Wednesday, October 1, 2014

Thinking About Discourse Analysis

Over the past couple of days I have digested some information on discourse analysis.  The detail of this form of analysis is frightening. That is, I am not a detail oriented person, and I have some doubt when it comes to my ability to well carry out such an analysis.  Yet, I also appreciate this form of analysis much more than narrative analysis.

While I failed to see the potential of narrative analysis to yield much more additional information than other forms of analysis, what with recognizing and labeling parts in narratives likes climaxes and codas as in the study of great literary works, I feel that the detail imbedded in discourse analysis has potential to yield significant information to include, perhaps, otherwise overlooked information.  For as Gee (1999) highlights intonation, pause, formality of address, and word choice may all be significant, though “the purposes of the analyst [determine] how narrow or broad the transcript must be” (p. 88).  Thus, discourse may be very detailed, but to me it serves a practical purpose.

Furthermore, mention Foucault and Marx in association with a method of analysis, as Grbich (2013) does, and I am instantly more interested.  As Grbich notes, discourse analysis aims at uncovering “the rules, assumptions, ways of seeing, hidden motivations, conditions for development and change, and how and why these changes occurred or were resisted” (p. 246).  For instance, this form of analysis is very good for investigating why individuals support capitalism or another system, such as religion, as well as values and assumptions attributed to their perspectives.

While I find this method carries the burden of considerable detail (as previously noted), I would certainly find it compatible with critical theory.  I also think it could compliment a phenomenological method nicely.  After all, phenomenology studies experience, and this method of analysis investigates assumptions that shape the experience, as well as inflection or strength of feeling about experience.

Gee, J. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. NY: Routledge.

Grbich, C. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: An introduction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,  CA: Sage.

1 comment:

  1. Interesting, Jennifer... I don't think I have ever seen phenomenology paired with discourse analysis but l won't rule it out. pPhenom falls more in line with postpositivism and DA in the post-structural realm, so it might be hard to put the two together in terms of methodology in the same study.

    ReplyDelete