Language and Power (2001)

Recommended Text for BBI 3303

(Language and Power):

Fairclough, Norman. (2001). Language and Power. 2nd ed. London: Longman Pearson Education Ltd.

Chapter 2:

Discourse as Social Practice

Chapter 2: Introduction

• Through ‘discourse as social practice’, Fairclough provides an overall perspective on language use in society i.e. the relationships between:– Language and power; and– Language and ideology

• Main topics:– Language and discourse– Discourse and orders of discourse– Class and power in capitalist society– Dialectic of structures and practices

Fairclough’s arguments (See Task 1):

• Social conditions (conventions, norms, beliefs, etc.) determine properties of discourse and language use

• Processes of producing and interpreting texts are socially shaped vis-à-vis shared understandings of social conventions

• Society determines language use; language use in turn shapes society

• Social actors occupy (subject) positions in the social orders of discourse

• Resistance to social orders bring about change

Language and discourse

• ‘Discourse’ = Language (Text) + Context• ‘Discourse’ = ‘Language as a form of social

practice’• Discourse NOT equal to langue + paroleLangue and parole• Langue – ‘social’ system or code internally

shared among members of a language community

• Parole – refers to individual language use and is ‘asocial’

Langue and parole (cont’d…)

• According to Saussure, linguistics is mainly concerned with langue, not parole which is subject to individual variation

• But in modern sociolinguistics, variation in language use is “a product of social differentiation” ie. Social identities, purposes, setting, etc.

• Issue – is there a homogeneous, unitary langue or even ‘a language’?

Langue and parole (cont’d…)

• What we understand as ‘a language’ is the result of social standardization of the endless varieties of ‘languages’ that social actors use

• ‘Standard languages’ are the result of social (economic, political, cultural and even religious) forces of unification

• People’s access to standard languages is unequal

Langue and parole (cont’d…)

• The use of rhetoric is an important part of the standardization process e.g. the creation and maintenance of ‘national languages’ is a political strategy to unify people

• In the notion of ‘language as discourse’, the focus is on language use determined by social factors

• Langue/parole distinction still useful but langue is influenced by social power struggle

Langue and parole (cont’d…)

• Fairclough’s position:– Saussure’s distinction between langue and parole not

entirely valid– Language use as discourse which is subject to social

determination– Sociolinguistic conventions are not unitary nor

homogeneous– Discourse characterized by diversity and social

struggle– Homogeneity in language use achieved via

standardization, and maintained by people in power

Discourse as social practice

• Discourse is “language as a form of social practice”.

1. Language as discourse is part of society

2. Language is a social process

3. Language is socially conditioned

1. Dialectical, internal relationship between language and society

– All linguistic phenomena are social phenomena and social phenomena are partly linguistic in nature

Discourse as social practice (cont’d…)

– Language use is social because social conditions (ideologies, norms, conventions, values, relationships, etc) affect the way people speak, listen, write or read

– Language use also affects social conditions ie. Help to maintain or even change them

Discourse as social practice (cont’d…)

– Social phenomena are linguistic because they are a part of social processes and practices e.g. expressions such as democracy, nationalization and terrorism are political discourses that represent actual social practices

– Language is one strand of the social ie. society

Discourse as social practice (cont’d…)

– Not all social phenomena are linguistic but they have strong links with the way people use language to express them

2. Language is a social process• ‘text’ is a product of the social process of

text production• ‘discourse’ refers to whole process of social

interaction i.e. process of production and process of interpretation

Fairclough’s 3-Dimensional Model of Discourse

Discourse as social practice (cont’d…)

• Text stands for traces of the process of production, and cues to the process of interpretation

• Interplay (interaction) between text properties and MR (Members’ Resources)

• MR – linguistic knowledge, knowledge of representations of the world, ideologies, values, etc.

Discourse as social practice (cont’d…)

3. Language use is socially conditioned

• Shaped or conditioned by other non-linguistic parts of society

• MR are cognitive resources but have social origins – socially produced but unequally distributed among people

• MR use is also socially determined and controlled

Social Context of Discourse

• Discourse also involves:– Social conditions of production– Social conditions of interpretation

• Social conditions address 3 ‘levels’ of social organization:– Social situation– Social institution– Society as a whole

• Social conditions shape the MR

Social Context of Discourse…

• Social conditions shape MR shape way texts are produced and interpreted

• Understanding discourse entails analyzing:– Processes of production and interpretation (texts)– Relationships between texts, processes, and social

conditions (interactions)– Conditions of the immediate situational context and

related institutional and social structures (contexts)

Social Context of Discourse…

• CDA is about relationships between texts, interactions, and contexts

• Stages of critical analysis:– Description of formal properties of text– Interpretation of relationship(s) between text and

interaction– Explanation of relationships(s) between interaction

and social context

• Nature of ‘analysis’ depends on stage of CDA

Description

• Using a linguistic framework to identify formal features of a given text

• Spoken text has to be transcribed (into written form)

• Problem: how a text is interpreted also determines how it is to be transcribed (e.g. IRC chat – writing? speaking? Or both?)

Interpretation

• Analyse the cognitive process of participants in the discourse

• (includes text + interaction i.e. why/how are they producing the text? Why do they need to comprehend the text and how do they do it? Etc.)

Explanation

• Analyse and explain the relationships between social events (‘interactions’) and more or less fixed social orders

• Social orders shape and are in turn shaped by social events

• CDA analyst attempts to provide a perspective (‘interpretation’) of text + interaction + context

Doing Critical Analysis

• Stage of analysis maybe from Description >> Interpretation >> Explanation

• Analysis differs at each stage but always shifting from one stage to another

• ‘Object’ of initial analysis i.e. the text is neither fixed nor final – depends on interpretation and explanation of the whole discourse

• Interpretation – cognitive processes of social actors i.e. discursive strategies

Doing Critical Analysis

• Explanation – making connections between changing social events and social structures that are more or less permanent - but shape and are shaped over time

• CD analyst provides an interpretative perspective on the complex and often hidden interconnections between the text and its social context

Some Principles of CDA

1. Social and political issues are constructed and reflected in discourse

2. Power relations are negotiated and performed through discourse

3. Discourse both reflects and reproduces social relations

4. Ideologies are produced and reflected in the use of discourse

5. Discourse is historical

Verbal and Visual Language

• ‘Verbal language’ – comprises linguistic signals that are meaningful

• ‘Visual language’ – non-linguistic means/ways of communicating meaning

Discourse and Orders of Discourse

• Order of discourse – the network of interrelated discourses and practices determined by underlying social conventions

• ‘felicitous ambiguity’ – the mutually shaping nature of the relationship between discourses and practices:– “the notion of social practice is that people are

enabled through being constrained: they are able to act on condition that they act within the constraints of types of practice – or of discourse” (Fairclough, 2001: 23)

discourse vs. practice

• ‘discourse’ – ‘discoursal action’ or what actually happens, E.g. a police interview

• ‘practice’ – what is expected to happen based on social orders and conventions, E.g. social conventions that determine the conduct or practice of police interviews

(See ‘Dialectics of structures and practices’, Fairclough, 2001: 30-34)

Orders of discourse

• Discourse and practice are constrained by interconnecting or networked discourses and practices i.e. they are ordered (arranged) in some way

• Society is structured / organised into different areas of action, situations and practices

• Social areas related via different discourses and practices

• Order of discourse = discourse + genre + style

Order of discourse

Order of discourse = discourses + genres + styles

• discourse = representation of social reality• Genre or ‘discourse type’ (Fairclough) =

social action via discourse• Style = way of being; identity as projected

via verbal or visual languageE.g. ‘conversation’ is a genre used

differently in different situations/domains

ODs and SOs

• Discourses and practices are constrained by related networks of orders of discourse (ODs) and social orders (SOs), respectively.

• Social order structures ‘social space’ into domains

• OD is a discourse-oriented view (perspective) of SO

Structuring ‘social space’

PRACTICE PERSPECTIVE

DISCOURSE PERSPECTIVE

Social order Order of discourse

Types of practice Types of discourse

Actual practices Actual discourses

ODs

• Discourse types (genres) are realized (i.e. ‘occur’) in different ways across ODs e.g. ‘conversation’ between students vs. ‘conversation’ between lawyers

• Social power (at society or institution level) enables control of ODs

• ODs in a given society or institution share ideologies

• No one-to-one connection between discourse and practice because:– A discourse draws upon other discourse types

(and a practice upon other types of practice)E.g. an ‘informercial’ draws upon information

(educational) discourses and commercial (promotional) discourse

– Discourse – the “creative-extension-through-combination of existing resources” (Fairclough, 2001, p. 26)

Social Class and Power

• Social structures determine discourse (cf. explanation of social context)

• Power relations determine how ODs are ideologically structured in institutions /society.

• We need to critically analyze social structures of capitalist societies

• Relationship between economic production and social class (Cf. ‘use value’ and ‘exchange value’ of goods and services)

• Capitalist class owns means of production

• Working class sell their labour in exchange for wages

• Role of petit bourgeois or ‘middle class’ in service and leisure industries

• Capitalist class has ability to control the state (Cf. economy + politics = political economy)

• Capitalist class controls the working class through the state

• ‘dominant bloc’ – Alliance of capitalists and political elite

• State power = government control of police, armed forces, civil service, education, local government services, etc. (Cf. Louis Althusser’s ‘ISA’ – Ideological State Apparatus’)

• Control of law, education, religion, media and family life ensures continuing dominance of capitalist class, esp. in times of crisis (i.e. maintaining the status quo)

• Education and social institutions are never ideologically neutral i.e. they ‘persuade’ people to “fit into and accept the existing system of class relations” (Fairclough, 2001: 27).

• People with power in social institutions draw upon underlying ideologies to legitimize existing power relations

• ‘Common sense’ practices and discourses that come from the capitalist class (‘dominant bloc’) become naturalized and function ideologically to maintain unequal power relations (Cf. ‘manufacture of consent’)

• Ideological power serves to legitimize /establish social practices and discourses as ‘universal’, ‘natural’ and ‘common sense’ i.e. acceptable to everyone

• Economic and political power draw on ideological power via discourse

• Exercise of power through coercion (physical force) and/or manufacture of consent

• Less risky (and more effective) for state to rule by MOC i.e. ideological persuasion

Power relations, class relations and social struggle

• Power relations are more complex than class relations

• Class relations influence other types – gender, ethnic, institutional, etc.

• Power relations involve social struggle between groups – to dominate or resist being dominated

• Language is:“both a site and s stake in class struggle, and those who exercise power through language must constantly be involved in struggle with others to defend (or lose) their position” (Fairclough, 2001: 29).

Changes in capitalism

• Marx – production heading towards monopoly: “the concentration of production in an ever-decreasing number of ever-larger units” (Fairclough, 2001: 29)

• Rise of consumerism: commodities or ‘goods’ also include ‘packages’ of intangibles such as education courses, holidays, health insurance, etc. (Cf. ‘MacDonalidisation’ of world economy)

• Consumerism affects all aspects of people’s lives (linguistic discourse is the primary means)

• Increasing state intervention via bureaucratic control

Analyzing society, analyzing discourse

• Close relationship between practices of capitalist society and ODs

• Shared ideologies enable institutional ODs to be integrated with social ODs

• Key discourse types (and ideologies) ‘colonize’ institutional ODs (e.g. advertising)

• People are positioned as ‘consumers’ (subject positions)

Analyzing discourse…

• Social control via MOF is on the increase (e.g. increase in consumerism)

• Increase in the quantity of SC discourse

• Increase in the quality of SC discourse towards “simulated egalitarianism” i.e. a false sense of everyone being equal

Dialectic of Structures and Practices

• Discourse is shaped by social structures• Social structures are also shaped by discourse

social change• Social structures not only determine social

practice but are also a product of practice• Thus, the relationship between

discourse/practice and social structures is dialectical

• Power relationships and power struggle play important roles in the maintenance of social orders and/or social change

Social structures and social practice(Fairclough, 2001: 31)

Social structures

Practice, discourse

Construction of subject positions

• E.g. the ‘social space’ of a school is structured into situations or ‘areas of practice’ (order of discourse):– Classroom– Assembly– Playground activity– Staff meeting– Canteen, etc.

Subject positions…

• Participation in school discourse on basis of:

• social roles or ‘subject positions’ (headteacher, teacher, pupil, prefect, janitor, etc.)

• purpose (teaching, learning, managing school, examining, etc.)

• discourse types (genres) – assembly address, lessons, meetings, etc.

Subject positions…

• Social actors in the school ‘occupy’ the subject positions that are constructed for them in the discourse

• By occupying subject positions in the discourse, the participants (re)produce the positions and the social structures they are part of

The ‘subject’

• discourse type discourse practice(determines) (reproduces)

• ‘felicitous ambiguity’ involving subjects; both constrained / shaped as well as active / agentive (Cf. Bourdieu, 1991: structure and agency of the social actor's ‘habitus’)

• Subjects are enabled through being constrained by social structures

Reproduction in Discourse

• Social subjects are creative – draw upon other discourse types to meet demands of social change

• reproduction – people draw upon ODs and aspects of social structure internalized in MR

• Social structures may be (re)produced in discourse to sustain / maintain the status quo or to transform it to effect change

Reproduction in Discourse (cont’d…)

• Relations of power among social agents determine whether reproduction in discourse is maintaining (conservative) or changing society (transformative)

• Stable power relations + ideologies stable ODs + minimal social change

• Shift in power relations + ideologies change in social structures

• Dominant groups may also manipulate ODs to stay in power (Cf. hybrid discourse types)

Reproducing Class: hidden agendas

• Class relations have an indirect effect on reproduction in discourse i.e. mediated or indirectly reproduced

• ‘hidden agenda’ in education to reproduce class relations e.g. teacher-pupil relations reproduce teacher and pupil subject positions

• ‘overt educational agenda’ – to teach/train minds and bring about social change

Reproducing Class…

• Social subjects are not aware of hidden agendas because they are abstract and opaque in discourse (Cf. Bourdieu)

• People unconsciously legitimize (or delegitimize) power relations

• Critical analysis of discourse and social practices help raise self-consciousness

(Discuss these ideas re: police interview)

Conclusions…

• Discourse is language as a form of social practice

• Dialectics of discourse and social structures• ODs are the discoursal perspective of SOs

(based on ideologies)• People are not aware of opaque connections

between language use, ideologies and power relations

• CLS – critical analysis of non-transparent cause-effect relations in society

Chap. 3: Discourse and Power

• Power in discourse

• Power behind discourse

• Social struggle in discourse