Reflections On Power And Discourse

IntroductionOnce critical discourse analysis(CDA), a way of discourse analysis was proposed, it promptly received great attention of the field of linguistics. The aim of CDA is to uncover the relationship between language, power and discourse, and it has become a new tendency of discourse analysis. The primary goal of this paper is to explore some aspects of the field. It is expected to help readers to develop a critical consciousness of domination and its modalities.Chapter One Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Discourse analysis studies language in use, from conversation to highly institutionalized forms of talk. It is under the general heading of discourse analysis that the field of conversation analysis developed. Conversation analysis explains the strategies that people employ in a conversation but external factors, such as status inequalities or preexisting relationships among the parties have been excluded from its consideration. So, conversation analysis has its limitations from a critical point of view. The approach to language which will be adopted here is called critical discourse analysis, or CDA for short. Critical analysts argue that there is a connection between discourse and power inequality, although this relationship is often obscured and not readily apparent. The principal aim of CDA is to uncover opaqueness and power relationships of discourse. The term 'discourse' has two senses, one linguistic and the other social. CDA sees discourse --- language use as a form of social practice determined by social structures. Discourse bears power and power relationships. It reflects the position of the speaker in the networks of social power relationships. According to discourse analysis, the principle of communication is cooperative. Why people tend to cooperate in communication? CDA shows that the enforcement of the cooperative principle in conversation carries the vestige of power.Chapter TwoPower Analysis Discourse is so socially influential, and socially influenced that it gives rise to important issues of power. These issues require a detailed analysis of what power is; what kinds of power are involved and how such power is enacted, expressed, or reproduced in discourse. Traditional concept of power is based on force, money or political position. However, much power in society is not coercive, but mental. Politics is embodied in power first. In a dictatorial and centralized country, the coercion of power is obvious. There is only little, if any, freedom for people to speak. Sometimes, discourse takes the form of silence, which, in some sense, is considered as a kind of cooperation. Foucault showed with the example of the round prison that it was more useful for power, at a particular moment, to observe than to punish. Such kind of observation called by Foucault "the Eye of Power" exists everywhere in the society. Of course, political power is not merely repressive. It can also do something good. Effective social actions and great developments are often the result of exercise of political power. Power discourse usually takes the form of governmental slogan, such as "the Four Cardinal Principles", "Reform and Opening up to the Outside World", and "Birth Control". The power of national discourse is extremely great. It may push the country forward, or it may push the country and its people into the disastrous abyss. For instance, Chinese people have once suffered much from the power discourse shown in the slogans like "Learn From Dazai in Agriculture". "Bigger Population Means More Strength" and so on. In modern society, the exercise of power is increasingly achieved through ideology. Ideological power is a significant complement to political power. Ideologies are developed by dominant groups in order to reproduce and legitimate their domination. And discourse, especially public discourse, essentially serves as the medium by which ideologies are persuasively communicated in society, and thereby helps reproduce power an...