Critical Discourse Analysis regards language as a social practice (Wodak & Meyer, 2001, p. 2). It is a form of sociolinguistics. It considers the context of language use to be crucial (Wodak & Meyer, 2001, p. 2). As mentioned in the above paragraph that synthetic personalisation is not necessarily used in adverts only but in any text that has the function to persuade; so does Critical Discourse Analysis. It considers political, gender, institutional and also media discourses.
Rhetorical analysis is an investigation into how someone uses his/her critical reading skills to analyze text. The objective of the rhetorical analysis is the study of how the author writes, instead of what the author wrote. At that point, we need to examine the method that the author uses to attain his goal. According to Jonah G. Willihnganz “A rhetorical analysis is an examination of how a text persuades us of its point of view. It focuses on identifying and investigating the way a text communicates, what strategies it employs to connect to an audience, frame an issue, establish its stakes, make a particular claim, support it, and persuade the audience to accept the claim”.
From 1980s onwards the concept of discourse became popular through the writing of Foucault which was then followed by other poststructuralists. The etymology of discourse is as follows: the word ‘Discourse’ is originated from Latin word ‘discursus’, meaning "running to and from" which denotes written and spoken communications. To be more precise and clear, discourse means discussion or information or communication. Michel Foucault says that discourse means “an entity of sequences, of signs, in that they are enouncements (énoncés)”. Foucault in order to study the structures of society and social reality he made use of the role of discourse and language in shaping the same.
It examines how texts are used to reflect and maintain dominant ideologies while suppressing those which do not fall within these ideologies. Moreover, discourse analysis is an interpretive process and is, therefore, subjective. As a result, the interpretation formed from the researcher’s
(Porter 1986, p. 397). In relation to discourse communities, intertextuality is important in assisting writers to conform to the social setting, enabling them to make reasonings that will not distance the individuals from the community, guide them to construct the logical decisions that are in comparison with the philosophy of the group, and become more aware of the peculiarities of a discourse community the more that they socialize. In addition, "acceptability is the key standard for analyzing a writing within a discourse community" (Porter 1986, p. 405). Therefore, a writer's achievement is estimated by their capacity to recognize what can be presupposed, and obtain the community's patterns adequately to make a text that adds to the support or conceivably of the community's
As Luke (2002: 96) notes, CDA is “an explicitly normative analysis of how texts and discourses work in ideological interests with powerful political consequences”. CDA is mainly concerned with social issues and problems, thus attempts to understand how language or more properly, discourse, figures in social interactions on the assumptions that language use is socially determined and therefore intimately connected to relations of power. It argues that power relations are discursive; that discourse serves ideological and hegemonic purposes and hence mediates the link between text and society. In the words of one of its founders, critical discourse analysis
The discourse evolved interaction between the teacher and his or her students in teaching and learning process. 1.7.4 Discourse Analysis According Johnstone (2008), discourse analysis is an analytical process in a relatively explicit way. The analysis can include aspects of the structure and function of language in use. 1.7.5 Textual Analysis In this study, the discourse analysis is specifically focusing on the textual analysis. According to Fairclough (1992), the interaction between the teacher and students in a classroom discourse is mainly focusing at the specific levels of organization such as in turn taking, topic selection and
In literature, rhetoric devices are used to add dimension, meaning, and depth to a text. Eric Warner and Graham Hough, the editors of Strangeness and Beauty: An Anthology of Aesthetic criticism, states that, “symbolism in literature really is: a form of expression” (page 242). Literature is seen as a form of communication for writers to convey their ideas. Symbolism provides a text to be read at two separate levels. The first level would be read superficially since interpretation is only done at surface level.
The spoken data will be collected from two famous TV channels, Geo News and ARY News, for the whole span of this event. The data will be taken in the original language Urdu in which it was produced to analyze the hidden ideologies more precisely. Model of Analysis – Fairclough’s Three Dimensional Model of Critical Discourse Analysis: A three dimensional analysis of discourse is an approach of critical discourse analysis by Norman Fairclough (1992b; 1995a; 1998; 2000), this will be used as a model of analysis I the present study. This model of analysis includes three levels or dimensions of analysis: 1) Micro level analysis: at this level textual analysis is made to describe the text. 2) Meso level of analysis: this level moves towards discourse analysis to describe the relationship of discourse produced and its source of production i.e.