Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
Summary
TLDRThis script delves into the origins and significance of discourse analysis within the field of linguistics. It distinguishes between structural and usage aspects of language, exploring sub-disciplines like morphology, phonology, syntax, semantics, and pragmatics. The focus is on how discourse analysis examines sociolinguistic values in language use, drawing from semantics and pragmatics. The script also touches on the history of semiotics, discussing the contributions of figures like Charles Sanders Peirce and Ferdinand de Saussure, emphasizing the arbitrary and conventional nature of signs in meaning-making. It concludes by highlighting discourse analysis's role in uncovering the arbitrary conventions that can mask power dynamics within language.
Takeaways
- 🔍 Discourse analysis is a sub-discipline of linguistics that focuses on how language is used in context and how sociolinguistic values are inscribed in language during use.
- 🏛 Linguistics is the scientific study of language, including its history, acquisition, structure, and use.
- 📚 Structural linguistics examines the formal properties of language, such as morphology (word structure), phonology (study of sounds), phonetics (differentiation of sounds), and syntax (word arrangement).
- 💡 Semantics looks at the meaning of whole phrases or sentences, while pragmatics considers the implied meanings that are not directly present in the text.
- 🧠 Psycholinguistics studies how language is developed and acquired, and historical linguistics explores how languages change over time.
- 🌐 Sociolinguistics investigates how social norms, values, and rules are reflected in the language we use, including gender distinctions and cultural variations.
- 👴 Leo Spitzer is often considered the founder of discourse analysis, which he defined as the examination of any significant semiotic event.
- 🔑 Semiotics, the study of signs and their meaning, is foundational to discourse analysis, with key figures like Charles Sanders Peirce and Ferdinand de Saussure contributing to the understanding of signs and their arbitrary nature.
- 🌐 Discourse analysis aims to uncover the arbitrary and conventional aspects of meaning-making (semiosis) that can be obscured by our familiarity with language.
- 🌿 The script discusses how language and signs can be used to disguise power dynamics and reinforce societal structures, such as in the historical justifications for slavery.
- 🔧 Discourse analysis serves as a tool to critically examine language use, revealing the underlying assumptions and power structures that may be hidden within our everyday communication.
Q & A
What is the primary focus of linguistics?
-Linguistics is the science of language, focusing on understanding why human language is the way it is. It includes the study of the history, acquisition, structure, and use of language.
What is the difference between structural and functional aspects of language?
-Structural aspects of language include morphology, phonology, phonetics, and syntax, which focus on the formal properties of language. Functional aspects involve semantics and pragmatics, which look at the meaning of language and how meanings are indicated by syntactic arrangements.
What is morphology in linguistics?
-Morphology is the study of word structure, including how root words are modified to create words with different meanings, such as adding 'ing' to a verb to form a participle.
How does phonetics differ from phonology?
-Phonetics is the study of how sounds can be differentiated for meaning, focusing on the physical properties of sounds. Phonology is the study of the set of sounds used by a particular language to convey meaning.
What is syntax and what does it examine?
-Syntax is the examination of how meaningful structures are put together out of different words. It looks at the arrangement of words to create phrases, sentences, or clauses that are syntactically correct and functional.
Can you explain the concept of pragmatics in linguistics?
-Pragmatics in linguistics looks at the meanings that aren't explicitly present but are indicated by syntactic arrangement. It deals with how context and situation influence the interpretation of language.
What is the role of sociolinguistics in understanding language?
-Sociolinguistics examines how social conventions, norms, values, and rules governing behavior are inscribed into the language we speak. It looks at how language varies with different social groups and contexts.
How does discourse analysis relate to other areas of linguistics?
-Discourse analysis is interested in how sociolinguistic values get inscribed in language as it is being used. It borrows concepts from semantics, pragmatics, and syntax to analyze language in use.
Who is considered the founder of discourse analysis and what is their contribution?
-Leo Spitzer is often considered the founder of discourse analysis. His perspective on discourse analysis is the examination of any significant semiotic event, emphasizing the study of how signs function in the construction of meaning.
What is the significance of semiotics in discourse analysis?
-Semiotics, the study of how signs function in the construction of meaning, is significant in discourse analysis because it helps to uncover the arbitrary and conventional aspects of meaning-making in language.
How do Charles Sanders Peirce's concepts of iconic, indexical, and symbolic signs relate to discourse analysis?
-Peirce's concepts of iconic, indexical, and symbolic signs are relevant to discourse analysis as they provide a framework for understanding how signs represent meaning. This helps in analyzing how language constructs and conveys meaning within discourse.
What is the role of Ferdinand de Saussure's ideas in discourse analysis?
-Ferdinand de Saussure's ideas on the arbitrary nature of the signifier and signified and the importance of the relationship between them are crucial in discourse analysis. His work highlights the conventional nature of language and meaning, which discourse analysis seeks to uncover and examine.
How does discourse analysis aim to reveal the arbitrary and conventional aspects of language?
-Discourse analysis aims to reveal the arbitrary and conventional aspects of language by closely examining how language is used in context. It seeks to identify instances where language is used to disguise power dynamics or present certain views as natural or common sense.
Outlines
📚 Introduction to Discourse Analysis and Linguistics
This paragraph introduces the field of Discourse Analysis, which is rooted in Linguistics. Linguistics is defined as the scientific study of language, with a focus on understanding the reasons behind the structure and use of human language. The paragraph delves into the various subfields of Linguistics, including Structural Linguistics, which examines the formal properties of language such as morphology (word structure), phonology (study of sounds), phonetics (differentiation of sounds), and syntax (arrangement of meaningful structures). Semantics is also mentioned, which is concerned with the meaning of words and phrases, and pragmatics, which looks at the inferred meanings beyond the literal words. The paragraph sets the stage for understanding how language is not only a structural system but also a tool for conveying meaning in various contexts, including social interactions.
🔍 The Significance of Signs in Discourse Analysis
The second paragraph explores the concept of signs and their role in the construction of meaning, a fundamental aspect of discourse analysis. It discusses the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, who introduced the idea that signs can represent something else in different respects or capacities. Peirce differentiates between iconic signs, which are similar to the objects they represent, indexical signs, which indicate the presence of something, and symbolic signs, which are based on social conventions. The paragraph also touches on the contributions of Ferdinand de Saussure, who emphasized the arbitrary and conventional nature of the signifier-signified relationship. This discussion is crucial for discourse analysis as it highlights how meaning is not inherent but is constructed through social conventions and agreements, which can often be obscured by the seemingly 'natural' or 'common sense' use of language.
🌐 Discourse Analysis and the Unveiling of Arbitrary Conventions
The final paragraph of the script discusses the application of discourse analysis in uncovering the arbitrary and conventional aspects of language that often go unnoticed. It points out that familiar semiotic processes can obscure the arbitrary nature of language, which can be used to disguise power dynamics and social constructs. The paragraph uses the historical example of slavery to illustrate how religious, natural, and common sense discourses were employed to justify an inherently arbitrary and unjust practice. It also introduces the idea that language, like a tool, is often only recognized when it fails, drawing parallels to Martin Heidegger's philosophy and Roland Barthes' concept of the 'invisible' photograph. The paragraph concludes by emphasizing the importance of discourse analysis in revealing the constructed nature of meaning and the role of language in shaping our perceptions of reality.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Linguistics
💡Discourse Analysis
💡Structural Linguistics
💡Morphology
💡Phonology
💡Syntax
💡Semantics
💡Pragmatics
💡Sociolinguistics
💡Semiotics
💡Arbitrariness of the Sign
Highlights
Discourse analysis is a branch of linguistics that focuses on language structure and use.
Structural linguistics examines the formal properties of language, including morphology, phonology, phonetics, and syntax.
Semantics looks at the meaning of whole phrases or sentences and how they conform to or defy conventions of meaning.
Pragmatics deals with the meanings that are implied by syntactic arrangement, such as indirect requests.
Psycholinguistics studies the development and acquisition of language.
Historical linguistics explores how languages change and evolve over time.
Sociolinguistics investigates how social norms and values are reflected in language.
Discourse analysis is concerned with how sociolinguistic values are inscribed in language during its use.
Conversation analysis is considered a special case of discourse analysis.
Leo Spitzer is often regarded as the founder of discourse analysis.
Semiotics is the study of how signs function in the construction of meaning.
Charles Sanders Peirce introduced the concept of signs standing in for something else in some respect or capacity.
Peirce distinguished between iconic, indexical, and symbolic signs based on how they represent their objects.
Ferdinando de Saussure discussed the arbitrary and conventional nature of the signifier and signified relationship.
Discourse analysis aims to uncover the arbitrary and conventional aspects of meaning-making in language.
Language is often used without awareness of its arbitrary conventions, which discourse analysis seeks to reveal.
Discourse analysis can help identify how language is used to disguise the arbitrary distribution of power.
The historical use of nature, common sense, and religion as justifications for slavery illustrates the concealment of arbitrary power dynamics.
Martin Heidegger compared language to a hammer, highlighting how its workings are often unnoticed until it fails.
Roland Barthes suggested that photographs (as signs) are invisible because we immediately interpret what they represent.
Transcripts
before looking at discourse analysis I'm
going to just quickly review the
discipline that it fits into so
discourse analysis comes to us from
Linguistics um David Crystal tells us
that Linguistics is the science of
language and linguists are the people
who uh try to understand why human
language is the way it is so linguists
study the history and acquisition of
language and its structure and use so
I'm just going to pick apart that
structure use distinction a little bit
so on the sort of the structural side we
have these different areas of
Linguistics so um structural Linguistics
is interested in the formal properties
of language so it includes things like
word structure which we find studied in
morphology um so that's like how you
make a participle from a root word you
know so run running so that kind of add
an ing word structure then there are
phonological and phonetic areas of
linguistics these are to do with the
study of sounds and how sound is used to
make meaning so phonetics is the study
of how we can differentiate between
sounds what's the minimum difference
that can be used for meaning and then
phology is the set of sounds used by a
particular language so human voice can
produce many different phonetic
distinctions but in any one language we
only have a limited set of phonological
ones um syntax is the examination of how
uh meaningful structures are put
together out of different words so if we
had phrases like the famous syntactic
one is the cat sat on the mat that's
syntactically correct you know it works
it's functional and then we could have
also had the cat purred on the mat that
would equally be functional you could
even have something like the cat juggled
on the mat which whilst it might not
make sense is still syntactically legit
you know works because juggled is the
past tense of a verb um so the fact that
the the cat juggled on the map wouldn't
would perhaps be seen as nonsense that's
a kind of semantics thing so what we're
looking at there is how a whole phrase
has meaning or or stands in defiance of
conventions on meaning um so that's that
looks at what the meaning of a whole
group of words might be so a sentence or
phrase or Clause pragmatics looks at the
meanings that aren't present but are
somehow indicated by uh syntactic
Arrangement so if you've ever said to
somebody are you putting the kettle on
and really meant will you make me a cup
of tea that's a kind of pragmatic usage
on the other side here we got these kind
of use things so there's
psycholinguistics it's how we develop
and acquire language historical
Linguistics how languages change and
develop over time varieties of language
so slang
cray uh
pigeons these are um fascinating area of
study but one that's not terribly
relevant to what we're going to do but
this side of the thing is so sociol
Linguistics is looking at how social
conventions Norms values the rules
governing our Behavior get inscribed
into the language that we speak so we
live in a culture where gender
distinctions very important and we can
see that inscribed in our language in
terms of we have different verbal forms
and different pronouns forms for males
and
females um then there's these two things
here which these are more relevant to us
again so discourse analysis is thing
we're actually interested in today
conversation analysis I'm going to just
treat that as a special case of
discourse analysis some people be upset
by that but I've got a shorten this
discourse analysis looks really at how
sociolinguistic value gets inscribed in
the language as it is being used and it
pretty much uses things like semantics
and pragmatics and it borrows some bits
of this syntactics as well
um in order to to do that inquiry so
we're going to look at the overlap
between these different
things this is Leo Spitzer and many
people think of him as the founder the
Granddad of um discourse analysis that's
given that people like to have a
starting place for anything Leos it's as
good as start as anywhere but really you
know we've we've been looking at
discourse and working out how it means
what it means way back you know go back
to the Greeks beyond that I think
anytime people who've used language
they've wanted to know how it
works so from Leo's perspective
discourse analysis is the examination of
any significant semiotic event which is
not a brilliant definition to be fair
because it was defining the thing that
we didn't know discourse analysis in
reference to something we've probably
never even heard of significant semiotic
event so what is this what's
semiotic well way back in the day
semiotics was the study of how
signs function in the construction of
meaning and that you know if we talk 3
400 years ago people would have talked
about the semiotics of medicine or
agriculture meaning so how you interpret
material traces of illness so the doctor
sees the spots on the skin and
interprets it in terms of
measles so if we think about that in a
more formal way by the time we get to
the 19th century we're looking at these
two gentlemen here this is Charles
Sanders Pur he was an American I may not
be saying his name entirely correctly I
know something unusual about the way he
said his name but I don't quite know
what it is is he's a pragmatist an
American philosopher um he was a a
person who inspired some of the great
names of American philosophical
tradition particularly Jey um and also
to some extent uh the James Brothers
William IET the guy's name now anyway
he's he was an important philosopher
from America and he he says that a sign
is something that stands in for
something else in some respect or
capacity and once he sort of made that
claim the thing that's most interesting
about he does is the respects and
capacities of the sign so how can a
thing stand in for something else so he
says signs can be iconic so they can be
similar in some way to the thing they
stand in for so these are signs for a
bell so if somebody says ding dong or if
somebody drew that picture or presented
it to you on a screen and it made you
think of bell these are then iconically
representing the bell and they're iconic
because they are similar to the object
they stand in in for in some way yeah so
this is supposed to sound a bit like the
noise a bell makes this is supposed to
look a bit like a bell all right he also
says you got indexical signs so here you
get the bell in the same way so the
thing that's being stood for is a bell
but this time it's the noise made by
this guy as he rattles this
thing if you hear a ringing sound a
clang clang clang noise then you have a
tendency to think there must be a Bell
nearby so the sound indicates is an
index of the presence of a bell and it
could be a logical relationship as well
so if somebody says that they are a
brother that indicates that they have a
sibling in their immediate family you a
brother or a sister themselves so it'd
be hard to see how somebody could be an
only one and a
brother and then uh Pierce also says
that there are symbolic signs where the
standing in for is achieved just by
convention so we use the sound b l you
know the word Bell but we could equally
as well use the word chime or any other
word at all you know we could use the
word sandwich there's no reason why Bell
has anything to do with Bell's any more
than any other sound we could
make right so this is the other
dimension this is the side of the coin
if you like and this comes from
Ferdinando suur he was a famous Swiss
linguist famously could speak wide
variety of languages with considerable
fluency um and thought and wrote on the
nature of the sign but in a different
dimension so he's not interested in
different types as as the internal
mechanics so he would basically agree
with P when he says that you know one
thing stands in for another but he says
well these two parts of the sign then so
there's the thing that does the standing
in for which he calls a signifier that
would be like the marks or sounds or
gestures that we read hear or observe
and then there are the signified that's
the things that are being stood in for
so here we've got a bunch of sounds lion
Leo Simba all of which can be used to
stand in for this
so those are the the two halves of the
sign but the other thing that he says
that's important is observes that this
relationship is arbitrary and it doesn't
just mean that you know it's not just
that we could say sandwich and mean Bell
it's not just that we could say um you
have lion or we could say Leo or we
could say Simba and mean the same thing
it's also arbitrary that we group
particular objects into the same class
so we have a specific class of objects
that we call lion and it excludes
leopards but it could include them
that's an arbitary distinction we drew
there um and people get upset about this
sometimes so they say well look there is
a there's a natural difference between a
lion and a leopard and and yes maybe
there is but also there are natural
distinctions within the group that we
call Lions so you get lions from certain
types you know certain places which are
are quite different to others they may
be able to reproduce but you can also
get different big big cats to reproduce
with one another that aren't lions and
produce hybrids so the idea here is that
there isn't this kind of uniform
homogenous naturally occurring object
it's an arbitrary class that we've put
together so person D you're both taken
different approaches to signs but what
their work brings out is that there is
something arbitrary and conventional in
the way the signs work and this is going
to be important for discourse analysis
because in discourse analysis we aim at
finding this arbitary and conventional
dimension of making meaning the
semiosis so why are we doing that well
we so familiar with semiotic processes
that that go on around us we often don't
see the arbitary in the conventional and
so we can be in a way hijacked by it um
just as the fish is always in the water
and and therefore loses sight of the
water we very often lose sight of the
fact that we're constantly engaged in
semiosis the the interpretation
of meaning
making so we behave as though some of
the meanings that we work with aren't
arbitrary and conventional that the
world is not necessarily the way we
think it is but it could be chopped up
in other ways so we could use different
sounds to mean the same objects or we
could actually divide the object that
we're referring to in different ways so
this arbitr tends to disappear from us
just as quickly as we start to interpret
science
but we can sometimes recover these the
assumptions about this arbitrariness by
listening carefully to the language and
that's what discourse analysis does so
wherever we hear somebody catching
something up as natural or common sense
and it used to be the case that people
did the same thing with them natural
religion or or traditional religion
sorry the religion nature and Common
Sense are sometimes the aliis for the
arbitrary and the
conventional and we do this because
arbitary conventions in language that we
have forgotten and turned into natural
or common sensical distinctions are
often used to disguise the arbitrary and
conventional distribution of
power for
example 200 years ago my ancestors went
to North Africa and stole people from
there and forced them to work on
plantations in appalling circumstances
so that my ancestors could enjoy um
sugar and cotton and coffee and and
stuff like that and um when whenever
people have engaged in slavery other
people have always criticized it and
whenever those criticisms arose the
answer would very often be dressed up in
terms of Nature and common sense and
also religion back in the day so that it
was argued that so that the religious
discourse might say something like well
they were they were mired in sin you
know they hadn't heard the good news of
Jesus and being mired in sin and caught
up in that they were going to go to hell
so we went there and we took them the
good news and where they refuse to
listen we forced them to to accept it
because that it was our responsibility
to bring them to God
um as soon as you start to say it's okay
to force people to believe what you
believe it's a very short step to
forcing them to work on your Plantation
it
seems then we also had people arguing
from nature and they would say well
black people are just naturally not as
able to look after themselves as white
people so the white person has to do the
looking after and therefore the black
person owes the white person a debt of
responsibility you know so they they
then have to I take on responsibility
for their um good management so they owe
me their labor kind of thinking and then
there were Common Sense arguments people
would say well the fact that we can turn
them into slaves means that just common
sense we will turn them into slaves and
there's something horrible being said
about human nature that people will
exploit one another being dressed up as
common sense so those three discourses
and and the religion one hasn't hasn't
been maintained as much as nature and
common sense but those three discourses
have been used to disguise the arbitrary
Assumption of
power just a quick um wander off into
thinking about language
then so this is Martin haiger he's not
as popular a character as he used to be
and certainly he's you know some of his
motives are fairly questionable some of
his political activities in the mid 20th
century is dubious but he he argues that
language is like a
hammer um so when we're using it to do
stuff we don't think about it too much
if if you think about the hammer you'll
hit yourself with it but when it breaks
down when it goes wrong you really
notice how it works it's only when it
starts to fail you that you really begin
to think about what did does when it's
useful and then there's this guy he's a
bit later than haer this is Roland Bart
he's a French um May's a journalist
cultural commentator and academic and He
suggests that that photographs and by
this he means any sign but he was
particularly interested in how
photographs function as signs so he says
a photograph is always invisible we see
the photograph which you what doesn't
make any sense of course it's perfect
illustration I already said this is
Roland B and it's not rollart it's a
photograph of ringart but it's very hard
for us to see the photograph as a
photograph we look through it and
believe we see the person of course we
don't see the person that's not ringart
at all and just as it is a photograph
it's a photograph of a particular place
and a so if we really really thought
about it it's just a bunch of colored
lights and shades isn't it but
this is Bart's point the the sign
disappears as soon as we see it because
what we do is
interpreted and it's it's how we forget
that the discourse analysis tries to
focus
on and that'll do for now I think
Посмотреть больше похожих видео
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)