The word, 'discourse'
originally comes from the Latin word, 'discursus',[1] which denotes
'conversation or speech'. It refers to a wider area of human life and its
activities. Discourse is a continuous stretch of language, which is larger than
a sentence. It often constitutes a coherent unit such as a sermon, argument, joke
or narrative (Crystal: 1992:25). 'Discourse' and ‘text’ are used synonymously.
It is either written or spoken communication or debate or formal discussion. Discourse
means language above the sentence or above the clause (Stubbs 1983, p.1). In
other words, it is beyond the sentence level. According to this definition, a
particular language in use is considered to be a discourse. Notices, memos,
obituaries, shopping lists, road signs posters and banners are various
discourse patterns, which occur in language. Even some aspects of body language
indicate some specific discourses. In other words, discourse is any instance of
language involving more than just a sentence. “Discourse
is defined as any form of oral or written communication, which is more
extensive than a sentence.”[2]
The objective of the study is to investigate the impact of discourse on
the communication process, which occurs in numerous ways both among human
beings and animals. Different behavioral patterns of human beings and animals
imply different information. It is a vital fact to perceive their respective
responses and attitudes. Some symbols, different postures, tone and emotion
also reveal their thoughts and ideas. All such activities and behavioral
patterns come under the scope of discourse. Effective communication means one
should be able to understand the others, who communicate with him/her. It is
now apparent that communication is a vast phenomenon.
Methodology applied in the present study is literary survey and
observation. It is partly primary data based and partly secondary data based.
Relevant books and websites were referred to regarding the study. Some authors
have defined discourse analysis in many ways, but generally, they reveal the
same thing. All such definitions were included in the present study.
Members
of a speech community use language in different
ways according to the activities and situations they are involved in. Discourse
analysis means investigating such a language within their particular contexts.
Language form and language function are very significant in discourse analysis.
Under this, both spoken interaction and written texts can be examined. Language
form and language function are not the same.
In other words, language form is the direct meaning and language
function is the indirect meaning. It identifies linguistic features that
characterize different genres as well as social and cultural factors that aid
in our interpretation.[3]
Use
of language varies according to a particular activity or situation. For
instance, the way language is used in a funeral is different from the way it is
used in a wedding ceremony. The vocabulary used by the people, emotion of the
participants, their tone and behavior we find in a funeral are quite different
from those of a wedding. Language used in an alms giving, sports meet, garage,
temple, hostel, classroom, market and bus stand differs from situation to
situation.
The
focus of discourse analysis is any form of written or spoken language, such as
a conversation or newspaper article. The main topic of interest is the
underlying social structures, which may be assumed or played out within the
conversation or text. It concerns the sorts of tools and strategies people use
when engaged in communication, such as slowing one's speech for emphasis, use
of metaphors, and choice of particular words to display.
According to the Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary, discourse
means the use of language in speech and writing in order to produce meaning
(Hornby, 1948: p.434).[4] Discourse analysis or discourse
studies, is a general term for a number of approaches to analyze
written, spoken or signed language use.
Discourse analysis has been taken up in a variety of social science disciplines, including linguistics, anthropology, sociology, cognitive psychology,
social psychology,
international
relations, communication studies
and translation studies,
each of which is subject to its own assumptions, dimensions of analysis, and
methodologies.
When a person communicates with another person verbally, in
writing or using a sign language, sometimes the listener has to think more
deeply about the meanings of such words as they indicate an indirect meaning.[5]
That is why it is mentioned at the very beginning that discourse is bigger than
language. In other words, discourse conveys an extensive meaning rather than a
linguistic meaning, which occurs in the given sentence. This can be expressed
verbally, in writing and through sign languages.[6]
Discourse in context may consist
of only one or two words as in Stop or No smoking. But, when the
people see them, they will suddenly respond. No one orders them to do it;
however, they will obey. There are many such examples around us.
·
No
admission
·
Exit
·
Silence
·
No
parking
·
Lecture in progress
The above words,
phrases and symbols provide us with some information. Only those, who have
previous experience and knowledge of such activities or situations, will
respond to them positively. Others will fail to do so due to their lack of
experience and knowledge regarding them.
Language and discourse
Alistair
Pennycook[7] says that discourse
occurs in language and the problem, which arises here, is what is bigger,
language or discourse. In linguistics, language is bigger as discourses occur within
language. However, in many instances, discourse seems to be bigger than
language as it conveys different meanings.
(1909–1992)
Zellig
Harris,[8]
who was one of Chomsky’s teachers paved the way for linguists to analyse
language above the sentence level, calling this unit of analysis ‘discourse’. Analysis,
therefore, focuses on language in use, the relation of language to context and
the relations of cohesion within a text. However, Michel Foucault (1972)
argues that discourse is bigger than language.
Regarding this particular fact, it is difficult to arrive at a conclusion.
Anyway, it is obvious that discourse is a substantial phenomenon in language.
Institutionalized way of thinking
(1926-1984)
According
to Michel Foucault
(1972), a discourse is considered
to be an institutionalized way of thinking. For example, two institutions
may have two different attitudes towards a particular guerrilla movement describing it either as freedom fighters or terrorists. LTTE in Sri Lanka is
such a movement. International communities and local communities have different
attitudes towards it. Some people consider it as a terrorist organization,
whereas the others accept it as a liberation movement. This conception of discourse
is largely derived from the work of French philosopher Michel Foucault.
Discourse analysis is a term, which refers to different
interpretations for scholars working in different disciplines. For a
sociolinguist, it is concerned mainly with the structure of social interaction
manifested in conversation. Their principal concern is to examine how any
language produced by man, whether spoken or written, is used to communicate for
a purpose in a context. The discussion is carefully illustrated throughout by a
wide variety of discourse types such as conversations in different social
situations, extracts from newspapers, notices, contemporary fiction and
graffiti.
Language is used rather than what its components of language are
(Yule, 1985: p.139). Under discourse analysis, linguistic aspects are not
investigated. Only the use of language is considered. In other words, the field
of discourse and related activity or situation engaged in through language is
discussed. Language, a person should select according to the field of discourse
is independent from his social variables.
George
Yule
(1871-1952)
In
the study of language, some of the most interesting questions arise in
connection with the way language is used rather than what its components are. Hence,
the interpretation of all discourse in a sentence is very significant as
discussed earlier. Discourse analysis means interpreting a discourse embedded
in a specific language. Accordingly, we can easily identify whether it is an
obituary notice, tender notice, poster, formal letter, informal letter,
receipt, bill, memo, poem, song, drama, review, telegram, admission card,
brochure, news bulletin etc.
Discourse
coherence and cohesion
Coherence and cohesion are terms used in discourse analysis.
A piece of writing is coherent if it is clearly organized and
has a logical sequence of propositions or ideas. Teun A. van Dijk,[9]who is a
professor of Critical Discourse Analysis points out that coherence is a
semantic property of discourse formed through the interpretation of each
individual sentence relative to the interpretation of other sentences, with
interpretation implying interaction between the text and the reader.
Teun A.
van Dijk
(1943-
)
Paragraph
or section of text is cohesive if the sentences are well structured, well linked together and there is
no unnecessary repetition. Ordered sequence of
propositions, phonological, morphological syntactic and lexical structures of
the respective sentences, word order, sentence order, use of connectives,
nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs, adverbs, prepositions, tenses, punctuation,
pronunciation etc… are the devices, which are often subsumed under the concept
of surface structure, which is known as cohesion.
Generally, discourse has a sequence of sentences, which expresses
sequences of propositions or ideas (Beaugrande: 1981). They are logically
related and well-organized. Sentences are thus related so as to form the
meaning of the paragraph and how the
meanings of sentences are related so as to form the meaning of the sequence as
a whole. In other words, how the propositions of a discourse are linked up in a
sequence in order to add up to more complex meanings. The meaning of one sentence depends on the
meaning of a sequence. It is an important task for a speaker or writer to
represent these relations between the facts as relations within or among propositions
and to express them (Levelt: 1981), whereas the hearer or reader has the task
of establishing these relations the other way around with the additional
knowledge about the usual ordering of facts. Hence, a discourse is not just a
set of sentences, but an ordered sequence of propositions. It is now apparent
that coherence is closely associated with meaning and cohesion with grammar. In
other words, coherence means semantically related and cohesion means
grammatically related.
Text-1
A My
car broke down yesterday.
B I
called for a mechanic.
Text- 2
A My
car broke down yesterday.
B Obama
visited Latin America.
In Text-1, the meaning of the first
sentence depends on the meaning of the second sentence. There is also cause and
effect in it. However, in Text-2, there is neither cause nor consequence.
Hence, it has no meaning at all as the two sentences are not properly
connected. In other words, there is coherence in Text-1 whereas Text-2 has no
any coherence. This implies that discourse is not merely a string of sentences.
There should be both coherence and cohesion for a meaningful discourse.
For each sentence of the discourse, as well as for the discourse
as a whole, it should be indicated to the hearer, at both the semantic
(coherence) and surface structural (cohesion) levels, how each sentence relates
to previous and possibly following sentences, how the information of each
sentence is tied in with the information of other sentences, and what
information the hearer or reader is supposed by the speaker or writer to have
about the context and about the world. This means, among other things that at
each point of the discourse there should be at least some new information and
this new information should be appropriately linked with old information, which
may be textual or contextual.
The applied aspect of the investigation is to
explore how coherence is achieved in different registers and genres of spoken
and written discourse; namely face-to-face conversation, telephone
conversation, panel discussions, political speeches, media discourse and
academic writing.
Discourse is not only semantics of natural language utterances or
acts, but also of nonverbal or paraverbal behavior, such as gestures, pictures
and films, logical systems or computer languages, sign languages of the deaf,
and perhaps social interaction in general.
Previous experience
Language users have previous experience, such as having read or
heard other discourses about the same kinds of facts, and traces of the
representations of these experiences gradually build and update models of the
situations. That is why they are capable of understanding the nature of the
discourse. Hence, previous knowledge or experience is very important to a
person to realize what the discourse is. It is also instrumental in the
analysis of the discourse. Language user thus understands the discourse with
his previous knowledge and experience (Beaugrande: 1981).
For
instance imagine that your father came home after a long journey and says,
‘Open the windows please.’ removing his shirt. His behavior and speech indicate
that it is very hot inside the living room and he needs fresh air to come in.
It is now apparent that the sentence, ‘Open the windows please.’ is not a mere
sentence. It is a particular discourse within a language. The meaning of that
sentence can be analyzed as indicated below.
It
is very hot inside the living room. He
feels uncomfortable. Therefore, he requests his wife and children to open the
windows.
In
this sentence, linguistic meaning is just opening the windows, but the intended
meaning or speaker meaning is wider. Father feels it very hot inside the living
room and wants them to open the windows. People with such experience only,
realize what he says. Hence, the listeners and audiences should have that
experience in their lives. Otherwise, they fail to understand what the speaker
says. In other words, they should be able to interpret the discourse embedded
in father’s utterance. The same phenomenon is discussed under pragmatics as well.
This shows us that both pragmatics and discourse are closely related though
they are studied under different themes. Even semantics and semiotics are
closely related to discourse as they are all involved in the concept of
meaning.
Text-1
COSTA
– ASELA (USA). Son of late Gerald and late Susila de Costa, son-in-law of late S.
A. Gnanissara and of Sumana Gnanissara, loving husband of Swarna, dearly
beloved father of Moditha and Dumindu, brother of Reena, late Yasonanda and of
Upali, father-in-law of Sunita and Dayantha, beloved uncle of Indunil,
grandfather of Amaiya, Dilini, Thamali, Rahul, Thilan and Roshan, expired. The
remains lie at 123, Veluwanarama Road,
Pamankada, Colombo 6. Cortege will leave at 2.30 p.m. on Saturday 4th
April for Cremation at General Cemetery, Borella at 3.30 p.m.
We are familiar with the given context or
discourse both verbal and written. The following aspects are considered when
interpreting a discourse.
·
Structure
·
Style
·
Vocabulary
·
Tone
·
Emotion
·
Intonation
·
Diction
·
Grammar
·
Cohesion
·
Coherence
Generally, any obituary notice is structured in a
particular way as indicated above. The same structure remains common to all.
When we closely study the above obituary notice, we can easily see the way some
specific names have been highlighted so that relations and friends are capable
of locating the name of the deceased and the venue. Hence, in discourse
analysis, structure or form is immensely vital. Vocabulary found in an obituary
seems to be specific. The words like; ‘late’, ‘loving husband’, ‘beloved
father’, ‘expired’, ‘remains’, ‘Cortege
will leave’, ‘Cremation at General Cemetery’ imply that it is about a
funeral.
Tone is another important aspect, which is highly
considered when a particular discourse is analyzed. According to the tone of a
discourse, one can say whether it is about a funeral, wedding or otherwise.
Emotion and intonation are also closely associated with the tone. For example,
when a person speaks, we can observe whether is in happy or sad mood according
to his intonation.
Discourses are written or spoken in different
diction. It means the choice of words. When the vocabulary of the above
obituary notice is closely studied, it is clear how the words have been
selected to write the obituary notice.
When the following matrimonial is closely
examined, it is obvious that some sentences are not grammatically connected.
For instance, in the following phrase, there is no any verb to connect the
subject with the predicate.
‘Educated in Convent and International School in
Sri Lanka, with considerable assets…’
Though the sentence is incomplete, it conveys a
particular meaning. This shows that in some discourses, grammar is not a very
important component. However, there are instances, where grammar is very significant
and essential. For instance, the formal letters are written grammatically and
they are expected to be accurate and authentic.
Text-2
Affluent
Catholic parents seek a partner for their pretty, slim, fair, daughter 29
years, in IT, presently working in NY City USA. Educated in Convent and
International School in Sri Lanka, with considerable assets. Prefer a Sri
Lankan professionally qualified partner, non-smoker with sober habits with
similar background, living in Sri Lanka or abroad. Religion - Catholic or
Buddhist. All correspondence will be treated confidentially. Please reply with
family particulars.
As
discussed earlier, discourse means how language is used in different situations
or different activities. From situation to situation or activity to activity it
changes. We use language in different ways. For instance, it is mainly spoken
and written. It is clear that spoken discourse is different from written
discourse. This is a common phenomenon in many languages. We hardly speak the
same language as we write it. There are some differences between them. Even in
spoken discourse, the way language is used varies according to the situation or
activity. For example, the way we speak
to a priest and the way we speak a layman are quite different. This difference
can easily be discerned in the intonation and vocabulary that the speaker uses
in his speech. We usually speak to a priest in a very respectful manner using a
specific vocabulary whereas we speak to a friend in a friendly way using a
general vocabulary. When a person is angry, he uses language in a very
emotional way. According to a person’s emotion and mood, his discourse pattern
also changes. When a person speaks at a funeral, his normal way of speaking,
suddenly varies according to the situation or activity he is involved in. In
written discourse too, there are many such changes. Obituary notices, general
notices, memos, posters, formal and informal letters, minutes, advertisements,
pornographic and defamation literature are written in different ways. They have
their own discourse patterns. Vocabulary, grammar and sentence patterns, which
they use, are relevant to such specific discourse patterns.
New cross-discipline
DA began to develop as a new cross-discipline in
late 1960s and 1970s in the field of both humanities and social sciences. It is
related to the disciplines such as semiotics, psycholinguistics, sociolinguistics, and pragmatics. Discourse Analysis is involved in a variety of
social science disciplines including linguistics, anthropology, sociology, cognitive psychology, social psychology, international
relations communication studies and translation studies. The various dimensions
of discourse are associated with sounds, intonation, emotions, gestures, syntax, lexicon, rhetoric, meanings, speech acts and other aspects of interaction. According to these
dimensions, discourse patterns change.
These approaches
emphasize different aspects of language use and they all view language as
social interaction. They are concerned with the social contexts, in which
discourse is embedded. Many discourse types begin with some kind of summary,
for instance in titles, headlines, abstracts and so on. This means though in
concise form, they convey some comprehensive information. For example, the
newspaper headlines through one or two words reveal more information about a
particular incident. The discussion or text is carefully illustrated throughout
by a wide variety of discourse types such as conversations and speeches recorded
in different social situations, extracts from newspapers, books, magazines,
notices, contemporary fiction and graffiti. We should know the techniques of
analysis in order to apply them to any language in context that we encounter.
Ambiguous sources
There are many sources of
ambiguity in language as Asher[10] points out. They are
lexical ambiguity, ambiguity of function and ambiguity of rhetorical function.
They all lead to ambiguity and as a result, listener or reader hardly realizes
what the discourse is. Even wrong punctuation marks, wrong spelling, wrong body
language, wrong signals and wrong word order lead someone to confusion. When
the following sentences are closely studied, it is clear that the wrong
punctuation mark, comma can kill even a person.
·
Let him go, not kill him.
·
Let him go not, kill him.
This ambiguity is caused by the wrong use of the punctuation mark.
That is why the correct use of punctuation mark is very important.
Application in translation theory
The general
attention to discourse analysis developed in the 1970s has found applications
in translation theory in the 1980s and into the 1990s. However, a survey of the
linguistic approaches concerned shows that many kinds of analysis are
inappropriate to the study of translation quite simply because they cannot say
if a source text and a target text can or should belong to the same discourse.
That is, most theories cannot describe the limits of any particular discourse
within or across different tongues. A more pertinent approach is to define
discourse as a set of constraints on semiotics at a non-lingual level, and then
use this definition to recognize translation as a possible index of
intercultural discursive constraints. For instance, when a text whether
verbal or written is translated, its discourse should be highly considered.
That is why a Muslim person, who knows Sinhala, fails to translate an English
text into Sinhala. He should also be aware of the Sinhala culture as well.
Otherwise, his translation is most probably humorous and funny. Structuralists
such as Ferdinand de Saussure[11] and Jacques Lacan,[12] argue that all human
actions and social formations are related to language and can
be understood as systems of related elements. For instance, when you speak to a
person in a threatening voice angrily, he will nod with his eyes cast down.
This is also a kind of discourse as Ferdinand de Saussure and Jacques Lacan point out. His nod indicates that one day he
is going to take revenge from you. Though his action is non-verbal, it implies
his anger, tension and revenge.
Different
people may come up with different interpretations of the same thing of
discourse depending on their particular knowledge and experience of the world
(Paul Cobley: 2001-p.136). For example, two boys might interpret their
discussions as rudely insulting, while the boy’s friends might call it just
chatting.
4.8 Social distance through talk
When two
people speak, we can easily observe whether they are closely related or
distanced according to the way they are communicating with each other. In other
words, we can see the relationship existing between them (Paul
Cobley: 2001-136). When two lovers speak to each other, the listeners
understand that they are lovers or husband and wife. Their way of
communication, body language, vocabulary, tone etc establish their real
identity. It is their specific discourse pattern, which helps us identify them.
Discourse thus seems to be accompanied by the actions of the speakers as
well.
Functional relation and structural relation
In discourse analysis, the
functional relation is above the structural relation. For instance, the
following sentences constitute a discourse and we can see what the functional
relation occurring here.
Mala Will you attend Roshan’s
wedding?
Ravi Did he
attend ours?
Mala His father was seriously ill
and he had to look after him at hospital.
Ravi If so, why don’t you go
there with your friends? I have to attend to an urgent matter today.
When you listen to this conversation carefully, you will realize
that Ravi does not like to attend this particular wedding. He seems to be
unhappy with Roshan for his failure to attend the wedding. This indicates the
negative relationship between Ravi and Roshan. However, Mala tries to defend
Roshan justifying his failure to attend their wedding. Anyway, Mala fails to
convince Ravi, who is not interested in attending it. This further implies that
Ravi is adamant and not prepared to forgive Roshan, whereas Mala seems to be
lenient and ready to forgive him. Ravi expresses his displeasure through the
following sentence:
Did he attend ours?
But, Mala shows her sympathy towards him through the following
words.
His father was seriously ill and he had to look after him at
hospital.
It is now obvious that good qualities of Mala and bad qualities of
Ravi are revealed through their own words and behavior.
Through this dialogue, the
relationship between language and society is also revealed and the
psychological status of Ravi is absolutely apparent.
Language functions
There are two fundamental
language functions (Brown and Yule: 1983), namely transactional function and
interactional function. Transactional function means communication of
information, which is of two kinds, objective information and subjective
information. Objective information is universally or generally accepted while
subjective information varies from person to person. For instance, a researcher
may reveal the results of his research to build up a particular theory. They
are all logical, rational and factual. Hence, this kind of information is
considered to be objective. A critic may have his review on a particular film.
It depends on his own ideas and attitudes. It is, therefore, considered to be
subjective.
For instance, interactional function Halliday[13] means trying to initiate
a conversation with another person.
Hello! Good Morning! What’s your time please?
Sometimes, you meet some people at the bus halt waiting for a bus.
Some want to begin a conversation with you and one such person may use the above
sentence not to get information, but to initiate a conversation with you. There
are many such instances in a language. This is common in any language we use.
Some other examples are given below.
·
I think you are not from
this area.
·
The price of petrol has gone
up again.
·
I have seen you somewhere.
5.
Findings and Conclusion
It is now obvious that
discourse is more extensive and complex than a sentence. A person should have
previous experience and good knowledge of the subject or incident to understand
a particular discourse. Otherwise, it is only linguistic awareness of language,
he gets. He will fail to get the real meaning of text or speech, which the
speaker or writer wants to convey. Due to the poor knowledge of discourse, one
may be confronted with great communication difficulties. This usually happens
in everyday life. A person should be able to perceive both verbal discourse and
non verbal discourse as discussed earlier. It is also found that there are many
discourse patterns in oral and written communication. The meaning is not
confined to morphological and syntactic levels. It goes beyond that. One’s
words, both oral and written, tone, mood, appearance, emotion, behavior,
silence and posture are closely associated with discourse. In conclusion, it is
now obvious that discourse is a vast domain in any language.
·
Beaugrande, R. de, &
Dressler, W. U., (1981), Introduction to text linguistics. London:
Longman.
·
Brown, G., and George Yule, (1983), Discourse Analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
·
Cobley, Paul. (ed.) (2001), Semiotics
and Linguistics: London, Routledge.
·
Cobley, Paul., (ed.) (1996), The
Communication Theory Reader, London: Routledge.
·
Compact Oxford Dictionary,
Thesaurus and Word power Guide [2001], New York: Oxford University Press.
·
Crystal, D., (1992), Introducing
linguistics, Harlow: Penguin.
·
Gee, J. P., (2005), An
Introduction to Discourse Analysis:
Theory and Method. London: Routledge.
·
Harris, Z., (1952), Discourse
Analysis. Language, 28(1), 1-30.
·
Johnstone, B., (2002), Discourse analysis. Oxford:
Blackwell.
·
Levelt, W. J. M., (1981), The speaker’s linearization problem, Philosophical Transactionsof the Royal
Society of London, B 295, 305-315.
·
Longacre, R.E., (1996), The Grammar of Discourse. New York:
Plenum Press.
·
Penny cook, A., (1994), Incommensurable discourses? Applied Linguistics, 15(2),
115-138.
·
Schiffrin, D., Deborah Tannen, & Hamilton, H. E. (eds.), (2001), Handbook
of Discourse Analysis, Oxford: Blackwell.
·
Stubbs, M., (1983), Discourse Analysis, Oxford: Blackwell.
·
Van Dijk, T. A., and
Kintsch, W., (1983), Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York:
Academic Press.
·
Yule, George. (1985), The
Study of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Web sites
·
www.scribd.com/.../DISCOURSE-ANALYSIS-ZELLIG-HARRIS
·
Research in Critical Discourse Studies -
Website Teun A.
van Dijk www.discourses.org 09.05.2010
·
dictionary.reference.com/browse/discourse
21.02.2010
·
www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/saussure.html-23.08.2010
·
www.lacan.com/zizfour.htm-23.08.2010
·
csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/discourse.htm-24.08.2010
·
www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/.../Asher:Nicholas.html-23.10.2010
[8]
www.scribd.com/.../DISCOURSE-ANALYSIS-ZELLIG-HARRIS
[9]
Research in Critical
Discourse Studies - Website Teun A. van Dijk www.discourses.org 09.05.2010
[10]
www.informatik.uni-trier.de/~ley/db/.../Asher:Nicholas.html-23.10.2010
[11]
www.angelfire.com/md2/timewarp/saussure.html-23.08.2010
[12]
www.lacan.com/zizfour.htm-23.08.2010
[13]
csmt.uchicago.edu/glossary2004/discourse.htm-24.08.2010
No comments:
Post a Comment