Approaches to Analyzing Discourse - Essay Example

………………………………………………………………………..xxxxxx ………………………………………………………………….xxxxx ………………………………………………………………….xxxxx ……………………………………………………………………xxxxx @2013 Approaches to analyzing discourse Introduction Discourse analysis is the analyzing of written materials, vocals or even signs to understand the language. Different approaches are used to understand a particular language. The approaches used to understand a sign language is not the same as the approaches used to understand vocal or written language. To analyze the languages one should know the topic of interest whether it is political, whether it is a business and so forth (Jørgensen & Phillips 2009). The subject in the matter should be understood, and so is the theme of the language. One has to learn the sign language in order to understand it and get to analyze it. One has to know how to speak a particular language in order for them to get to understand and be able to analyze the vocal language. One should be able to read and write in order for one to understand and be able to analyze written materials (Jørgensen & Phillips 2009). Theories in relation to discourse Relevance theory This is one of the theories that help one in analyzing discourse. Like the name suggests it is very important for one to know why he or she is analyzing the particular language, is it to benefit a person or others. Is the analysis meant to help others or is it just for your own understanding? The relevance theory enables one to know the reasons of conducting the analysis then steps to follow when conducting the analysis (Wodak et.al 2012). The writing language according to the relevance theory is a very broad field. One has to generalize on the subject that one wants to understand and dig deep. The subject will help one narrow down the specific topics one wants to analyze and to what extend one wants to go with the research (Tannen 2012). The Subject or what one is passionate about is the most important thing here. For instance, if one wants to know about the politics of America, the topic is too broad, but it is the guide to what exactly one want to know about the American politics. Then one can decide on the exact thing one wants to know about the American politics (Tannen 2012). Let us say someone wants to know about the first president of America and how it was being the president. This makes work easier for one because one can now gather the relevant reading materials of the particular topic and analyze them. The written materials are available, and the particular topic has probably been researched by many. A lot has been written, but one has to choose the right materials not just anything that has been written about the topic (Marston 2011). Relevance theory suggests that the structure and context of discourse analysis should be the key things in deciding on what materials to use. Does the material one is using have the context that is being needed? If yes, then it is the right material to use (Hardy & Bryman 2009). The vocal language dwells on the ability to hear and understand. The vocal language that one wants to analyze should be familiar. One cannot analyze something that one cannot understand. The vocal language depends on what one wants to hear, and the interest one has regarded the topic in discussion (Hardy & Bryman 2009). When analyzing this language, most of the time it is about how the topic is being put across rather than the topic itself. The way the topic is put across and choice of words is the major thing about vocal language analysis (Wodak 2011). When there is a public hearing most people gather to listen to the speech, but not everyone is there to listen to the speech but to see the movement the speaker makes during the speech. Some speakers prefer to break the silence by making the audience participate. They either ask the audience some questions or crack some jokes as they give the speech so as to make the crowd laugh. By so doing, the mood of the audience changes breaking the tension (Hearn & Salter 2009). The vocal language is more of analyzing the ways of communicating to people and the choice of words to use when talking to a particular audience. The way one addresses kids is not the same way one addresses adults. The way one addresses learned people is not the same way one addresses unlearned people. One has to put him or herself to the same level as them in order for one to put the message across (Wodak 2011). Otherwise, it will be a waste of time both for the speaker and for the audience. The sign language is a language like any other. It is just like trying to learn English. The use of hands helps in understanding and communicating the language. For one to analyze the language the language, one has to have to understand the particular signs that are used to communicate. It is not necessary for one to be deaf of dumb in order to learn and understand the language. It can be taught or read like any other discipline (Hardy & Bryman 2009). Sign language is mostly used by those who want to communicate, but they cannot either talk or hear; dumb or deaf. For one to learn more about these people and to reach out to them, one has to learn how to communicate to them. Know how to say hallo using sign language and to socialize with them so as to get what one wants (Hearn & Salter 2009). If the aim of the analysis is to know the language then being close to them is not that important but if one wants to know about the users of the language, the challenges they encounter then it is important to mingle with them and learn more (Asp &Villers 2010). Critical theory Critical theory is talks more about the important aspects of the analysis. This theory suggests that in order for one to analyze any of the language one has to know what it is that one wants with the analysis (Hearn & Salter 2009). The relevance theory is more of the reason for the analysis, but the critical theory is more of the importance of the analysis. The weight of the importance of the language is what will guide the analysis. This is what will determine the depth of the analysis and the right materials to choose (Tannen 2012). When it comes to the writing language the importance of the particular topic is what matters a lot. The writing materials used to deliver the message and so forth. Writing material become important if the materials make sense and give what one wants with the analysis (Tannen 2012). Suppose one wants to know what happened to the first president of Kenya then the only material that will make sense is the one that talks about that particular topic. The main thing about this theory relative to discourse analysis is how they describe him. The language they have used to describe the first President of Kenya and how the truth in it (Asp &Villers 2010). Different materials will communicate differently regarding the topic of choice depending on how the writers felt at the time they were writing. Writing is more about feeling about the topic one is writing about than what other people think. In order to write one must feel something about the topic so as to express ones thought in the form of a written piece (Renkema 2009). The importance of the analysis could be whether they have written good things about him or whether they have written bad things about him. Get to know what they have used to describe his good deeds for those writers who thought he was a good leader or person in general (Marston 2011). For those who think he was not then get to find out how they have expressed this feeling and the kind of message the writers want the reader to get. All these depend on the weight of the importance of the subject matter and how important it is especially to the fellow reader (Hardy & Bryman 2009). When it comes to the vocal language in order for one to maybe analyze on the same topic; about the first president of Kenya, one will get information on what people say about this particular president (Wodak et.al 2012). Their choice of words when talking is what will answer your questions and most importantly what will help one to analyze the language well. It is difficult for people to express their negative thoughts about a particular subject, but their choice of words will tell a person whether it is negative or not. These people will be ironical or sarcastic about the topic or use negative adjectives as they talk (Hearn & Salter 2009). Some will try to laugh at the situations that are not supposed to be laughed at because they are not supposed to be funny. These entire things are the ones that will help one gather information about vocal language and the different technique that is used to put across different subject (Jørgensen & Phillips 2009). The vocal language is also depended on the audience. The level of the audience will determine the words that they will use regarding the subject matter. It is important to get the right information from the right people. One cannot definitely get the right information about the first president of Kenya if one asks small children (Hardy & Bryman 2009). This is because they will only tell one what they have read in school or simply what they have been told by their parents. Worst will be if they give the answer depending on what other people say and so do not know which one is the true version (Wodak et.al 2012). The last type is the analyzing sign language. The sign language in the critical theory also needs to be led by the importance of the language. The analysis of the sign language can be got when talking. Most of people make movements with their hands, whole body or the head (Wodak et.al 2012). These movements say a lot regarding the subject matter and whether they like or dislike the particular topic. Circumstances could force him or her to say a positive thing, but he or she does not feel this way. Even though they are saying positive things about the topic the facial expression will show otherwise. These are the things that are to be dwelt on when analyzing the sign language. Get to know whether they are talking from what they feel or the circumstances they are in. The other way of analyzing the sign language is communicating with the deaf and the dumb through the sign language. Get to know their views regarding a particular topic. Even though, they will be communicating through sign language, the way they express them also matters a lot and will tell whether they have positive or negative opinion about the particular subject (Tannen 2012). It is the body movement that tells more about the feeling of the subject in the sign language analysis than what they say. It is therefore very important to get a note of the movement more than words. Choice of which theory to use in analytic task The choice to make while analyzing a particular task will be determined by whether the analysis is being done because of its relevance or its importance. This will help select the right theory and to be able to apply it in the analysis (Hardy & Bryman 2009). The task is also important when it comes to the choice of the theory to use. What is needed in the task and how it is supposed to be done is what will determine the choice of the theory to use (Hardy & Bryman 2009). Application of the relevance theory The word of mouth is a powerful thing, and it can also be the one thing that will destroy someone. It is therefore very important to know the right words to say before people; think before talking. While conducting an analysis on the spoken discourse the choice of words is very important to look at and the particular place that the subject is being talked about (Wodak 2011). The place, the time and the event is another aspect that should be considered when analyzing spoken discourse. This is because people will give different opinions about the subject matter depending on where they are and the occasion (Asp &Villers 2010). For instance, the president of America is Barrack Obama. Him being the president one wants to do a spoken analysis on whether the Americans like their president or not. The first step is to get the right questions that one want answered and why one wants these particular answers (Hearn & Salter 2009). This could be for the purpose of news if one is a journalist, or it could be for other reasons. The next step is to get to know where to get your answers from. The audience will matter because they are the determinants of the answer (Asp &Villers 2010)? It is therefore very important to choose the right audience for your answer. We then decide that the right people to get the information from are the people who have attained the voting age. This is because they got to select who they wanted and they selected why. They are therefore the right people to ask and the right people to get answers from (Tannen 2012). The other step is to know how to approach the audience and how to ensure that they give the right and genuine answer (Wodak et.al 2012). Many people would therefore think about how they will dress up, and the right way to frame a question without offending them or being in a way being disrespectful. The way one dresses up when approaching people will also determine whether they will give the right and genuine answers or they will give the answers that they think one wants to hear (Marston 2011). Some people will also feel offended when one dresses up in a particular manner. It is therefore very important to dress up in a way that one caters for all the audience to avoid miscommunication. The Last but not the least is to do the actual analysis go one on one with the chosen audience and try to get the information that you want. Try to be convincing so as to ensure one gets the information (Hardy & Bryman 2009). One should remember that the key things to remember are what they say but not how they say. This could be different for most people because different people talk differently. Some people are always excited about anything and in some way that might make one think that they like him but in actual sense they do not. The way they say it is different from what they say. This is why one should be focused to avoid misinterpretation (Tannen 2012). When one is back from the field one will have gathered enough to know not much about the president but the very many ways of expressing positive thoughts by word of mouth as well as the very many ways that people use to express negative thoughts about someone or something (Jørgensen & Phillips 2009). The way people try to disguise in order to appear friendly and what they go through in order to give the particular opinion just the way they want it. People say things for different reasons and purpose depending on the people, venue and purpose of saying it (Hardy & Bryman 2009). When it comes to the written discourse, let us assume one is doing the same research about whether the Americans love their president. The first step is getting the right questions that one wants answered in this case is how Americans feel about their president. (Tannen 2012). The next step is to know where to get the materials to answer the questions. The written materials are many and available. All that is needed is to be able to select the right ones for work and be able to analyze. The last step is going through the materials in order to get the answers (Hardy & Bryman 2009). After gathering the information one wanted from the relevant materials, one has chosen one will then analyze the different ways that people use to express their feelings and the choice of words when they are doing so. The negative thought will be expressed differently, and the positive thoughts will be expressed differently depending on the subject of interest (Jørgensen & Phillips 2009). The written discourse is easier to do than the spoken discourse. This is because the spoken discourse can easily be tampered with in the sense that one can be given different answers depending on the time, venue and occasion (Wodak et.al 2012). The person conducting it can also determine the answers that he or she will be given. The reason for the analysis can also lead to the deviation of the answers because the way the questions are framed  also determine whether one will get the right answers or not. The written discourse is however different from the spoken discourse in the sense that the materials are already there. It is for one to determine the materials that are relevant and use them. The way one interprets them is for one to decide (Hearn & Salter 2009). The writer’s feelings cannot be changed because the writing is already done. This is because the writings can only be changed if the writer decides to write about the subject matter and decide to change the feeling he or she had towards the subject matter. This will also depend on the message that the writer wants the readers to get (Asp &Villers 2010). Conclusion In conclusion, the discourse analysis is not about the theory that one is using, or language that one is using it is about the end product that determines all. If one wants the end product of the analysis to be negative, then one shall get exactly that, if one wants the end product to be positive then one shall get exactly that (Asp &Villers 2010). That is why the two theories concentrated on the end product; what one wants to achieve at the end of all (Asp &Villers 2010). The relevance theory is the theory that will give one the desired end product. Relevance of the discourse analysis is what guides one on which method to use, how to approach the method and how to go about it. Like in determining on how people feel about the American president, it is better using the written discourse than the spoken discourse. References Asp, E. D., & Villiers, J. D. 2010. When language breaks down: analysing discourse in clinical contexts. Cambridge, UK, Cambridge University Press. Hardy, M. A., & Bryman, A. 2009. Handbook of data analysis. Los Angeles, SAGE. Hearn, A. M. V., & Salter, L. 2009. Outside the lines issues in interdisciplinary research. Montreal [Que.], McGill-Queens University Press. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10135180. Jenner, B., Meyer, M., Titscher, S., Vetter, E., & Wodak, R. 2012. Methods of text and discourse analysis. London [u.a.], SAGE Publications. Jørgensen, M. W., & Phillips, L. J. 2009. Discourse analysis as theory and method. London [u.a.], SAGE. Marston, G. 2011. Social policy and discourse analysis: policy change in public housing. Aldershot, Hants, England, Ashgate. Phillips, N., & Hardy, C. 2009. Discourse analysis: investigating processes of social construction. Thousand Oaks, Calif. [u.a.], Sage Renkema, J. 2009. Discourse, of course: an overview of research in discourse studies. Amsterdam, John Benjamins Pub. Co. Tannen, D. 2012. Analyzing discourse: text and talk. Washington, Georgetown U.P. Wodak, R. 2011. A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis: theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity. Amsterdam [u.a.], Benjamins. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. 2009. Methods of critical discourse analysis. Los Angeles, SAGE. Read More