The concepts, oppositions, and hierarchies are constructed by power or social forces and, in turn, construct power. Discourses, serving specific interests, are conceived of ways of classifying and ordering by Foucault. Thus, it is the concepts, oppositions, and hierarchies which determine what is considered knowledge and truth or what is regarded normal and abnormal in a particular period. New Historicism employs Foucault’s technique of understanding a particular time’s episteme, i.e. the conventional mode of gaining and organizing knowledge which unites the diverse discourses and warrants their coherence within an underlying structure of implicit assumptions about the status of knowledge, to approach a literary text as a representation of or reaction to the power-structures in a given society.
Dijk (2006) in the article “Discourse and Manipulation” stated that manipulation is one of the vital ideas of Critical Discourse Analysis that requires encourage hypothetical analysis. Manipulation includes power, as well as particularly abuse of power, that is, dominance. All the more particularly, manipulation infers the activity of a type of illegitimate impact by methods for discourse, manipulators make others accept or do things that are in light of a legitimate concern for the manipulator, and against the best advantages of the manipulated. According to the researcher, an investigation of this power dimension includes a record of the sort of control that some social performing artists or gatherings practice over others. The researcher
claims to regard as “authorized heritage discourse“. From this it seems to follow that Graham and Howard (2008:3) suggests the notion of “heritages“ as a flexible process that seems to undergo a variety of changes that rely upon the notion of situational change mainly regarding politics as well as the notion of heritages as “both sources and results of social
This is where the production and construction of the text is made. The production of the message is affected by the different framework of knowledge. Hall mentioned that this is framed by the different meanings, ideas, professional ideologies, and institutional knowledge. In the case of
1.4: An Introduction to Discourse Analysis: Defining discourse depends on the subject area and the contextual use of language. Definition of discourse and discourse analysis depends on the epistemological stance of the theorist. It is used in different disciplines, in different ways, with different contents or the meanings of the concept. Discourse studies both the text and the context. Discourse analysis is essentially multidisciplinary.
The classification of conflict is often made on the basis of the antecedent conditions that lead to conflict. Conflict may originate from a number of sources, such as tasks, values, goals, and so on. It has been found appropriate to classify conflict on the basis of these sources for proper understanding of its nature and implications. Following is a brief description of this
It is the assumptions the researcher makes in his mind about the way in which the world works. ’The first aspect of ontology is objectivism. This portrays the position that social entities exist in reality external to social actors concerned with their existence. The second aspect, subjectivism, holds that social phenomena are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of
Paradigms are ways of perceiving the world in terms of both the problems that can be addressed and the evidence that may have a bearing on their solution, says, Margherita Ulrych, a translation scholar. He continues, when the existing paradigm accumulated so many defects that it essentially becomes untenable, the paradigm is challenged and replaced by new ways of perceiving the world. Translation studies also witness profound paradigm shifts in recent years along with literature, linguistics, social studies, cultural studies etc. This shift is from strictly comparing the original source text with the target text to descriptive translation studies, where many fundamental issues pertaining to historical, social and cultural compulsions which
2.2.3 Concept of Conversational Analysis Schiffrin illustrates conversational analysis as interactional sociolinguistics in its concern with the problem of social order, and how languages both creates and is created by social context Schiffrin (1994: 233). According to Levinson (1983:286), conversational analysis is sometimes regarded as distinct from discourse analysis which is a branch of study which sets out to discover what order there might be in this apparent chaos. 2.2.4 The Concept of Cohesion Halliday and Hassan in their book entitled cohesion in English according to them the concept of cohesion is a semantic one; it refers to the relation of meaning that exists within the text, and defines it as a text (Halliday and Hassan,
Although criticism has a long history in general, translation criticism based on a framework is almost a new discipline that carries some objectives stated from different views. Based on Wodak (2001), the purpose of CDA is "analyzing opaque as well as transparent structural relationships of dominance, discrimination, power and control as manifested in language. In other words, CDA aims to investigate critically social inequality as it is expressed, signaled, constituted, legitimized and so on by language use (or in discourse)" (p. 2). Then, Fairclough and Wodak (1997) elsewhere pronounce the aim of CDA as making "the ideological loading of particular ways of using language and the relations of power which underlie them more visible" (p. 258). In addition to the above cases, according to Bloor and Bloor (2007) the aims of critical discourse analysis are as