DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Definition
Discourse analysis is concerned with the study of the relationship between language and the contexts in
which is used. Discourse analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language ‘beyond the
sentence’.
Spoken Discourse
Model of Analysis
One influential approach to the study of spoken discourse is that developed at the University of
Birmingham, where research initially concerned itself with the structure of discourse in school
classrooms (Sinclair and Coulthard 1975). The Birmingham model is one of the valid approaches to
analyzing discourse that relatively simple and powerful model which has connections with the study of
speech acts, but at the same time, tries to capture the larger structure, the ‘whole’. Sinclair and
Coulthard found in the language of traditional native-speaker school classrooms a rigid pattern, where
teachers and pupils spoke according to very fixed perceptions of their roles and where the talk could be
seen to conform to highly structured sequences.
Framing Move and Transaction
From the classroom extract, Sinclair and Coulthard notice a bit of business seems to commence with the
teacher saying ‘Now then…’, and the same bit of business ends with the teacher saying ‘Right…Now
then’. The teacher in his planning and execution of the lesson decides that the lesson shall be marked
out in some way; he gives his pupils a clear signal of the beginning and end of this mini-phase of the
lesson by using the words now then and right in a particular way that make them into sort of ‘frame’ on
either side of sequence of questions and answers. Sinclair and Coulthard call this function as Framing
Move. The two framing moves, together with the question and answer sequence that falls between
them, can be called a transaction. There are a fairly limited number of words available in English for
framing transaction (example: right, okay, so, etc.) and notice how some people habitually use the same
ones.
Exchange
An exchange is a sequence of discourse moves by at least two speakers that forms a topical. Each of the
parts is given the name move by Sinclair and Coulthard. Sinclair and Coulthard call the first move an
opening move, the second an answering move, and the third a follow-up. Sinclair and Brazil prefer to talk
of initiation, response, and follow-up. Example:
Move Exchange 1 Exchange 2 Exchange 3
Initiation A: What time is it? A: Tim’s coming tomorrow A: Here, hold this.
Response B: Six-thirty. B: Oh yeah. B: (takes the box)
Follow- A: Thanks. A: Yes. A: Thanks
up
In these exchanges we can observe the importance of each move in the overall functional unit. Every
exchange has to be initiated, whether with a statement, a question or a command; equally naturally,
someone responds, whether in words or action. The status of the follow-up move is slightly different: in
the classroom it fulfills the vital role of telling the pupils whether they have done what the teacher
wanted them to; in other situations it may be an act of politeness, and the follow-up elements might
even be extended further.
Written Discourse
Cohesive and Coherence
In written discourse, we shall consider some grammatical regularities observable in well-formed written
texts, and how the structuring of sentences has implications for units such as paragraphs, and for the
progression of whole texts. We shall also look at how the grammar of English offers a limited set of
options for creating surface links between the clause and sentences of a text, otherwise known as
cohesion.
When talking of cohesion, we spoke of interpreting and understanding them. This is important because
the cohesive items are clues or signals as to how the text should be read, they are not absolutes. The
pronoun ‘it’ only gives us the information that a non-human entity is being referred to; it does not
necessarily tell us which one. So cohesion only a guide to coherence, and coherence is something
created by the reader in act of reading the text. Coherence is the feeling that a text hangs together, that
it makes sense, and is not just a jumble of sentences. For example: ‘Clare loves potatoes. She was born
in Ireland.’ Are cohesive (Clare/she), but are only coherent if one already shares the stereotype ethnic
association between Irish and loving potatoes, or is prepared to assume a cause-effect relationship
between the two sentences. So cohesion is only part of coherence in reading and writing, and indeed in
spoken language too, for the same processes operate there.
Text and Interpretation
Reading text is far more complex than creating links across clause and sentence, we also have to
interpret the ties and make sense of them. Making sense of a text is an act of interpretation that
depends as much on what we as readers bring to a text as what the author puts into it. Interpretation
can be seen as a set of procedures and the approach to the analysis of text that emphasizes the mental
activities involved in interpretation can be broadly called procedural. Procedural approach emphasizes
the role of the reader in actively building the world of the text, based on his/her experience of the world
and how states and events are characteristically manifested in it. The reader has to activate such
knowledge, make inferences and constantly assess his/her interpretation the light of situation and the
aims and goals of the text as the reader perceives them.
Another level of interpretation which we are involved in as we process texts is that of recognizing
textual patterns. Certain patterns in text reoccur time and time again and become deeply ingrained as
part of our cultural knowledge. These patterns are manifested in regularly occurring functional
relationship between textual segments. These textual segments may be phrases, clauses, sentences or
groups of sentences. What is important is that segment can be isolated using a set of labels covering a
finite set of functional relations that occur between any two bits/segments of text.
