Discourse analysis as critique

Nonhoff, Martin

doi:10.1057/palcomms.2017.74

Cited by 48 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 28 publications

(19 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Ideologies are "foundational beliefs" of social representations that are considered "the basis of discourse and other social practices" (van Dijk, 2006, p.116). In particular, critical discourse analysts seek to extrapolate the discursive structures and strategies which operationalize/(re)produce or resist particular relations of power, power abuse, dominance and injustice (Nonhoff, 2017;van Dijk, 1993), critiquing/unmasking power and ideology from a particular political, oppositional standpoint (Fairclough, 2010;Nonhoff, 2017;van Dijk, 1993;van Dijk, 2005). Critical discourse analysis requires a political/social ethic on part of the researcher to possess "critical adequacy" (van Dijk, 2005, p.19) and an explicit, oppositional stance to the status quo.…”

Section: Chapter 3 Methodology Critical Discourse Analysis (Cda): Language As Social Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

‘Such a white thing to do’: A discourse analysis of CAMH’s Coping with COVID-19 Campaign

Sullivan¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This major research paper is a modified critical discourse analysis of lived experience testimonials from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH)’s Coping with COVID-19 campaign. Social work practitioners and researchers must consider the inherent violence in the complex manifestations of sanism and racism (re)produced through discourse and their inextricable confluence with institutions, colonial legacies and realities which operate at this juncture in support of white supremacy. The identified discourses reproduce the ideal neoliberal subject and operate as technologies which maintain the colonial project and white supremacy. If we stake any claim to anti-racist praxis at this juncture, it is necessary to radically disclose our complicity within this colonial project, acknowledge our confluent realities and interrogate any claim to anti-racism. If we fail to interrogate these discourses constructing madness, we not only permit the violent trajectory of sanism but operationalize the deeply entrenched (re)production of violent white supremacy. key words: critical discourse analysis, sanism, racism, white supremacy, psychocentrism

show abstract

Section: Chapter 3 Methodology Critical Discourse Analysis (Cda): Language As Social Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

‘Such a white thing to do’: A discourse analysis of CAMH’s Coping with COVID-19 Campaign

Sullivan¹

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Foucault also discussed the discourse analyses in the Archaeology of Knowledge as an effective approach to view the clear picture using critical approach (Foucault, 1972). Nonhoff (2017) defined the relationship between discourse analysis and critique in two ways: (1) external and (2) integrated. The external relationship of discourse analysis and critique is expressed through core positions (Nonhoff, 2017).…”

Section: Discourse Analysis and Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nonhoff (2017) defined the relationship between discourse analysis and critique in two ways: (1) external and (2) integrated. The external relationship of discourse analysis and critique is expressed through core positions (Nonhoff, 2017). This concept is based on analysing social, political, and other problems with the critical perspectives, which is focused on ''real'' or "serious" problems using linguistic discourse analysis.…”

Section: Discourse Analysis and Critiquementioning

confidence: 99%

Use of Discourse Analysis in Various Disciplines

Manzoor¹,

Saeed²,

Panhwar³

2019

IJEL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The language plays an important role in the exchange of information and communication of knowledge of society, history, culture, traditions, and customs. Linguists analyse various uses of language to determine its impact and role in various domains of society such as media, politics, journalism, reporting, advertisement, war, criticism, and other such areas. Discourse analysis is associated with the use of language in various forms of communication such as written, spoken or signs of language. It helps in analysing how people say things, its impact on the audience, and how it affects the society, or the way society influences language/communication. This study aims to provide a systemic review of literature from various domains to determine how previous researchers explored discourse and language use in the society. The result reveals a strong connection between discourse analysis and language that reflect social practices and issues.

show abstract

“…Discourse researchers, therefore, should reflect on their own role in social struggles over truth (cf. Nonhoff, 2017;Parker, 2015).…”

Section: Towards the Strong Programme In Science And Technology Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Truth after post-truth: for a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies

Angermüller

2018

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary post-truth discourses put the constructivist foundations of Discourse Studies to a test. According to critical observers, discourse analysts have been playing into the hands of Trump, Brexit and right-wing populists by politicising scientific knowledge and undermining the idea of scientific truth. In order to respond to these concerns, this article outlines a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies. While the Strong Programme insists on truths as discursive constructions, in no way does it claim that all ideas have the same truth value or that an idea can become true because somebody wants it to be true. The Strong Programme makes the case for discourse research that is constructivist (it asks how truths are constructed practically) without being relativist (all ideas do not have the same normative quality). Taking inspiration from debates in Science and Technology Studies of the 1970s, the Strong Programme formulates principles for discourse researchers dealing with conflicting truth claims. Discourse analytical explanations of truths of first-order participants and of second-order observers should be symmetrical, heterogeneous, multi-perspectival and reflexive. The Strong Programme discourse research is grounded in the founding traditions of "French" and "Critical" Discourse Studies, which have struggled over questions of truth and reality since the beginning. While critically interrogating the structuralist heritage of these strands, the Strong Programme insists on the practices of making and unmaking ideas through language use no matter whether they appear as true or false to participants and observers. Discourse Studies are encouraged to critically reflect on how hierarchies between knowledges are not only represented but, through their representation, also constituted through discursive practices.

show abstract

Discourse analysis as critique

Cited by 48 publications

References 28 publications

‘Such a white thing to do’: A discourse analysis of CAMH’s Coping with COVID-19 Campaign

‘Such a white thing to do’: A discourse analysis of CAMH’s Coping with COVID-19 Campaign

Use of Discourse Analysis in Various Disciplines

Truth after post-truth: for a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About