Appunti lezioni di Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English, prof. Demata

a.y. 2018/2019

DISCOURSE STRATEGIES IN

CONTEMPORARY ENGLISH

M. Demata

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

Sommario

I-USING CORPORA IN DISCOURSE ANALYSIS.................................................................2

Chapter 1 - Introduction......................................................................................................2

Chapter 2 Corpus Building.................................................................................................9

Chapter 4 Concordances.................................................................................................11

Chapter 5 Collocates........................................................................................................15

II- THE EVALUATION OF RISK IN INSTITUTIONAL AND NEWSPAPER DISCOURSE.

THE CASE OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND MIGRATION......................................................18

III-THE LANGUAGE OF BREXIT – HOW BRITAIN TALKED ITS WAY OUT OF THE

EUROPEAN UNION............................................................................................................41

Chapter 1 ‘The EU isn’t much cop but . . .’. Remain supporters’ use of coordinative

constructions....................................................................................................................45

Chapter 2 Hedging and modality versus strident claims and apparent absence of doubt

..........................................................................................................................................45

Chapter 3 More to imperatives than meets the eye.........................................................47

Chapter 4 Inclusive we, the former City broker as champion of the common man, and

good old Bojo: How the pro-Brexit press created the illusion of a classless alliance......47

Chapter 5 Democracy myths and facts: A double defeat for David Cameron.................49

Chapter 7 Nominalization, presupposition and naturalization..........................................50

Chapter 8 The language of racism lite, and not so lite.....................................................52

Chapter 9 Comparison with the Scottish independence referendum of 2014: How Project

Fear worked in 2014 but not in 2016................................................................................54

Chapter 10 Leave’s appointment with history and Remain’s another day at the office...55

Chapter 11 Little Englanders on reaching out to the world beyond Europe? Comparison

with the 1975 referendum on remaining a member of the European Economic

Community.......................................................................................................................57

Chapter 12 From “Up Your Delors” (1990) to “Stick it up your Junker” (2016). Was it The

Sun wot won it once again?.............................................................................................57

Chapter 13 Dirty tricks: Lies, personal attacks and the Queen supports UKIP...............59

Chapter 14 The Day after: How could this happen?........................................................61

IV-LANGUAGE OF FEAR. COMMUNICATING THREAT IN PUBLIC DISCOURSE..........65

Introduction.......................................................................................................................65

Chapter 1 Cognitive, Social and Psychological Issues of Public Discourse and Threat

Communication.................................................................................................................65

1

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

Risk communication and legal mining conflicts in Australian media discourse – K. E.

Russo............................................................................................................................66

Chapter 2 - Proximization: A Threat-Based Model of Policy Legitimization.....................69

25/09/18

I-USING CORPORA IN DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

Chapter 1 - Introduction

Corpus linguistic is the study of language based on examples of real life language use.

As Bieber points out, corpus-based research actually depends on both quantitative and

qualitative techniques.

Corpus are generally large, representative samples of a particular type of naturally

occurring language, so they can therefore be used as a standard reference with which

claims about language can be measured. 

Discourse = different aims, one preliminary point to make to avoid misunderstanding

discourse is NOT the equivalent of “discorso” (speech = usually spoken language)!!!

Discourse can be spoken, written, digital, visual. Discourse may include speech.

Analysis of written discourses and digital discourses.



Example: contextualizing use of language “venire a mancare” meaning of the idiomatic

expression it is not the meaning of the single word “venire” and “mancare” but is “passing

away”. It is not “morire” because it is stronger. This is soft.

“Quasi eufemistico, venire meno a qualcuno, o venire meno in senso assol., quindi



morire”. (treccani.it) it is used when a family member die, a friend. We use it in specific

context. It literally means to die but we use it only in some specific discourse. It is

associated with some discourses.

Gianni Pittella’s tweet about Allende’s death (11 set 2018): we use it also for a relationship

of inspiration like a political person and a normal citizen. He takes inspiration from this

politician. It is “not said” that Allende has been killed in a “golpe”. The meaning it is always

the same, he died. This fact was presented under a certain light hiding a certain fact.

Language give you something but also hide something. This is not a lie, he is just

presenting something under a certain light. Language is about representation.

2

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

Discourse analysis allow us to discover what it is behind language. It implies discover

something hidden. What it is written and said, why it is written and said. We choose what

to say with a correlation with context.

What is DISCOURSE?

It is not spoken language.

Discourse is a certain way of speaking. It is language in use.

In a broader sense, “discourse” can be used to refer to a system of language use and

other meaning-making practices that form ways of talking about social reality.

1. “linguistics” definition: discourse is any extended stretch of language (generally

longer and more complex than a sentence). Discourse analysis is therefore text

analysis

2. “linguistics” definition: discourse is spoken language. Discourse analysis is

therefore conversation analysis.

3. Discourse is “language in use” (Brown and Yule 1983)

4. Discourse is a way of defining, structuring and signifying certain areas (or objects)

of knowledge and social practice (Foucault).

Discourses are evident through “statements” (affermazioni), and discourse analysis

consists of the analysis of such statements.

“Discoursive formations”: the system of rules which make certain statements

possible under certain social, cultural and institutional circumstances and not in

others.

Discourse is “the group of statements that belong to a single system of formation”

and these statements “can be assigned particular modalities of existence” (Foucault

1972).

e.g. clinical discourse, legal discourse, economic discourse, etc.

Discourse is constitutive: discoursal practices are constitutive of knowledge, but

discourse also both represents and constructs social entities and relations because

it is related to power.

5. discourse vs. Discourse (Gee, 1989): “discourse” (with lower case “d”) is a

meaningful utterance (enunciato) of stretch of language, such as a story, an essay,

a conversation, etc.

Discourse (with capital “D”) are “ways of being in the world”, which integrate

linguistic, cultural, social and ideological signs. Hence, Discourses always include

discourse, as linguistic acts are always part of wider social and cultural

significations.

(manca slides big D)

A Discourse is a socially accepted association among ways of using language,

other symbolic expressions and “artifacts”, of thinking, feeling, valuing and acting

that can be used to identify oneself as a member of a socially meaningful group or

“social network”, or to signal a socially meaningful “role”. (Gee, 1990)

Discourse is both a “mode of action”, according to which people act into the world, and a

“mode of representation”, which people use in order to represent a certain reality around

them according to certain (cultural, social, ideological) parameters. (Fairclough)

3

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

Discourse has 3 constitutive aspects:

social identities

- social relationships

- knowledge and belief

-

(Fairclough)

Texts realize these 3 aspects and include them in varying degrees, and in more or less

explicit ways. As such, texts are shaped by, and in tun shape, these three aspects, which

are constitutive not only of discourse, but generally of culture and society as well. Texts as

discursive practices are affected by social, institutional and situational settings, but at the

same time they are also instrumental in shaping these settings. (IMPO!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Cumulative effect of texts. We form our ideas on the base of the language that is common

in our society. We know reality around us through discourses.

Some key concepts

society

- ideology: system of ideas in what we believe and so also values

- representation

- language

- discourse

- discourse analysis

- critical discourse analysis

-

Ideology

Ideology speaks with the voice of nature (Roland Barthes).

Ideology comprises the habits of behavior and belief which combine to make any social

world appear to those who inhabit it as the natural world. Ideology operates to make

people forget that their world has been historically constructed (Michael Billig).

The critical discourse analysis unmasks historical construction.

Nobody would claim that their own thinking was ideological. Ideology, like halitosis, is in

this sense what the other person has (terry Eagleton).

To study ideology is to study the ways in which meaning, or signification serves to sustain

relations of domination (John B. Thomson).

Hegemony

Gramsci argues that the ruling class is able to maintain its dominance or hegemony over

the masses using various instruments like civil society, media, education system, interest

groups and other such means. Through such means, ruling class disperse its political,

social, moral and cultural values to be spread in the society in such a way that the masses

or ruled tend to accept or embrace them as their own. This is practicing the hegemony by

consent. 4

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

In society hegemonic and non-hegemonic discourse.

Representation of migrants: how do we conceptualize in language migrants and their

arrival? “sbarcati”, “illegal status”, “invasion”, “clandestine”, “ondata, tsunami, marea”. Only

“sbarco” is more or less neutral. Arrival of migrants as if it was a war. Metaphor of war.

Ideology is related to common sense

Ideological common sense is in the service of unequal relations of power, but it also

maintains solidarity within a certain group.

Common sense is naturalized through discourse, what would otherwise be artificial is

presented as and therefore becomes natural.

Ideological struggle takes place mainly in language but also over language.

Changes in society = changes in language. Two-way process.

Language is the house of being. In its home man dwells. Those who think and those who

create with words are the guardians of this home.

Representation

Representation of reality through images, language, media, etc. is NOT reality. Re-

formulate reality in language.

Representation involves selection and creation: it also requires interpretation; it constructs

commonsense as well as “deviations” from norms.

Words also have certain connotation which contribute to the meaning.

26/09/18

By the public sphere we mean first of all a realm of our social life in which something

approaching public opinion can be formed. Access is guaranteed to all citizens; a portion

of the public sphere comes into being in every conversation in which private individuals



assemble to form a public body. (Difference of opinion is essential for the public sphere

freedom of discuss. If you talk about general issues you have also taking part in that public

conversation).

Only when the exercise of political control is effectively subordinated to the democratic

demand that information be accessible to the public, does the political public sphere win

an institutionalized influence over the government through the instrument of law-making

bodies. (Habermas)

Social media: interaction; Mass media: no interaction, one to many communications. One

way.

Internet has changed things a lot. 5

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

The control of a certain discourse is important in spreading a certain idea. By analyzing

language, we will have an idea of what kind of strategy is behind.

Discourse analysis studies as:

1- specific form of language use

2- use of language seen as a form of social practice

(Fairclough)

Critical discourse analysis considers the ways ideologies and social structures

determine the production of language.

The structures of language contain the inprint of social structures. The way you use

language tell us something about who you are.

Discourse is a two-way process!!!

Critical discourse analysis

Language operates as an instrument to maintain certain power relations within society

(including the hegemony of certain groups over others) by encoding social values and

beliefs in its structure, and in doing so it “naturalizes” social relationships based on an

unequal distribution of power. Furthermore, not only is language instrumental in wielding

ideologies and in “naturalizing” common sense, but texts themselves become both the

target and the “locus” of social struggle, a fact that is continually reflected in their linguistic

features: ideological struggles are always inscribed into texts.

society --- discourse --- (language as) text

Social order and order of discourse

Fairclough argues that there is a direct interdependence between two orders, the social

order and the order of discourse, each having its own structure: the social order is

structured along different types of social practices which condition our actions and are

made visible through actual practices; in a parallel and interconnected way, the order of

discourse is constituted by certain types of discourse, which are made visible through

actual discourses (which include actual texts).

The use of power by the ruling classes aims at ensuring that the discourses structured

within the order of discourse are always homogeneous and, at least potentially,

controllable and in line with certain ideological constructs. And yet, the relationship

between the order of discourse and the social order is never fixed or static: rather, it is

always flexible and dialectic, as there is a constant, continuous process of interaction

between them. Accordingly, discourses within a certain order of discourse can only be

restructured and renewed when social relations, which are inevitably relations of power,

change. (Fairclough) 6

Discourse Strategies in Contemporary English – M. DEMATA 2018-2019

Discourse – historical approach (Ruth Wodak)

The Discourse-Historical approach is an approach which analyses texts by explaining and

“historicizing” their discoursal importance in terms of their social collocation. Discourse

analysis consists of four levels, which are somehow implicit in her definition of discourse:

1. the linguistic analysis of text

2. the analysis of the intersection, within texts, of different texts, different genres

(genre: group of conventions that make a book, a movie recognized between the

others) and different discourses (intertextual and interdiscoursal analysis)

3. the analysis of the “extralinguistic social/sociological variables and institutional

frames of a specific “context of situation”

4. “the broader socio-political and historical contexts”, in which the “discursive

practices” (that is, texts) are embedded, and to which they contribute

Intertextuality is to make a reference to a previous text.

N. 3 and 4 are implicit. We will focus on the n.1 and 2.

The discourse analysis (1-2) of a text has to be pursued through two complementary

analytical dimensions:

1. Linguistic analysis, which will show how certain elements and structures from the

linguistic system are used within texts

2. Intertextual analysis, which will show how texts depend on resources made

available to them through the order of discourse, i.e. discourses, genres, other

texts, etc.

These two levels are interdependent: “the intertextual properties of a text are realized in its

linguistic features” (Fairclough)

Intertextuality

Texts circulate within a discourse community (a group of people who share a certain

discourse and so a certain language) only if and when speakers themselves can somehow

relate to their meaning, that is to say, when meanings address certain fields of experience

shared by a sizeable community of speakers or indeed a discourse community. This

“social” view of meaning derives from the speakers’ ability to recognize texts and to

associate, often unconsciously, each text with other texts and their constitutive and

discoursal values. Each text has some kind of relationship with other texts, as the

meaning of a text is always “constructed” in relation to other texts, both past and

future. Furthermore, each text appeals to a set of values, beliefs and knowledge shared