Article Title：Explanation, interpretation and critique in the analysis of discourse
Abstract：
The first half of this article offers an assessment of critical discourse analysis, as developed since the 1980s and understood at the time in terms of a much-needed departure from predominantly descriptive modes of linguistic enquiry, which prevented an adequate thematization of power, inequality and ideology. In this review I draw attention to some enduring tensions in the model's aspirations between (1) being an interpretative mode of enquiry which inevitably adopts a discourse participant's point of view, (2) offering social-theoretically informed explanations of discourse which overcome limitations inherent in a participant's outlook and (3) formulating an interventionist programme of emancipation which prioritizes dialogue with institutional members. With an eye to relieving some of these tensions, I explore, in the second half of my article, what might bu gained from a dialogic confrontation with reflexive research traditions within linguistic anthropology. In particular, recent work on the 'natural historics of discourse' takes the situatedness of entextualizations of discourse-in-context as one of its main forces of enquiry.
Keywords: critical discourse analysis; critique; institutional intervention; natural history of discourse; (re)contextualization/entextualization
DOI: 10.1177/0308275X0102100103
Source：CRITIQUE OF ANTHROPOLOGY
Welcome to correct the error, please contact email: humanisticspider@gmail.com
