The Concepts of Discourse and the Theoretical Genealogy of Discourse Analysis

Abstract

Discourse analysis has become an important research approach in humanities and social sciences, involving a wide range of disciplines, schools and theories. Among the research literatures, which are named “discourse” or “discourse analysis”, there are significant differences in conceptual connotation and analysis frameworks, which are actually different from the theoretical origin and genealogy. In early studies, in view of structural linguistics, discourse is defined as “language above the sentence”, and discourse analysis is focused on the structure of language. The discourse analysis from the functional perspective emphasizes the use of language, highlighting the language users, the purpose and intention of the language users, or the situational context, including form/function analysis and context analysis. In social science, in approach of post-structuralism, discourse is “a form of social practice in which language plays a central role”, and discourse analysis is dedicated to revealing the social contradictions, conflicts and fairness, as well as the constructive role of discourse in the macro-social, cultural and historical process. The convergence of functional perspective and post-structuralist paradigm of discourse analysis has led to critical discourse analysis, an interdisciplinary field which inherits the post-structuralist view of language, cares about social practice, and at the same time attaches importance to linguistic texts. van Dijk's “Discourse-Cognitive-Social” analysis model, Wodak's “Discourse/History” critical discourse analysis model, and Fairclough's “Social event, Social practice, and Social structure" analytical framework are the typical representatives of critical discourse analysis.