Mighty Digests # 14: WOOD & KROGER, Doing Discourse Analysis (Chapters 7-9)

(Book: Wood, L.A. & Kroger. R.O. (2000). Doing Discourse Analysis: Methods for Studying Action in Talk and Text. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.) (Chapters 7-9)

I found some very interesting points in these chapters, that made me think… For example, the analysis of the meaning of “context” in Discourse Analysis. The author describes it as a problematic issue, as it involves the consideration of gender, sex, race, identity, culture, ideology, settings, circumstances, social roles, etc. Furthermore, we can find a lot about the context in the text-in-interaction itself.

Another interesting concept discussed is “quantification in qualitative research”. Quantification is not the goal of DA, but it may be a part of the preanalytic work. For example, it may be useful for selecting data or for the detection of patterns for analysis. Quantification is also a common output of computer-assisted analysis, which, however, cannot replace the human work on Discourse Analysis.

Schegloff makes a very interesting point about “rough”, participant defined quantifications:

“[…] Overwhelminghly, ordinarily, or occasionally. Schegloff  (1993) has argued that […] informal quantification (or what we could call ethnoquantification) is not weaker than statistical or formal techniques.” (p. 138)

Another important feature of discourse is that it is a constructive process (for example of identities) and we should always pay attention to this characteristic, and look at discourse as an evolving system. For example, the authors state that:

“Concepts […], such as “intention” and “motivation”, are constituted rather than reflected in discourse.” (p. 159)

Other ideas that I would like to note for future reference are:

Analysis: sequence of activities

“There is no necessary sequence of activities […] because analysis involves recycling and iteration” (p. 96)

Some analytical concepts (p. 99):

1. Content (e.g., accounts)
2. Features (e.g., intensifiers)
3. Form (direct, indirect; simple, elaborate)
4. Structure (hierarchical, sequential, turn raking, adjacency pairs)
5. Function (e.g., constructing a motive)

Agency

-       agent-patient distinction

-       issues of power

-       accountability and responsibility

Footing

Participants’ categories: “speakers may present themselves as responsible for their words or as merely passing on a report of the experiences of others; hearers may be addressed or merely present.”

Sack’s Advice

“Treat what you have “in an unmotivated way” rather than starting from ready-made issues or categories.” (p. 107)

Strategies (p. 107-116)

1. Substitution (e.g. “like” and “for example”; a cough can mean “wake up!” or “Look out!”)
2. Reframing (e.g., attention to the categories expressed by the participants)
3. Multiple Functions
4. Content
5. Participants’ meaning
6. Similarity and difference
7. New problems
8. Interpretation and grounding (justifying an interpretation of discourse, attention to previous or subsequent utterances)

Last, but not least, reading these chapters, I would say that DA is a “methodically creative process”...