LECTURE 8: CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS (CDA) 1.

Background - The roots of CDA lie in classical Rhetoric, Textlinguistics and Sociolinguistics,
as well as in Applied Linguistics and Pragmatics. The notions of ideology, power, hierarchy
and gender together with sociological variables were all seen as relevant for an interpretation
or explanation of text. Gender issues, issues of racism, media discourses, political
discourses, organizational discourses or dimensions of identity research have become very
prominent (Wodak, 2002:6).

Concerning the difference between CDA and DA, Rogers (2004:3) claims that CDA differs
from other discourse analysis methods in that it includes not only a description and
interpretation of discourse in context, but also offers an explanation of why and how
discourses work (as cited in Amoussou & Allagbe, 2018:12)

The CDA takes a particular interest in the relationship between language and power. The
term CDA is used nowadays to refer more specifically to the critical linguistic approach of
scholars who find the larger discursive unit of text to be the basic unit of communication
(Weiss & Wodak, 2002:12).

2. Power and Ideology 2.1.

Power - Power is central and endemic to socio-political discourse. It is through power that
one is able to constitute social order or ideology. It is defined as “the ability of people and
institutions to control the behaviors and material lives of others” (Fowler, Hodge, Kress and
Trew, 1979:61).

Regarding van Dijk’s perspective on power (1998), he argues that a social group is
considered as having power when it has the privileges to obtain sparse social resources
such as fame, wealth, knowledge, information, etc. and the capability to influence the
thinking and action of other groups. He continues saying that power has significant
characteristics and can be divided into different genres, and each genre contains several
levels of influence in overmastering others. Furthermore, there is rarely any absolute power.
It may be unlikely that powerful people possess unconditional dominance. Thus, power does
not always belong to a certain group of people.

In the social and political context, texts and talks reenact, reproduce, and resist social power
abuse, domination, and inequality (van Dijk, 2003). In other words, power is omnipresent that
no language-in-use can ever be neutral or objective (Fairclough, 1989) and no discourse can
ever be free of power and the exercise of power (Watts, 1992, as cited in Michael Karlberg,
2005). - In order to clarify the interrelation between power and discourse, there are two
expressions: power in discourse and power behind discourse. The former concerns
discourses as the place that relations of power are implemented. It is said to appear in lexical
and syntactical structures such as speech acts. The latter focuses on how orders of
discourse are created and constituted by relations of power. In this genre of power, it is
described as where “the whole social order of discourse is put together and held together as
a hidden effect of power to influence/change” (Fairclough, 1989:55)

2.2. Ideology
Ideology is considered as one of the centrals in CDA since language is a concrete form of
ideology, and is heavily affected by ideology. “Ideology is located both in structures which
constitute the outcome of past events and the conditions for current events, and in events
themselves as they reproduce and transform their conditioning structures” (Fairclough,
1995:72).

“Besides their social function of sustaining the interests of groups, ideologies have the
cognitive function of organizing the social representations (attitude, knowledge) of the group,
and thus indirectly monitor the group-related social practice; and hence also the text and talk
of its members” (van Dijk, 1993:256)

3. Rhetoric: ethos, pathos, logos

The term rhetoric itself was derived from the Greek word “rhetor”, which means “speech”.
Aristotle defines rhetoric as the means of persuasion. - “Rhetoric is the faculty of observing in
any given case the available means of persuasion” (Aristotle, 1355b:27-28). Then Aristotle
identifies three kinds of proofs which help to persuade the audience by speech. - Rhetoric is
used to display communication in a persuasive sense, and is also a tool for one to study
such a communication. Rhetoric is used both as an analytical methodology and a direct
guide to produce discourses that are persuasive in nature (Eyman, 2015:45).

3.1. Ethos
Ethos is a style of a speaker by help of which he or she appeals to and tries to attract the
attention of audience to earn their faith. Ethos refers to the trustworthiness or credibility of the
writer or speaker. If the speaker is persuasive the audience follows him or her. It means
convincing by the character of an orator (speaker), which leads to persuasion (according to
Chain Perelman orator is the one who exclaims verbal discourse and even the one who does
it in the written way) (Mshvenieradze, 2013:1940).

Ethos refers to the trustworthiness or credibility of the writer or speaker. If the speaker is
persuasive the audience follows him or her. In his discourse Aristotle calls Ethos the face of
the orator which would impact on audience by words, in other words it is a “face created by
the discourse”. This is conditioned by the fact that the orator earns the credibility only in case
if his or her arguments are competent, reliable, fair and frank.

It is utilized “when the speech is delivered in such a manner as to render the speaker worthy
of confidence. It is identified when the speaker makes him/herself credible to the hearers
through “personal character, trustworthiness, truthfulness, reputation, or all of this” (Donahue
& Prosser, 1997:154)

3.2. Pathos - Pathos is the power with which the writer's (speaker’s) message moves the
audience to his or her desirable emotional action. Thus a good orator should know for sure
which emotion would effectively impact the audience considering their social status, age and
other features. It is important to know not only how the orator can express but how he or she
can by help of discourse cause favorable emotions, like anger, insult, empathy, fear,
confusion, etc. (Amossy, 2000:178)
3.3. Logos - Logos means persuading by the use of reasoning which includes critical
cognition, analytical skills, good memory, and purposeful behavior, which is the most
important argumentation. For Aristotle Logos is rationale, logical and argumentative
discourse (Mshvenieradze, 2013:1939).
Logos is speech itself, it proves or seems to prove. It is utilized “when we establish the true
or apparently true from the means of persuasion applicable to each individual subject”. It is
identified when the speaker uses “logical reasoning” to persuade the hearers to act (Herrick,
2016:78- 79).

4. Metaphor - Metaphor is a way of representing something in terms of something else. The

identification and analysis of metaphors are often used as a way of revealing ideologies or
discourses surrounding a subject (Baker & Ellege, 2011:70). - Metaphor, as defined by
Lakoff & Johnson (1980), is a tool to provide a link between the source domain and the target
domain. Source domains are usually concrete or familiar objects in the physical world, while
target domains are abstract or unknown concepts. The phenomenon of metaphor occurs
when humans take conceptual characteristics of the source domain to clarify the target
domain.

5. Modality and Hedging 5.1. Modality

Modality has been categorized in many ways, but here we distinguish three (Machin & Mayr,
2012:187-188) + Epistemic modality (Tình thái nhận thức): This is to do with the speaker’s/
author’s judgement of the truth of any proposition. So if I say “I may have a beer tonight”, I
am expressing uncertainty about the proposition “I am having a beer tonight”. Slightly more
certainty is expressed in the proposition “I will probably have a beer tonight”. In other words,
epistemic modals show how certain you are something will happen, or is the case.
+ Deontic modality (Tình thái bổn phận/đạo nghĩa): This is to do with influencing people and
events. So if I say “Students must do the essay”, I am expressing greater influence than if I
say “Students may do the essay”. Deontic modals are therefore about how we compel and
instruct others.
+ Dynamic modality (Tình thái năng động): This is related to possibility and ability, but is not
subjective in the manner of the first two modalities. For example, if we say “I can do this
essay” or “Tomorrow I will go to the dentist” or “You can eat your lunch in this room”, I am not
so much expressing my judgement nor attempting to influence others, but indicating an
ability to complete an action or the likelihood of events. - Modality can also be associated
with hedging terms, such as “I think”, “kind of/ sort of”, “seems”, or “often”. This becomes
clear in the difference between:

+ This is the correct procedure.

+ I think this might be the correct procedure

5.2. Hedging

- Hedging means that a speaker avoids directness or commitment to something, although,

as we will see, this can often be used to give the impression of being detailed and precise.
Hedging can be used to distance ourselves from what we say and to attempt to dilute the
force of our statements and therefore reduce chances of any unwelcome responses (Machin
& Mayr, 2012:192).
- Hedging can also serve the important role of giving the impression that the opposite is
taking place, that they are increasing the level of explanation and clarification, rather than
obfuscating it (Machin & Mayr, 2012:193).
- Long noun phrases
- Modal verbs and adverbs such as “may”, “perhaps”, and auxiliary verbs such as “seems to”
and adverbs such as “especially” - Approximators “some”, “somewhat” and the compounding
of these “to a somewhat lesser extent”
- Non-factive verbs (Động từ phi thực hữu) such as “report”, “suggest” - Comparative forms
of adverbs such as “more concerned than before” suggest precision
- Specific times and referral to history such as “since last year”, “in 1998”, “previously” -
Reference to an official body, report, person or expert
- Connectors such as “while”, “although”, “nonetheless”, “moreover” are important to convey
that the speaker is covering all the options and alternative explanations - Excessive defining
of concepts and terms