Education 645: Methods of Discourse Analysis
Fall 2007, Wednesdays
GSE 429, 898-6307
http://www.gse.upenn.edu/~stantonw
Discourse analysis is a broad and complex interdisciplinary field. It includes somewhat diverse theoretical and methodological approaches from linguistics, anthropology, and sociology. All approaches to discourse share a commitment to studying language in context. But “context” is notoriously indeterminate, and different approaches to discourse analysis emphasize different aspects of context as potentially relevant to understanding language use.
This course focuses on several important methodological approaches that have been developed to do discourse analysis. Methods are motivated by and intertwined with theories, so the course inevitably addresses some theoretical issues. But the course intends primarily to provide students with methodological tools for studying naturally-occurring speech.
Because of its methodological goals, the course involves both reading and data analysis exercises. The course introduces a few approaches to understanding the relations between linguistic categories and social life, spending more time on conceptual issues earlier in the semester. Then it alternates between further reading and opportunities to analyze data. Some classes are set aside as data analysis sessions, in which data provided by the instructor or the students is analyzed in detail.
Students are expected to: (1) do the reading and come to class; (2) prepare the sample analyses for data analysis sessions—both preparing analyses for each session and taking responsibility for one session, including handing in a sample analysis for evaluation; (3) complete a larger piece of discourse analysis by the end of the term. This final paper should be primarily empirical, using techniques from one or more of the approaches to analyze a transcript of naturally occurring conversation or a piece of written discourse found in the social world. The paper should also include a brief discussion of why you chose the approach(es) you did—citing the strengths and weaknesses of these approaches for particular purposes. Deadlines for the project are: by October 3, a one page description of the data you plan to use; by November 7, a brief two page excerpt from the data analysis you are working on; by December 12, the final project. Grades will be determined using the following rule-of-thumb: 70% final paper; 30% completion of weekly analyses and class discussion.
When preparing your discourse analyses, you might try the coding program (“Coder”) available at www.wagsoft.com. Or you can use a qualitative data analysis program like NVivo (www.qsrinternational.com). You will have to tailor any software to your specific form of discourse analysis and use judgment in analyzing the data—there is no automated way to do complex discourse analyses of the sort we will discuss.
Blommaert, J.
(2005). Discourse. NY:
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. NY: Routledge.
Gee, J. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. NY: Routledge.
Schegloff, E.
(2007). Sequence organization in interaction.
NY:
September 5 Introduction
Consult the following books for
an overview of the field, whenever it is helpful. These books are on reserve, but you do not
have to read them if you do not find them useful.
Cameron, D. (2001). Working with spoken discourse.
Sage.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse.
Titscher, S. et al. (2000). Methods of text and discourse analysis.
September 12 Text and Context I
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse. NY:
September 19 Text and Context II
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse. NY:
He, A. (2000). Discourse analysis. In M. Aronoff & J. Rees-Miller
(Eds.), The handbook of linguistics (pp. 428-445).
Rampton, B. (2006). Language in late modernity. NY:
(
September 26 Conversation
Analysis I
First, do the transcription tutorial at
http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/soc/faculty/schegloff/TranscriptionProject/index.html
Schegloff,
E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction.
NY:
October 3 Conversation
Analysis II
Schegloff,
E. (2007). Sequence organization in interaction.
NY:
Pomerantz, A. & Fehr, B.J. (1997). Conversation analysis. In T. van
Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction.
See also the resources on CA available at http://www2.fmg.uva.nl/emca/resource.htm
Workshop #1: bring text analyses
October 10 Linguistic Anthropology I
Silverstein, M. (1985). On the pragmatic "poetry" of prose.
In D.
Schiffrin, ed., Meaning, form and use in context.
Wortham, S. (2001). Narratives in action (Ch. 2-4). NY: Teachers
College.
Wortham, S. (1996). Deictic mapping. Journal of Pragmatics, 25, 331-
348.
October 17 Linguistic Anthropology II
Wortham, S. (2003). Linguistic anthropology of education. In
& B. Rymes (Eds.), Linguistic
anthropology of education.
Modan,
G. (2007). Turf wars.
Workshop
#2: bring text analyses
October 24 Critical Literacy I
Gee, James. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. NY: Routledge.
October 31 Critical Literacy II
Gee,
J. (1991). A linguistic approach to narrative. Journal of Narrative
and Life History, 1, 15-39.
Hymes, D. 1996. Ethnopoetics and sociolinguistics. In D. Hymes,
Ethnography, linguistics, narrative
inequality.
Workshop #3: bring
text analyses
November 7 Critical Discourse Analysis I
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse. NY: Routledge.
November 14 Critical Discourse Analysis II
Fairclough, N. (2000). Discourse, social theory,
and social research: the
discourse of welfare reform. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 4: 163-195.
McKenna, B. & Graham, P. (2000).
Technocratic discourse: A primer.
Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 30: 219-247.
If you are interested, also browse http://www.languageandcapitalism.info/
Workshop
#4: bring text analyses
November 21 Workshop
#5 & #6
Bring text analyses
November 28 No
Class (AAA)
Continue to work on your own text analyses
December 5 Social Semiotics
Stillar, G. (1998). Analyzing everyday texts.
(Ch. 2, pp.14-57)
Halliday, M.A.K.
(1994). An introduction to functional
grammar (2nd Ed.).
Baldry, A. &
Thibault, P. (2006). Multimodal
transcription and text analysis.
See also the “appraisal” website for more detail
on how systemic functional linguistics analyzes evaluative positioning:
http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/
December 12 Final projects due