The interdisciplinarity of critical discourse studies research

Unger, Johann Wolfgang

doi:10.1057/palcomms.2015.37

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, since interdisciplinarity is a response to complex problems, ID researchers have argued that the insights of complexity science can be useful in addressing such problems (Batie, 2008;Menken and Keestra, 2016;Repko and Szostak, 2017). Although the insights of complexity science have not be fully explored in ID research, complexity researchers have appealed to Ashby's (1956) principle of requisite variety in solving complex problems (Boisot and McKelvey, 2011). This principle states that "an adaptive system survives to the extent that the variety it generates matches that of the environment it finds itself in" (Boisot and McKelvey, 2011, p. 281).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overcoming disciplinary divides in higher education: the case of agricultural economics

Litzenberg

2019

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As global problems have become ever more complex, the production and organization of knowledge in society is increasingly based on the sharing, integration and collaboration of diverse experiences. For instance, global 'grand challenges', such as world hunger, poverty, climate change, and sustainability often require an interdisciplinary (ID) approach, in which integrating the insights of different disciplines provides a more comprehensive solution than can be offered by any given discipline. Universities or higher educational institutions face increasing pressures to engage in such interdisciplinary collaboration. This interdisciplinarity, however, raises particular organizational challenges to departments in higher educational institutions. In particular, while departments have been traditionally organized around a disciplinary core, interdisciplinarity has placed increasing pressures on departments, such as agricultural economics, to integrate insights from disciplines that do not advance a department's disciplinary core. Few ID researchers have addressed the issue of how this internal conflict can be resolved in a departmental setting. Resolving this internal conflict is important to developing a greater interdisciplinarity among the disciplines of departmental units where a greater variety of disciplinary insights can be drawn upon to solve complex social problems. Here, we call for a unique organizational structure that can resolve this internal conflict. In using agricultural economics departments as a case study, we appeal to a concept of a "gatekeeper" whose role is to institute "loosely coupled" connections that can reconcile a department's internal conflicts. This "gatekeeper" can advance the "normal science" of a department's core and peripheral disciplines, while at the same time support a 'common ground' that appeals to these disciplines' common interests. A key conclusion is that "gatekeepers" can sustain the integration of disciplinary insights necessary for the advancement of interdisciplinarity in higher educational institutions.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Overcoming disciplinary divides in higher education: the case of agricultural economics

Litzenberg

2019

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This classificatory attempt is laudable and proves that even in such a heterogeneous field as discourse studies, certain typological mappings are possible, especially if there is a controlling category which defines the domain and range of the proposed distinction(s). Such a stance seems to comply with another major mapping of the field, by Unger (2016), who shows how the main theoretical perspectives in critical discourse studies can be positioned within an interdisciplinary space defined by the cognitive, textual, and social categories (though the choice of these categories remains arbitrary).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…At the most general level, discourse studies can be characterized as ways of exploring the meanings produced by language use and communication, the contexts and processes of these meanings, and practices caused by these meanings (Jørgensen & Phillips 2002;Unger 2016;Fetzer 2018). Discourse studies as research practices are essentially trans-disciplinary and include different theoretical starting points and discipline-specific applications.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A critical note on the evolution of social theoretical and linguistic underpinnings of contemporary discourse studies

Cap

2019

Jezikoslovlje (Online)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A critical note on the evolution of social theoretical and linguistic underpinnings of contemporary discourse studies This paper gives a critical overview of analytical approaches dominating the field of discourse studies in the last three decades, from the perspective of their philosophical and formative bases: social constructionism and linguistics. It explores different conceptions of the theoretical nexus between these two bases leading to the emergence of three distinct yet complementary strands of thought (i-iii). The paper starts with poststructuralist views of discourse salient in (i) Laclau & Mouffe's Discourse Theory. Laclau & Mouffe's assumption that no discourse is a closed entity but rather transformed through contact with other discourses is taken as the introductory premise to present a large family of (ii) critical discourse studies, characterized as text-analytical practices explaining how discourse partakes in the production and negotiations of ideological meanings. Finally, the paper discusses (iii) three recent discourse analytical models: Discourse Space Theory, Critical Metaphor Analysis, and Legitimization-Proximization Model. These new theories make a further (and thus far final) step toward consolidation of the social-theoretical and linguistic bases in contemporary discourse studies. The empirical benefits of this consolidation are discussed in the last part of the paper, which includes a case study where the new models are used in the analysis of Polish antiimmigration discourse.

show abstract

“…The researcher uses Critical Discourse Analysis's framework of Fairclough in analyzing the data. Breeze (2011) and Unger (2016), in explaining the interdisciplinary of CDA emphasized that Fairclough (1995), provided the way in analyzing discourse critically by using three dimensional frameworks, they are; text analysis, processing analysis, and social analysis. Through this framework, the researcher uses it to cover the data and then links it to Halliday's theory in Halliday & Matthiessen (2004), to find out the linguistic features, especially modality and transitivity system in representing the humour by the speakers of skit (comedians) and also relate them with the power of relationship of their speaking process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transitivity and Modality in a Marriage Proposal Skit of English and Makassarese

Wahdaniyah¹

2018

ELS-JISH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two languages are never considered to represent the same social reality in similar way sufficiently, especially in conveying the humour. The objectives of this research are to identify the patterns of transitivity and modality used to represent the humour in marriage proposal skit of English and Makassarese and also to explain the way of English and Makassarese humour maintain power of relationship in marriage proposal skit. This research was conducted by using Critical Discourse analytic approach of Fairclough and Halliday’s Theory particularly in transitivity and modality system of both English and Makassarese. The results of this research show that Halliday’s theory cannot cover all Makassarese data, especially in dividing process of functions in the level of ideational and interpersonal meaning of Makassarese data. In fact, in building their relationship through humour, English speakers tend to use many relational processes which they asked about the identity of their interlocutor and also use many deontic modality (desirability, obligation, and permission). In Makassarese data, speakers tend to use many material processes that they can know what happened with their interlocutor and what is their interlocutor doing. And also they use lack of deontic modality with no obligation category.

show abstract

The interdisciplinarity of critical discourse studies research

Cited by 15 publications

References 6 publications

Overcoming disciplinary divides in higher education: the case of agricultural economics

Overcoming disciplinary divides in higher education: the case of agricultural economics

A critical note on the evolution of social theoretical and linguistic underpinnings of contemporary discourse studies

Transitivity and Modality in a Marriage Proposal Skit of English and Makassarese

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About