Linguistics and Discourse Analysis

Summary

This 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

00:00

📚 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.

05:02

🔍 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.

10:05

🌐 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.

Keywords

💡Linguistics

Linguistics is defined as the scientific study of language, encompassing its structure, history, and development. In the video, it sets the stage for understanding discourse analysis by highlighting the various subfields within linguistics that contribute to the understanding of language. It is foundational as it provides the context for the more specialized study of discourse.

💡Discourse Analysis

Discourse Analysis is a sub-discipline of linguistics that examines language in use, focusing on how sociolinguistic values are inscribed in language during communication. It is central to the video's theme as it delves into the analysis of language beyond the sentence level, looking at how meaning is constructed in context.

💡Structural Linguistics

Structural Linguistics is concerned with the formal properties of language, including morphology, phonology, and syntax. The video uses structural linguistics as a contrast to discourse analysis, illustrating the shift from studying language in isolation to examining it within its social context.

💡Morphology

Morphology is the study of word structure, particularly how words are formed from morphemes. It is mentioned in the video as part of structural linguistics, highlighting how different linguistic subfields contribute to the broader understanding of language.

💡Phonology

Phonology is the study of the system of sounds used in a language and how they contribute to meaning. It is discussed in the video as a component of structural linguistics, emphasizing the importance of sound in language structure and meaning.

💡Syntax

Syntax is the study of how words are combined to form phrases, clauses, and sentences. The video uses examples like 'the cat sat on the mat' to illustrate syntactic rules and how they contribute to the structural integrity of language.

💡Semantics

Semantics is the study of meaning in language, focusing on how words and phrases gain meaning. In the video, semantics is integral to discourse analysis as it examines how meaning is constructed and interpreted within linguistic expressions.

💡Pragmatics

Pragmatics is the study of how context influences the meaning of language. The video discusses pragmatics in relation to discourse analysis, showing how meaning can be inferred from the context and the intended implications beyond the literal words.

💡Sociolinguistics

Sociolinguistics is the study of how language varies according to social factors, such as class, gender, and ethnicity. It is relevant to the video's theme as it connects language use to social conventions and norms, which discourse analysis seeks to uncover.

💡Semiotics

Semiotics is the study of signs and symbols and their use in creating meaning. The video delves into semiotics to explain how signs function and how this understanding is crucial for discourse analysis in examining the arbitrary and conventional aspects of meaning.

💡Arbitrariness of the Sign

The arbitrariness of the sign refers to the idea that the relationship between a sign (like a word) and what it represents is not inherent but is instead a social convention. The video discusses this concept to emphasize how discourse analysis reveals the constructed nature of meaning and the role of language in shaping perceptions.

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