Critically Analyzing Information Sources

This paper will address the following topics:

Initial appraisal of the journal

The content analysis of the journal

Authors : Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen

Intended Audience

Date of publication: 19/09/2008

Objective Reasoning

Publisher: Annual Reviews

Coverage

Title of journal: CRITICAL DISCOURSE

Writing Style

Evaluative Reviews

ANALYSIS

The tittle of this journal is Critical Discourse Analysis, by Jan Blommaert UGent and Chris
Bulcaen UGent(2000) ANNUAL REVIEW OF ANTHROPOLOGY. 29. p.447-466. It is a
scholarly journal under the subject of Languages and Literatures.

Critical Analysis of the Content

CONTENT ANALYSIS
The author's intentions of writing this journal are:
1. To give an overview of the main thrusts of CDA movement (Critical discourse analysis
(CDA) emerged in the late 1980s as a programmatic development in European discourse
studies spearheaded by Norman Fairclough, Ruth Wodak, Teun van Dijk, and others).
2. To discuss critically its main concentrations of attention.
3. To situate it in a wider panorama of developments in linguistics.
4. To show that the critical turn in studies of language is by no means restricted to any
single approach but represents a more general process of (partial) convergence in theories
and practices of research on language. CDA provided a crucial theoretical and

methodological impetus for this paradigm, but it could benefit from a closer
integration with new developments.
The bibliography of this journal show us that the author is very interested on how to make
this movement in wider view and give us a closer integration with this new development.
Some of the authors sources that guide us to this conclusion are:
1. Fairclough N. 1989. Language and Power. London: Longman
2. Fairclough N. 1992a. Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Polity
3. Fairclough N. 1992b. Linguistic and intertextual analysis within discourse analysis.
Discourse Soc. 3:193-217
4. Fairclough N, ed. 1992c. Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman
5. Fairclough N. 1995a. Media Discourse. London: Arnold
6. Fairclough N. 1995b. Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman
7. Fairclough N. 1996. A reply to Henry Widdowson's 'Discourse analysis: a critical
view.' Lang. Lit. 5(1):49-56
8. Fairclough N, Mauranen A. 1997. The conversationalization of political discourse: a
comparative view.
9. Hymes DH. 1996. Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality: Toward an
Understanding of Voice. London: Taylor, Francis
10. van Dijk T. 1987. CommunicatingR acism: Ethnic Prejudice in Thought and Talk.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage
11. van Dijk T. 1991. Racism and the Press. London: Routledge
12. van Dijk T. 1993a. Critical and descriptive goals in discourse analysis. J. Pragmat.
9:739-63
13. van Dijk T. 1993b. Elite Discourse and Racism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
14. van Dijk T. 1993c. Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse Soc. 4:249-83
15. van Dijk T. 1995. Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. See Schaffner & Wenden
1995, pp. 17-33
The author also mentions some other phenomena to discuss in this journal as shown in the
abstract of this paper. The phenomena are:

1. The relations of power and inequality in language.

2. The incorporation of social-theoretical in - sights into discourse analysis
3. The advocates social commitment and interventionism in research.
4. The main programmatic features and domains of enquiry of CDA with emphasis on
attempts toward theory formation by one of CDA's most prominent scholars, Norman
Fairclough
5. Another section reviews the genesis and disciplinary growth of CDA, mentions some of
the recent critical reactions to it.
6. The situation of wider picture of a new critical paradigm developing in a number of
inequality and power figure prominently.
Some Scholars are quoted here, related to the movement of critical discourse analysis and its
wider development. Beginning with what Wodak (1995:204) stated about the purpose critical
discourse analysis: CDA is to analyze opaque as well as transparent structural relationships
of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language"
The highlight points of this statement are both analyzing opaque and transparent structural
relationship of the four supremacies, dominance, discrimination, power and control that can be
found or manifested in language. Those fours supremacies will be clearly found by analyzing the
language as suggested by Wodak.
Then, there are also some other scholars hypotheses to supports the thoughts of the author such
as:
Chouliaraki& Fairclough
Discourse and Social Change
Fairclough
1. Discourse and characteristic of the economic, social and cultural changes of late modernity
2. A methodological blueprint for critical discourse analysis in practice
3. A three-dimensional framework for conceiving of and analyzing discourse
A. Discourse-as-text

The linguistic choices and patterns in vocabulary( e.g. wording, metaphor)

Grammar (e.g. transitivity modality),

Cohesion (e.g. conjunction, schemata)

Text structure ( e.g. episoding, turn-taking system)

B. Discourse-as-discursive-practice

Something that is produced, circulated, distributed consumed in society

Analyzing vocabulary, grammar, cohesion, and text structure, attention should be

given to speech acts, coherence, and intertextuality.

Manifest intertextuality" (i .e. overtly drawing upon othert exts)

Constitutive intertextuality" or "interdiscursivity"(i.e. texts are made up of

heterogeneous elements: generic conventions, discourse types, register, and style).

C. Discourse-as-social-practice

The ideological effects and hegemonic processes

Constructing alliances and integrating classes and groups

The articulation and rearticulation of orders of discourse is correspondingly one stake

in hegemonic struggle

The author said that Fairclough successfully identifies large-scale hegemonic processes such as
democratization, commodification, and technologization on the basis of heteroglossic
constructions of text genres and styles. He also identifies the multiple ways in which individuals
move through such institutionalized discursive regimes, constructing selves, social categories,
and social realities. At the same time, the general direction is one in which social theory is used
to provide a linguistic meta-discourse and in which the target is a refined and more powerful
Technique of text analysis
In this journal I found the practice of discourse on a methodological level:
1. Systemic-functional linguistics (historical research)
2. Discourse-historical method ( tracing the (inter-textual) history of phrases and arguments
3. The socio-semantic representation of social actors

A. Intended Audience

The type of audience is addressing university learners and researcher and general audience. This
is a specific field of study under Linguistics and literature, thus the intended audience must be
specific learners and researcher that interested on Linguistic and Literature fields.
It is also obviously understood from the publications that the aims of the audience are who
interested in linguistic, literature and English education but most of all, this paper appropriately
right for my needs.
B. Objective Reasoning
This journal covers some facts, hypotheses and interpretation of the author on the precede
theories proposed by the experts on the field the study.
Most the information appears valid and well-researched since it is discussing the coherencies,
correspondences and the pragmatics values of the study he conducted, all the information of the
data and theories here are fully supported by the evidences taken from the previous researches
and studies.
The idea and arguments more advanced in line with other works I have read on the same topics.
Even though I found the language the author use in the abstract of this paper is not free of
emotion arousing words such as: We provide an overview of the main thrusts of this movement,
discuss critically its main foci of attention, and situate it in a wider panorama of developments in
linguistics.
C. Coverage
The work updates other sources, substantiate other materials I have read, and add new
information. It extensively covers my topic.
Even though this material is secondary in the nature of this field of study but It contributes and
suggest a new paradigm on this study. This paper suggest us to look the Critical discourse
Analysis not positioned CDA as still burdened by a very "linguistic" outlook, which prevents
productive ways of incorporating linguistic and nonlinguistic dimensions of semiosis (apparent,
for instance, in the very partial interpretation of Foucault's" discourse" in Fairclough's work).
Here as well, a more ethnographically informed stance, in which linguistic practice is embedded

in more general patterns of human meaning-ful action, could be highly productive. Goodwin's
work could serve as an example here.
D. Writing Style
The publication is organized logically and the main point is clearly presented. The text is easy to
read and to understand. The author's argument is not repetitive but mostly he uses very clear
understanding words and more showing emphasizes to the wider thinking in this field of study.
The descriptions of the problem, in term of sentences, are always prove the by the A1 journals
marked.
D. Evaluative Reviews
To support my reasons and the thoughts of the writer I will locate critical reviews of
journals:
CDA practitioners tend to work on applied and applicable topics and social domains such as the
following.
1.

Political discourse See, for example, Wodak (1989), Chilton et al (1998), Fairclough
(1989, 1992a), and Fairclough & Mauranen (1997).

2.

Ideology Discourse is seen as a means through which (and in which) ideologies are
being reproduced. Ideology itself is a topic of considerable importance in CDA. Hodge
& Kress (1979) set the tone with their work. More recently, van Dijk (1998) has
produced a socio-cognitive theory of ideology.

3.

Racism Particular attention within this study is given to racism. Van Dijk stands out as
a prolific author (1987, 1991, 1993b), but the topic has also been covered by many
others (for a survey, see Wodak & Reisig l 1999). Related to the issue of racism is a
recent interest in the discourse on immigration (e.g. Martin Rojo & van Dijk 1997, van
Leeuwen & Wodak 1999).

4.

Economic discourse See, for example, Fairclough (1995b). The issue of globalization
has been formulated as an important preoccupation for CDA (Slembrouck 1993,
Chouliaraki & Fairclough 1999:94).

5.

Advertisement and promotional culture See, for example, Fairclough (1989, 1995b),
Slembrouck (1993), and Thorborrow (1998).

6.

Media language See, for example, Fairclough (1995a), van Dijk (1991), Kress (1994),
and Martin-Rojo (1995).

7.

Gender See especially the representation of women in the media (e.g. Talbot 1992;
Caldas-Coulthard 1 993, 1996; Clark& Zyngier 1998; Walsh 1998; Thorborrow 1998).

8.

Institutional discourse Language plays a role in institutional practices such as doctorpatient communication (e.g. Wodak 1997), social work (e.g. Wodak 1996, Hall et al
1997), and bureaucracy ( Sarangi& Slembrouck 1996)

9.

Education See, for example, Kress (1997) and Chouliaraki (1998). Education is seen as
a major area for the reproduction of social relations, including representation and
identity formation, but also for possibilities of change. Fairclough and associates have
developed a critical language awareness (CLA) approach that advocates the stimulation
of critical awareness with students of pedagogical discourses and didactic means (cf
Clark et al 1989, 1990; Fairclough 1992c, Ivanic 1998).

10.

Literacy CDA studies of literacy have linked up with those anthropological and
sociolinguistic analyses that view literacy as "situated practices" (e.g. Heath 1983,
Street 1995), e.g. in the context of local communities (Barton & Hamilton 1998) or
education (Baynham 1995, New London Group 1996, Cope & Kalantzis 2000).
Scholars working in these "new literacy studies" have joined efforts in a new book
series (Barton et al 2000, Cope & Kalantzis 2000, Hawisher & Selfe 2000).

All domains, issues of power asymmetries, exploitation, manipulation, and structural in

equalities are highlighted on this article; the positive review goes to the journal under review
considered as a valuable contribution to the field? It is also very informative and humble by
showing a valuable contribution to the field of Linguistic and Literature. Some of them are:

A New Critical Paradigm

1. Ideology One prominent feature is the development of ideology into a crucial topic of
investigation and theoretical elaboration
2. Inequality and Power a second feature of the critical paradigm is the renewed attention to
inequality and power in relation to language in society.
3. Social Theory a third feature of the critical paradigm, already mentioned in passing, is the
common desire to find social-theoretical support for analytical treatments of language

4. Assessing CDA
The above selective survey is aimed at demonstrating that CDA, as an original and
stimulating research discipline, should be situated within a wider panorama of common
concerns, questions, and approaches developing among a much wider scholarly
community.