Discourse (vs. Language)
From Geography
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
Discourse and '''language''' transformations are ascribed to progress or the need to develop new or more “accurate” words to describe new discoveries, understandings, or areas of interest. | Discourse and '''language''' transformations are ascribed to progress or the need to develop new or more “accurate” words to describe new discoveries, understandings, or areas of interest. | ||
In modern times, '''language''' and discourse are dissociated from power and ideology and instead conceptualized as “natural” products of common sense usage or progress. | In modern times, '''language''' and discourse are dissociated from power and ideology and instead conceptualized as “natural” products of common sense usage or progress. | ||
| - | Thus language gives us a meaning to environment , Habermas speaks of speech acts. | + | Thus language gives us a meaning to environment , [[Habermas]] speaks of speech acts. |
In the post structuralist tradition [[Michel Foucault's]] definition of discourse as “systems of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak." He traces the role of discourses as language in wider social processes of legitimating and power, emphasizing the construction of current truths, how they are maintained and what power relations they carry with them.” Foucault later theorized that discourse vs language is a medium through which power relations produce speaking subjects. It's not only language itself, but it is something bigger. | In the post structuralist tradition [[Michel Foucault's]] definition of discourse as “systems of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak." He traces the role of discourses as language in wider social processes of legitimating and power, emphasizing the construction of current truths, how they are maintained and what power relations they carry with them.” Foucault later theorized that discourse vs language is a medium through which power relations produce speaking subjects. It's not only language itself, but it is something bigger. | ||
Revision as of 11:09, 22 October 2010
Assignment 2
Discourse in the first sense of word is the studied in corpus linguistics. Analysis of discourse in the second and third senses is carried out within a variety of traditions that investigate the relations between language, structure and agency, including sociology, feminist studies, anthropology, ethnography, cultural studies, literary theory, and the philosophy of science. Within these fields, the notion of "discourse" is itself subject to discourse, that is, debated on the basis of specialized knowledge. Discourse can be observed in multimodal or multimedia forms of communication including the use of spoken, written and signed language in contexts spanning from oral history to instant message conversations to textbooks. Discourse and language transformations are ascribed to progress or the need to develop new or more “accurate” words to describe new discoveries, understandings, or areas of interest. In modern times, language and discourse are dissociated from power and ideology and instead conceptualized as “natural” products of common sense usage or progress. Thus language gives us a meaning to environment , Habermas speaks of speech acts.
In the post structuralist tradition Michel Foucault's definition of discourse as “systems of thoughts composed of ideas, attitudes, courses of action, beliefs and practices that systematically construct the subjects and the worlds of which they speak." He traces the role of discourses as language in wider social processes of legitimating and power, emphasizing the construction of current truths, how they are maintained and what power relations they carry with them.” Foucault later theorized that discourse vs language is a medium through which power relations produce speaking subjects. It's not only language itself, but it is something bigger. Foucault (1977, 1980) argued that power and knowledge are inter-related and therefore every human relationship is a struggle and negotiation of power. Foucault further stated that power is always present and can both produce and constrain the truth. Discourse according to Foucault (1977, 1980, 2003) is related to power as it operates by rules of exclusion. Discourse therefore is controlled by objects and therefore language, what can be spoken of; ritual, where and how one may speak.
Sources:
Hall, S. (ed.) (1997) Saussure’s Legacy (pp. 30-33); Discourse, power and the subject pp, 41-45.
Gibson-Graham, J.K. (2000) Poststructuralist interventions. In, E. Sheppard & T. Barnes (eds.) A Companion to Economic Geography. Blackwell, Oxford, pp. 95-110.
Foucault, M. (1983) Afterword: the subject and power. In: Dreyfus, H.L. & Rabinow, P. Michel Foucault: beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Univer-sity of Chicago Press, Chicago.
By Jorg Schröder (s4083245) & Ivar Le Loux (s4092031)
