Critical Discourse Analysis by Thomas Huckin
- 1. Critical Discourse Analysis Thomas Huckin Lecture by Dr. Syed Kazim Shah Student: Ali Raza Siddique
- 2. Content 1. 2. What is Critical Discourse Analysis? 3. Types of Discourse Analysis 4. CDA differs at Six ways from other forms of Textual analysis at Six Ways 5. Characteristics of Critical Approaches to Languages 6. Strategies of CDA 7. What can be done with strategies of CDA? 8. Huckin’s (2002) Argument on Critical Approaches to Languages 9. Huckin claims on Critical Approaches to Language 10. Tools of CDA 11. Parameters of CDA Strategies Conclusion References (Thomas Huckin)
- 3. Critical Discourse Analysis Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a highly context sensitive, democratic approach which takes an ethical stance on social issues with the aim of improving society. Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is a relatively new addition to the varieties of text analysis available to the second language teacher and researcher. It could best be characterized as an approach or attitude toward textual analysis rather than as a step-by-step method. In sum, the primary activity of critical discourse analysis is the close analysis of written or oral texts that are deemed to be politically--or culturally influential to a given society. But the text-analytic activity cannot be done in isolation; rather, the analyst must always take into account the larger context in which the text is located.
- 4. Thomas Huckin: Types of Discourse Analysis 1. Critical Discourse Analysis 2. Social Linguistics 3. Social Semiotics Huckin (2013) considerably applied CDA on undergraduate composition course that it will assist students to learn how to be a part and participate actively in a society as active citizen. (p. 1)
- 5. CDA differs at Six ways from other forms of Textual analysis 1) CDA is highly context-sensitive: It is acknowledged that authentic text is produced and read in real world context with its all complexity, not in isolation. 2) CDA is a highly integrated form: this sums at least three different levels of analysis such as: a) the text analysis, b) the discursive practices, and c) the larger social context. CDA explains how these levels are integrated. 3) CDA deals significant societal issues. 4) CDA practitioners take an ethical stance, describes unfair social and political practices, and make explicitly critical for them.
- 6. CDA differs at Six ways from other forms of Textual analysis 5) CDA supposes social constructionist view of discourse, it aims to support the victims of oppression and encourage them to resist it. 6) CDA tries to minimize the use of scholarly jargon and complex syntax.
- 7. Strategies of CDA: Thomas Huckin Huckin (2012) explains CDA that provides a useful methodology to the students that point out logical fallacies and warrants to recognize the strategies the individuals use unconsciously, hide their biases. The following strategies contain: • omitting facts • foregrounding particular points that support your cause • placing in the background those that don’t support your cause • relying upon suggestion, presupposition, and connotations to control people to your side •
- 8. What can be done with strategies of CDA? (Thomas Huckin, 2012) Students, with CDA, can analyze number of “artifacts” in form of different areas: a) Advertisements b) Television Programs c) Films d) Songs e) Music Videos f) Graffiti g) Museums h) Websites i) Toys k) Facebook
- 9. Huckin’s (2002) Argument on Critical Approaches to Languages Huckin (2002) argues on critical approaches to languages, including 1. Critical discourse analysis 2. Social Linguistics 3. Social Semiotics These are relevant to real world because these are context-sensitive forms of discourse Analysis. (p. 2) Huckin shares characteristics of these approaches ahead.
- 10. Characteristics of Critical Approaches to Languages 1. They address contemporary societal issues, seeking to show how people are manipulated by powerful interests through the medium of public discourse. 2. They give special attention to underlying factors of ideology, power, and resistance. 3. They link together analyses of text, discursive practices, and social context. 4. They combine rhetorical theory and social theory. 5. They see genres as key structural elements.
- 11. Characteristics of Critical Approaches to Languages 6. They incorporate intertextuality, interdiscursivity, and other post-structural conceptions of discourse. 7. They take into account omissions, implicatures, presuppositions, ambiguities, and other covert but powerful aspects of discourse. 8. They take note of interpersonal aspects of discourse such as politeness, identity, and ethos. 9. Unlike other forms of cultural criticism, they ground their analyses in close, detailed inspection of texts. 10. To encourage political activism, they try to make their analyses accessible to the general public by, for example, minimizing the use of technical jargon and belletristic style.
- 12. Huckin claims on Critical Approaches to Language He claims that such critical approaches, including CDA, embody the generic features that share the critical spirit that is held in common among the divergent perspectives of Horkheimer, Adorno, Habermas, and Foucault, and serve a demystifying function by demonstrating the different ways in which rhetoric conceals as much as it reveals through its relationship with power and knowledge. They are also not detached and impersonal, but rather have as their object something which they are "against"; and they have “consequences” in the sense that they “identify the possibilities of future action available to the participants” (p. 2).
- 13. Tools of CDA (Thomas Huckin, 1997) There are number of tools which are used to analyze any research areas as mentioned before in slide 6. 1) Genre 2) Framing 3) Foregrounding 4) Omission 5) Backgrounding 6) Presupposition
- 14. Parameters of CDA Strategies Presupposition can also occur at the sentence level. If a politician says, We cannot continue imposing high taxes on the American people, he or she is presupposing that the taxes Americans pay are high. Another common form of manipulation at the sentence level is the deletion or omission of agents, which escapes the notice of many uncritical readers. Agent- deletion occurs most often through nominalization and the use of passive verbs. Many texts contain more than one style of discourse (or register, see below). Writers can exploit these discursive differences to manipulate readers in various ways.
- 15. Parameters of CDA Strategies Having noticed the genre and framing of a text, readers next typically proceed through it sentence by sentence. At this level, in addition to constructing the basic meaning of each sentence, they might notice that certain pieces of information appear as grammatical subjects of the sentence and are thereby topicalized (which is a type of foregrounding at the sentence level). A sentence topic is what the sentence is about. Often the topic of one sentence continues as the topic of the next, reinforcing its importance in the text. Topicalization is thus a form of sentence-level foregrounding: In choosing what to put in the topic position, writers create a perspective, or slant, that influences the reader's perception.
- 16. Conclusion Thomas Huckin defines CDA as highly context sensitive, available for second language teachers and researchers, makes textual analysis rather step-by-step method, deems to be politically--or culturally influential to a given society, and is studied with real life context rather isolation. He categorizes CDA, Social Linguistics and Social Semiotics under discourse analysis. He is of the view that to understand discourse, need these approaches. Huckin enlists characteristics of critical approaches to language. Huckin also shares how CDA is different at six ways from other textual analysis. He also explains the areas which can be studied through the tools of CDA. These tools help to analyze text and talk such as Genre, Framing, Foregrounding, Omission, Backgrounding and Presupposition. Further, he also mentions parameters on what levels these tools can be applied.
- 17. References Huckin, T., Jennifer, A., & Jennifer, C. L. (2012). Critical Discourse Analysis and Rhetoric and Composition. College Composition and Communication 64.1, 107-29. Print. Huckin, T. (2002). Critical Discourse Analysis and the Discourse of Condescension in Discourse Studies in Composition, ed. E. Barton and G. Stygall. Hampton. Huckin, T. N. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. Miller (Ed.), Functional approaches to written text (pp. 78-92). Washington, CD: US Department of State.