Interdiskurstheorie/Interdiskursanalyse

Parr, Rolf

doi:10.1007/978-3-476-05717-4_40

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interdiscourse theory is based on the observation that, since about the middle of the 18th century, modern societies and their cultures have not only differentiated themselves into specific fields of knowledge, each with its special discourse, but in response to this, forms of speech have also developed, which, in turn, establish new connections between the specializations (see Link /Link-Heer 1990;Parr 2008;2013; the relevant research is listed in Parr/Thiele 2010). Interdiscourse theory thus essentially understands the social cohesion of modern societies as defined by the sum of the links that imaginatively transform "the practical division of labour into life lived in its totality" (Link 1983, 27, my translation), even if this totality must always remain fragmentary and fragile.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdiscourse Theory and the Analysis of Collective Symbols

Parr

2022

Metropolitan Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rolf Parr first outlines some basic premises of interdiscourse theory, which form the constitutive framework for the analysis of collective symbols. In a second step, he presents the system of collective symbols characteristic for Western Europe. It plays a major role in the perception of metropolises as well as in the images of metropolises communicated by the media and politics. Subsequently, a concrete example is discussed in order to illustrate the analysis of collective symbols and to illustrate the specific effectiveness of this analysis for metropolitan research. The chapter ends with some references to other concepts and Methods of metropolitan studies.

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interdiscourse Theory and the Analysis of Collective Symbols

Parr

2022

Metropolitan Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interdiscourse theory is based on the observation that, since about the middle of the 18th century, modern societies and their cultures have not only differentiated themselves into specific fields of knowledge, each with its special discourse, but in response to this, forms of speech have also developed, which, in turn, establish new connections between the specializations (see Link /Link-Heer 1990;Parr 2008;; the relevant research is listed in Parr/Thiele 2010). Interdiscourse theory thus essentially understands the social cohesion of modern societies as defined by the sum of the links that imaginatively transform "the practical division of labour into life lived in its totality" (Link 1983, 27, my translation), even if this totality must always remain fragmentary and fragile.…”

Section: Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Metropolitan Research. Methods and Approaches

Kunzmann¹

2022

disP - The Planning Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

He is co-founder and speaker of the Competence Field Metropolitan Research (KoMet) in the University Alliance Ruhr. His research areas include literary urban studies, theories and methods of urban and metropolitan research, model theory, literature and climate change as well as British literature of the 17th to the 21st centuries and contemporary US fiction. Rolf Parr (Prof. Dr.), born in 1956, is a professor of German Literature and Media Studies at Universität Duisburg-Essen. He is a member of the extended coordination circle of the Competence Field Metropolitan Research in the University Alliance Ruhr (KoMet). His research areas include literature, media and cultural theory/history of the 18th to 21st centuries, discourse theory and research on normalism, collective symbols, literature/media relations, television, medial representations of work, urban and metropolitan research. Dennis Hardt (Dipl.-Geogr.), born in 1984, is an urban geographer and regional planner in the Department of Regional Development at Regionalverband Ruhr. Before, he was coordinator of the Competence Field Metropolitan Research in the University Alliance Ruhr (KoMet) and researcher in the Department of Spatial Planning and Planning Theory at Technische Universität Dortmund. His research 1 For detailed discussions of the rewards, challenges and pitfalls of interdisciplinary collaboration, see the collections by Frickel/Albert/Prainsack 2017; Frodeman 2017; Menken/Keestra 2016; for a brief discussion of conceptual as well as practical challenges, cf. Gurr/Kluwick 2021.

show abstract

“…Collective symbols are an important tool in the popularization of knowledge. They comprise a limited ensemble of rhetorical figures that can be characterized as “empirically relatively stable, frequently recurring partial structures” (Parr, 2008, p. 203). Their cultural anchoring and imagery are easy to understand because these collective symbols or partial structures align themselves with self-evident references in wider circles of individuals.…”

Section: Theoretical Referencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visibilities and the Analysis of Interdiscourse: The Case of Digital Health Practices

Urban

2019

Qualitative Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This contribution examines the study of interdiscourses in visual discourse analysis. An expanded theory of interdiscursivity considers the integration, plausibility, and popularization of meanings, offering a perspective on ways of legitimating interventions and instructions or guidelines for action. Based on the reconstruction of meaning assignments, the expanded interdiscourse theory presented here opens up the possibility of tracing how power is exercised through the occupation of particular discourse positions, whether these are of a linguistic or of a pictorial/visual nature. With reference to poststructuralist theories, assignments of meaning are seen as inherently temporary and unstable. Whatever social reality is, it remains at least partially ambiguous and is determined anew in conflicts or tensions surrounding hegemonic negotiations. Visual discourse analysis thus focuses on the precarious nature of hegemony-building processes. How such adjustments of meaning through visualizations can be investigated within the framework of interdiscursive analysis is discussed using the example of the digitalization of body data via wearables.

show abstract

Interdiskurstheorie/Interdiskursanalyse

Cited by 4 publications

References 2 publications

Interdiscourse Theory and the Analysis of Collective Symbols

Interdiscourse Theory and the Analysis of Collective Symbols

Metropolitan Research. Methods and Approaches

Visibilities and the Analysis of Interdiscourse: The Case of Digital Health Practices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About