Edited by Karl Simms
Robert A. Troyer
This paper presents a discourse analysis framework that can be applied to dialogue in fiction. Based on an elaboration of Halliday’s functional approach to conversational interaction combined with traditional conversation and discourse analysis and speech act theory, the framework posits a hierarchical categorization of opening and responding speech moves. When applied to fictional dialogue, this analytical method offers a descriptive apparatus that can be simple or complex depending on one’s needs (i.e., pedagogical or research oriented) while also providing insight for interpretation of character interaction. The major strength of the approach is its ability to capture not isolated speech acts, but the interactive nature of conversation – the verbal dance of dialogue between characters in a narrative. Initiating and continuing speech moves (both verbal and non-verbal) with various discourse functions are followed by responding moves that can be grouped into the two broad classes of supporting or confronting. Quantificational analysis of such description provides empirical support for readers’ intuitions about conversational exchanges.
As a sample analysis, the framework is applied to all of the dialogue in the short story ‘What You Pawn I Will Redeem’ by Sherman Alexie (2004). This particular story, with its fourteen distinct conversational interactions between the main character and a variety of other characters of differing degrees of status and solidarity, provides an ideal demonstration of the proposed method of analysis. The main character, a homeless Native American Indian in Seattle, Washington, exhibits distinctly different patterns of discourse or conversational styles in his interactions with friends, strangers, and acquaintances of higher status. Such discoursal indications of power and solidarity are not only inherent in the dialogue, but central to the story’s broader themes of the individual’s role in society as well as distinctly Native American concerns for heritage and preservation of cultural identity. In keeping with the descriptive perspective of conversation analysis though, generalizations about interaction in different situations should only serve as guidelines – likewise, the power of stylistic analysis lies in its ability to help interpret the linguistic subtleties of a given text. This study demonstrates that analysis of the discourse functions of speech moves in the dialogue of fictional narratives serves the purposes of explication, which are central to stylistics and literary study.
This chapter analyzes the changing nature of the British news media’s visual representations of the figure of the ‘Islamic’ terrorist across the opening stages of the ‘war on terror’ period. Focusing on images emerging between 2001–2005, its central argument rests on the belief that news media visual representations of the ‘Islamic’ terrorist both draw upon and challenge the simplified, Orientalist-inspired modes of representation and depiction that are considered typical of Western news coverage; something that makes the terrorist seen in diverse, yet highly specific ways. Using visual discourse analysis, the chapter identifies three dominant modes of representation – the figure of the bearded, finger-wagging fanatic, the masked, shadowy militant, and the lone, home-grown extremist – which each provide different ways of seeing and speaking about the phenomenon of ‘Islamic’ terrorism. In doing so, the analysis provides insight into the diverse nature of such depictions, and shows how news media visual representations function to both police and proliferate depictions of terrorism, thus making the terrorist simultaneously visible and invisible within British society.
of a world view in which animals are primarily seen as potential economic resources (economic discourse), or alternatively as possible sources of conflicts (management discourse). 1 Inspired by Stibbe 2012 and drawing on ecolinguistics, corpus linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis, this
Mark Bassin) “The Etnogenez Project: Ideology and Science Fiction in Putin’s Russia,” Utopian Studies 27:1 (2016). Jussi Lassila works as a postdoctoral researcher at the Aleksanteri Institute of the University of Helsinki. His core areas of interest are political discourse analysis and post
, Reassembling the Social , 33. 210 See Asprem, “Esotericism and the Scholastic Imagination,” 30. Asprem builds on the discourse analysis of Kocku von Stuckrad in The Scientification of Religion: An Historical Study of Discursive Change, 1800–2000 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2014), 25–55. 211 G
Encarnación Hidalgo Tenorio
The analysis of how people speak or write about others’ wicked condition is a very exciting topic in itself for two main reasons: first of all, because by describing the various salient devices (syntactic, lexical, rhetorical, etc.) used in the verbal construction of those offenders or criminals, we can discover recurrent patterns in the discourse of those who in one way or another portray wrongdoing (either bad behaviour or transgression); secondly, because through the observation of their own words, we can also decipher who these individuals are themselves, their ideology, their prejudices, and perhaps even their own evil nature, if by any chance that might be the case.1 To illustrate this point, I will look at two different phenomena: I will examine some examples of the media’s textual representation of a blatant evil-doer such as Saddam Hussein; and I will consider what happened in the Spanish Parliament before the legalisation of same-sex marriage, when some seemed to try to paint the issue as a struggle between natural good and hideous perversity. It is my contention that what is said (and what has presumably been omitted or ignored), as well as the way in which this is said, are instrumental in discovering more about the participants of discourse and their degree of wickedness. I will take into account the principles of critical linguistics and critical discourse analysis, combined with tools of corpus linguistics, to assess how our sets of beliefs shape our linguistic reformulation and construal of all events; that is to say, how beliefs shape how we understand the world around us and the way we prefer to depict it.
so, some remarks are due that leave the text-centred discourse analysis aside in order to situate the film in the actual historical and political context (for an overview of approaches to teaching postcolonial literature and culture, see Eisenmann et al. 2010 ). What does it mean that the film is
Theory Since 1965 , ed. Hazard Adams and Leroy Searle (Tallahassee: Florida State University Press, 1986), 710. On the varieties of linguistic determinism, see John Lucy, “Linguistic Relativity,” Annual Review of Anthropology 26 (1997): 291–312. 33 Barbara Johnstone, Discourse Analysis , 2nd ed
Press, 2001), 60. 6 Wittgenstein calls this “stage setting,” and applies it to neologisms ( The Wittgenstein Reader , 147). 7 Barbara Johnstone, Discourse Analysis , 2nd ed. (Malden: Blackwell, 2008), 192. 8 Shakespeare, Hamlet , Act 1, scene 1. 9 On these, esp. see Wallace Martin, Recent Theories of