties.

Surprise! He’s a janitor. Our interpretation keeps shifting based on new info. This shows how
much we rely on background knowledge to make sense of even simple stories.

Schemas and Scripts

To understand conversations and texts, we use schemas and scripts.

• A schema is your stored knowledge of a typical situation.
E.g., if someone mentions going to a supermarket, you already picture aisles, carts, checkouts,
etc.
• A script is a dynamic version of a schema—a sequence of expected actions.
E.g., the “restaurant script” might include: going in, ordering food, eating, paying, leaving a tip.

Example text:

Trying not to be out of the office for long, Suzy went into the nearest place, sat down and
ordered an avocado sandwich. It was quite crowded, but the service was fast, so she left a good
tip. Back in the office, things were not going well.

We assume Suzy:
• Opened a door
• Found a table
• Ate the sandwich
• Paid and left a tip

These things aren’t stated, but we fill in the gaps using our restaurant script.
Even instructions often skip information because they assume we know the script. For example:

“Fill measure cup to line and repeat every 2 to 3 hours.”

They don’t say, “Drink the syrup”—but you know that’s what you’re supposed to do. Why?
Because of your knowledge structures—your scripts and schemas.

Conclusion

So, understanding conversation is about much more than just decoding words and grammar. We
rely on:
• Turn-taking rules (like adjacency pairs and insertion sequences),
• Social expectations (the co-operative principle and Gricean maxims),
• Implied meanings (implicatures),
• Language softeners (hedges),
• and most importantly, our world knowledge (schemas and scripts).

We build meaning from more than the words we hear—we use our background knowledge to
interpret, predict, and fill in the gaps.