Approaches to Discourse

There are six dominant approaches to discourse analysis such as speech act theory, pragmatics, ethnomethodology, interactional sociolinguistics, ethnography of communication, and variation theory.

Speech Act Theory is a logico-philosophic perspective on conversational organization focusing on interpretation rather than the production of utterances in discourse. From the basic belief that language is used to perform actions. Every utterance can be analyzed as the realization of the speaker’s intent (illocutionary force) to achieve a particular purpose. Neither Austin nor Searle were concerned with the analysis of continuous discourse. (Austin 1955, Searle 1969)

Principal problems: the lack of a one-to-one match up between discourse function (IF) and the grammatical form. Systemic name : speech function (SF) – central issue in discourse structure.

Interactional Sociolinguistis grows out of the work of anthropologists. Centrally concerned with the importance of context in the production and interpretation of discourse. Units of analysis: grammatical and prosodic features in interactions. Gumperz demonstrated that interactants from different socio-cultural backgrounds may “hear” and understand discourse differently according to their interpretation contextualisation cues in discourse. E.g. intonation contours, ‘speaking for another’, alignment, gender. (Gumperz 1982, Goffman 1959-1981)

Schiffrin (1987): focused on quantitative interactive sociolinguistic analysis, esp. discourse markers (defined as ‘sequentially dependent elements which bracket units of talk). Schiffrin’s unit of analysis: turn.

Ethnography of Communication concerned with understanding the social context of linguistic interactions: ‘who says what to whom, when, where. Why, and how’. Prime unit of analysis: speech event. Definition: ‘The speech event is to what analysis of verbal interaction what the sentence is to grammar … It represents an extension in the size of the basic analytical unit from the single utterance to stretches of utterances, as well as a shift in focus from … text to … interaction’. (Dell Hymes (1972b, 1974)

Problem: Lack of explicitness in Hymes’ account on the relationship between genre and other components of the speaking grid and their expression in language. The ethnographic framework has led to broader notions of communicative competence.

Pragmatics formulates conversational behaviour in terms of general “principles” rather than rules. At the base of pragmatic approach is to conversation analysis is  Gricean’s co-operative principle (CP). This principle seeks to account for not only how participants decide what to DO next in conversation, but also how interlocutors go about interpreting what the previous speaker has just done. This principle is the broken down into specific maxims: Quantity (say only as much as necessary), Quality (try to make your contribution one that is true), Relation (be relevant), and manner (be brief and avoid ambiguity). (Grice 1975, Leech 1983, Levinson 1983)

Significant problem: it implies that conversations occur co-operatively, between equals where power is equally distributed etc.

Conversation Analysis (CA), Garfinkel (sociologist) concern: to understand how social members make sense of everyday life. Sack, Schegloff, Jefferson (1973)tried to explain how conversation can happen at all. CA is a branch of ethnomethodology. Two grossly apparent facts: a) only one person speaks at a time, and b) speakers change recurs. Thus conversation is a ‘turn taking’ activity. Speakers recognize points of potential speekar change – turn constructional unit (TCU). (Harold Garfinkel 1960s-1970s)

Major problems: a) lack of systematicity- thus quantitative analysis is impossible; 2) limited I its ability to deal comprehensively with complete, sustained interactions; 3) though offers a powerful interpretation of conversation as dynamic interactive achievement, it is unable to say just what kind of achievement it is.

Variation Analysis, L & W argue that fundamental narrative structures are evident in spoken narratives of personal experience. The overall structure of fully formed narrative of personal experience involves six stages: 1) Abstract, 2) Orientation, 3) Complication, 4) Evaluation, 5) Resolution, 6) Coda where 1) and 6) are optional. Strength: its clarity and applicability. (Labov 1972a, Labov and Waletzky1967)

Problems: data was obtained from interviews. Variationists’ approach to discourse stems from quantitative of linguistic change and variation. Although typically focused on social and linguistic constraints on semantically equivalent variants, the approach has also been extended to texts.