Ch04 Discourse Analysis 2ndedition

Discourse Analysis
Implications for Pedagogy 1

1. "Language practitioners" can know how
discourse is structured in a given context.
Clarifies what "genres" are.
2. Teachers can present models of the relevant

genres to students and "explain the
underlying features of the text types"
McCarthy, Michael, Christian Matthiessen, & Diana Slade. 2010. Discourse Analysis. In
Norbert Schmitt, editor An Introduction to Applied Linguistics, 2nd edition, Chapter 4,
pp. 53-69. London: Hodder Education, p. 67.
Discourse Analysis
3. Familiarity with models such as the IRF
technique in "traditional teacher-fronted
classrooms" can raise the awareness of new
(and experienced) teachers and help them
see this technique probably will not give them
what they want in terms of language
acquisition.
Discourse Analysis
4. Teachers can use DA to inform their
evaluations of their learners' performance in
terms of how close they fit with "real-world
discourse".
5. Teachers can teach the systematic features

of discourse: openings, closings, discourse
markers, common adjacency pairs.
Discourse Analysis
6. Producers of pedagogical grammars,
learners dictionaries, [and textbooks] can
make materials more representative of real
language use.
Discourse Analysts'
Questions: 1
1. Who are the participants in the discourse?
a. What is their relationship?
Are they equals?
b. Are there differences in power or
knowledge?
c. What are their goals?
Discourse Analysts'
Questions: 2
2. How do we know what writers/speakers
mean?
a. What does text mean in this context?
b. What factors help us interpret text?
c. What do we need to know about
context?
d. What textual clues are present?
Discourse Analysts'
Questions: 3
3. How is this discourse structured/organized?
a. Does this discourse represent a specific
(typical) genre?
b. In what order are ideas presented?
c. How is coherence maintained?
d. What cohesive devices are used?
Written vs. Spoken Discourse
Features [AND FORMALITY]
1. Detachment or distancing of writer from reader
Use of impersonal pronouns
Use of passive voice (more than usual)
Absence of 'you' and 'I'
Avoidance of "affective/emotional vocabulary"
2. Formality of vocabulary
3. Lexical density
Formality Continuum:
Spoken and Written Discourse
Informal spoken English Formal written English
Casual conversation: Letter to an Job interview Written academic

cosy chat with a acquaintance article
close friend
E-mail to a friend Conversation with Public speech
manager at work
Disciplines and Approaches to
Discourse Analysis
1. Sociology
Conversation Analysis
2. Sociolinguistics
Ethnography
Variation Theory
3. Linguistics
Birmingham School
Systemic Functional Linguistics
Critical Discourse Analysis
pp. 53-69. London: Hodder Education, p. 56-63.
Conversation Analysis
1. How do people take turns in conversation?
2. How do people open and close conversations?
3. How do people launch new topics, close old
ones, shift topic, etc?
4. How is it that conversation generally
progresses satisfactorily from one utterance
to the next?
Turn-Yielding Signals
1. A drop of pitch.
2. A drawl on the final syllable or final stressed
syllable of a final clause.
3. The termination of hand gestures.
4. The use of stereotyped expressions such as
you know, or something, and but uh.
5. A drop in loudness.
6. Completion of a grammatical clause.
Carroll, David W. 2008. Psychology of Language, 5th edition. Singapore: Thomson
Wadsworth, p. 230.
Expected Sequences
(How do you respond?)
Preferred Sequences:
 Greeting
 Compliment (US / Traditional Chinese)
 Apology
 Invitation—acceptance (or decline)
Dispreferred Sequences:
 Declining an offer
Hymes's (1972)
SPEAKING Model
S setting / scene
P participants
E ends
A act sequence
K key
I instrumentalities
N norms
G genre
Sinclair-Coulthard or 'Birmingham'
Model of Spoken Interaction
(Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975)
TRANSACTION

EXCHANGE

MOVE

ACT
McCarthy, Michael. 1991. Discourse Analysis for Language Teachers. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, p.22.
Sinclair, J. McH. & R. M Coulthard. 1975. Towards an Analysis of Discourse. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Explicitness:
Spoken Discourse:
"…is usually so tied to its immediate
context…, speakers usually have even
less need to [explicitly] refer [verbally] to
everything that is in the context and can
take for granted that listeners will know
what is being referred to [because of
linguistic context and non-linguistic
(environmental) clues]".
pp. 53-69. London: Hodder Education, pp. 63-64.
Explicitness:
Written Texts:
"…are often produced at one time and
place to be read at another" [and so
explicit references may be necessary]". .
pp. 53-69. London: Hodder Education, pp. 63-64.

Ch04 Discourse Analysis 2ndedition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ch04 Discourse Analysis 2ndedition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ch04 Discourse Analysis 2ndedition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Discourse Analysis

Implications for Pedagogy 1

2. Teachers can present models of the relevant

5. Teachers can teach the systematic features

Informal spoken English Formal written English

Casual conversation: Letter to an Job interview Written academic

You might also like