Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
References
All Topics
Languages and Linguistics
Discourse Analysis

Introducing critical policy discourse analysis

Profile image of Jane M MulderrigJane M Mulderrig

2019, Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks

https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788974967.00006
visibility

…

description

22 pages

link

1 file

Abstract
sparkles

AI

This volume introduces Critical Policy Discourse Analysis (CPDA), an integrated approach combining Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and Critical Policy Studies (CPS). It presents ten empirical case studies that demonstrate the effectiveness of CPDA in enriching policy analysis through detailed textual examination and operationalized methodologies. The volume aims to highlight how this integration provides novel theoretical insights and enhances the understanding of policy dynamics, illustrated through specific policy-relevant problems.

Related papers

Critical discourse analysis in political studies
Michael Farrelly

2010

In the first sections of this article I give a simple and general account of critical discourse analysis (CDA) and how it might contribute to the theoretical and methodological repertoire of political studies through its discourse-dialectical theory of how discourse figures as an aspect of social practices without reducing those practices to discourse. In the final section I give a short illustrative example of how a CDA approach to detailed textual analysis might also be applied to specific texts (or groups of texts) in the political arena: in the example I take the press release in which the national UK government heralded its recent ‘empowerment’ White Paper, ‘Communities in Control’.

View PDFchevron_right
ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Review paper Discourse Analysis: Varieties and Methods
Emma Froud

This paper presents and analyses six key approaches to discourse analysis, including political discourse theory, rhetorical political analysis, the discourse historical approach in critical discourse analysis, interpretive policy analysis, discursive psychology and Q methodology. It highlights differences and similarities between the approaches along three distinctive dimensions, namely, ontology, focus and purpose. Our analysis reveals the difficulty of arriving at a fundamental matrix of dimensions which would satisfactorily allow one to organize all approaches in a coherent theoretical framework. However, it does not preclude various theoretical articulations between the different approaches, provided one takes a problem-driven approach to social science as one's starting-point.

View PDFchevron_right
A new agenda in (critical) discourse analysis: theory, methodology and interdisciplinarity
Songqing Li

2005

Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture The series includes contributions that investigate political, social and cultural processes from a linguistic/discourse-analytic point of view. The aim is to publish monographs and edited volumes which combine language-...

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse and democracy: critical analysis of the language of government
Jane M Mulderrig

Critical Discourse Studies, 2016

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse, social theory, and social research: the discourse of welfare reform
Liyat Nudy

2 Discourse, social theory, and social research: the discourse of welfare reform Abstract Recent social theory includes important insights into language which constitute a so far underdeveloped resource for sociolinguistics. But much of this theory stops short -theoretical frameworks and categories which socially locate language are not pushed in the direction of a theorisation of language itself, which limits their operational value in research. Sociolinguistics can draw upon social theory to produce more sophisticated theorisations of language which at the same time constitute contributions to social theory. My aim in this paper is to explore what it means to work in a 'transdisciplinary' way. I argue in particular for a transdisciplinary engagement with social theory in which the logic of one theory is put to work in the elaboration of another without the latter being simply reduced to the former. My focus is upon critical discourse analysis (CDA) which I here take to be a part of a broadly conceived sociolinguistics.

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse analysis as social construction: Towards greater integration of approaches and methods
Susan Ainsworth

Melbourne: University of Melbourne, 2001

This paper presents a reflection on the process of doing critical discourse research. Examples from a current project on the discursive construction of 'older worker' identity are used to illustrate how major challenges inherent in undertaking discourse research can be addressed. These involved initial justifications of discourse theory as a research framework, research design and the selection of a research site, data collection, data analysis and framing key findings in order to contribute to broader debates about age, gender and unemployment.

View PDFchevron_right
Critical Discourse Analysis: Exploring its Philosophical Underpinnings
Kapil D Regmi

Méthod(e)s: African Review of Social Sciences Methodology, 2017

Critical discourse analysis (CDA) stresses that language use, discourse, and communication should be studied in their social, cultural and political contexts. A considerable amount of literature has been produced and the use of CDA as a research methodology has been so wide across various disciplines of social sciences. The current body of literature in the field reflects two major aspects of CDA: Linguistic aspect and critical aspect. However, the philosophical aspect of CDA, especially its ontological and epistemological underpinnings, which in a sense guides other two aspects, is not fully elaborated. This paper summarizes linguistic and critical aspects of CDA and explores major philosophical underpinnings of CDA with the help of four aporias of research methodology introduced by Patti Lather.

View PDFchevron_right
Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory, and Methodology 1
Zunaid Khan
View PDFchevron_right
Political Discourse Analysis: Exploring the Language of Politics and the Politics of Language
Ahlam El Karouni

This essay overviews the body of research known as political discourse analysis (PDA). I begin by situating this work within the linguistic and political turns that took place in the latter part of the 20th century within the human and social sciences. I then discuss different conceptions of what comprises the political and the appropriate objects of study for PDA. Adopting an inclusive conception of politics and discourse, I consider the relationship between PDA and critical discourse analysis (CDA). I close with a review of studies of political discourse in terms of their theoretical and analytic frameworks and the socio-political issues they address.

View PDFchevron_right
Critical Discourse Analysis: Overview
Angel M. Y. Lin
View PDFchevron_right

References (77)

  1. Bartlett, T. (2014). Analysing Power in Language: A Practical Guide. London: Routledge.
  2. Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. (2002). Interpretive theory. Theory and Methods in Political Science 1(1). Available online at: https:// escholarship .org/ uc/ item/ 0bk3k2nq [Accessed 15 March 2019].
  3. Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. (eds) (2016). Routledge Handbook of Interpretive Political Science. London: Routledge.
  4. Bhaskar, R. (1986). Scientific Realism and Human Emancipation. London: Verso.
  5. Blommaert, J. (2007). Sociolinguistic scales. Intercultural Pragmatics 4(1): 1-19.
  6. Chouliaraki, L. and Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. CMA (2016). Energy market investigation: Final report. Available online at: https:// assets .publishing .service .gov .uk/ media/ 5773de34e5274a 0da3000113/ final -report -energy -market -investigation .pdf [Accessed 12 January 2019].
  7. Fairclough, I. and Fairclough, N. (2012). Political Discourse Analysis: A Method for Advanced Students. London: Routledge.
  8. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.
  9. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.
  10. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Longman.
  11. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
  12. Fairclough, N. (2005). Critical discourse analysis and change in transdis- ciplinary research, in R. Wodak and P. Chilton (eds) A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis: Theory, Methodology and Interdisciplinarity, pp. 53-70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  13. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis and critical policy studies. Critical Policy Studies 7(2): 177-197.
  14. Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and Power (3rd edn). London: Routledge.
  15. Fairclough, N. and Graham, P. (2002). Marx as a critical discourse analyst: The genesis of a critical method and its relevance to the critique of global capital. Estudios de Sociolinguistica 3(1): 185-229.
  16. Fairclough, N. Jessop, R. and Sayer, A. (2004). Critical realism and semiosis, in J. Joseph and J. Roberts (eds) Realism Discourse and Deconstruction, pp. 23-42. London: Routledge.
  17. Fairclough, N., Mulderrig, J. and Wodak, R. (2011). Critical discourse analy- sis, in T. Van Dijk (ed.) Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction, pp. 357-378. London: Sage.
  18. Fairclough, N. and Wodak, R. (2008). The Bologna process and the knowledge-based economy: A critical discourse analysis approach, in B. Jessop, N. Fairclough and R. Wodak (eds) Education and the Knowledge-Based Economy in Europe, pp. 109-126. Amsterdam: Sense Publishers.
  19. Farrelly, M. (2015). Discourse and Democracy: Critical Analysis of the Language of government. London: Routledge.
  20. Farrelly, M. (2019). Rethinking intertextuality in CDA. Critical Discourse Studies. Available online at: https:// doi .org/ 10 .1080/ 17405904 .2019 .1609538 [Accessed 17 March 2019].
  21. Farrelly, M. (in press). Critical discourse analysis, in P.A. Atkinson, S. Delamont, M.A. Hardy and M. Williams (eds) SAGE Research Methods Foundations. London: Sage.
  22. Finlayson, A. (2007). From beliefs to arguments: Interpretive methodol- ogy and rhetorical political analysis. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 9(4), 545-563. Available online at: https:// doi .org/ 10 .1111/ j .1467 -856x .2007 .00269 .x [Accessed ?].
  23. Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  24. Fischer, F. (2007). Deliberative policy analysis as practical reason: Integrating empirical and normative arguments, in F. Fischer, G. Miller and S. Mara (eds) Handbook of Public Policy Analysis: Theory, Politics and Methods, pp. 223-236. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
  25. Fischer F. and Forester, J. (eds) (1993). The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
  26. Fischer, F. and Gottweis, H. (eds) (2012). The Argumentative Turn Revisited: Public Policy as Communicative Practice. Durham, NC & London: Duke University Press.
  27. Fischer, F., Torgerson, D., Durnová, A. and Orsini, M. (2015). Introduction to critical policy studies, in F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová and M. Orsini (eds) Handbook of Critical Policy Studies, pp. 1-24. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  28. Flowerdew, J. and Richardson, J. (eds) (2018). The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. Oxon, New York: Routledge.
  29. Fraser, N. (1993). Clintonism, welfare, and the antisocial wage: The emer- gence of a neoliberal political imaginary. Rethinking Marxism: A Journal of Economics, Culture and Society 6(1): 9-23.
  30. Glynos, J. and Howarth, D. (2007). Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory. London, New York: Routledge.
  31. Hajer, M. and Wagenaar, H. (eds) (2003). Deliberative Policy Analysis: Understanding Governance in the Network Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  32. Halliday, M.A.K. and Matthiessen, M.I.M. (2014). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd edn). London/New York: Routledge.
  33. Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Oxford: Blackwell.
  34. Hay, C. (1996). Re-stating Social and Political Change. Buckingham: Open University Press.
  35. Hay, C. (2004). The interpretive approach in political science: A sympo- sium 1 (with A. Finlayson, M. Bevir, R. Rhodes and K. Dowding). The British Journal of Politics and International Relations 6: 129-164. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2004.t01-6-00131.x.
  36. Hellman, M., Monni, M. and Alanko, A. (2017). Declaring, shepherding, managing: The welfare state ethos in Finnish government programmes, 1950-2015. Research on Finnish Society 10: 9-22.
  37. Hyatt, D. (2013) The critical policy discourse analysis frame: helping doctoral students engage with the educational policy analysis, Teaching in Higher Education,18:8, 833-845, DOI: 10.1080/13562517.2013.795935.
  38. Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. London: Arnold.
  39. Jessop, B. (2002). The Future of the Capitalist State. Cambridge: Polity.
  40. Jessop, B. (2004). Critical semiotic analysis and cultural political economy. Critical Discourse Studies 1(2): 159-174.
  41. Jessop, B. (2010). Cultural political economy and critical policy studies. Critical Policy Studies 2(3-4): 336-356.
  42. Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. (1985/2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy (2nd edn). London: Verso.
  43. Lemke, J. (2005). Textual Politics: Discourse and Social Dynamics (2nd edn) London: Taylor and Francis.
  44. Lemke, T. (2012). Foucault, Governmentality, and Critique. London: Routledge.
  45. Machin, D. and Mayr, A. (2010). How To Do Critical Discourse Analysis: A multimodal introduction. London: Sage.
  46. Machin, D. and Mayr, A. (2013). Personalising crime and crime-fighting in factual television: An analysis of social actors and transitivity in language and images. Critical Discourse Studies 10(4): 356-372.
  47. Montesano Montessori, N. (2011). The design of a theoretical, methodo- logical, analytical framework to analyse hegemony in discourse. Critical Discourse Studies 8(3): 169-181.
  48. Mulderrig, J. (2009). The Language of Education Policy: From Thatcher to Blair. Saarbucken: VDM Dr Muller Verlag.
  49. Mulderrig, J. (2011). The grammar of governance. Critical Discourse Studies 8(1): 45-68.
  50. Mulderrig, J. (2012). The hegemony of inclusion: A corpus-based critical dis- course analysis of deixis in education policy. Discourse and Society 23(6): 701-728.
  51. Mulderrig, J. (2015). 'Enabling' participatory governance in education: A corpus-based critical policy analysis, in P. Smyers, D. Bridges, N. Burbules and M. Griffiths (eds) International Handbook of Interpretation in Educational Research, pp. 441-470. Dordrecht: Springer.
  52. Newman, J. and Clarke, J. (1994). Going about our business? The manageriali- zation of public services, in J. Clarke, A. Cochrane and E. McLaughlin (eds) Managing Social Policy, pp. 13-31. London: Sage.
  53. Ofgem (2017). State of the Energy Market Report. Available online at: https:// www .ofgem .gov .uk/ system/ files/ docs/ 2017/ 10/ state _of _the _market _report _2017 _web _1 .pdf [Accessed 12 January 2019].
  54. Pearce, M. (2004). The Marketization of Discourse about Education in UK General Election Manifestos. Text 24(2): 245-265.
  55. Pollit, C. (1990). Managerialism and the Public Services: Cuts or Cultural Change in the 1990s? Oxford: Blackwell.
  56. Reisigl, M. (2018). The discourse-historical approach, in J. Flowerdew and J.E. Richardson (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, pp. 44-59. Oxon, New York: Routledge.
  57. Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.
  58. Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2016). The discourse-historical approach (DHA), in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds) Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd edn), pp. 23-61. London: Sage.
  59. Schatz, E. (ed.) (2009). Political Ethnography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  60. Sum, N-L. and Jessop, B. (2013). Towards a Cultural Political Economy. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  61. Sum, N.-L. and Jessop, B. (2015). Cultural political economy and critical policy studies: Developing a critique of domination. In F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová and M. Orsini (eds) Handbook of Critical Policy Studies, pp. 128-150. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  62. Torgerson, D. (2015). Harold D. Lasswell and critical policy studies: The threats and temptations of power, in F. Fischer, D. Torgerson, A. Durnová and M. Orsini (eds) Handbook of Critical Policy Studies, pp. 27-46.
  63. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA, USA: Edward Elgar Publishing.
  64. Jane Mulderrig, Nicolina Montesano Montessori and Michael Farrelly -9781788974967 Downloaded from Elgar Online at 07/24/2020 09:47:46PM via free access
  65. Van Brussel, L., Carpentier, N. and de Cleen, B. (eds) (2019). Communication and Discourse Theory: Collected Works of the Brussels Communication and Discourse Theory Group. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  66. Van Leeuwen, T. (1995). Introducing Social Semiotics. London, New York: Routledge.
  67. Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The representation of social actors, in C.R. Caldas-Coulthard and M. Coulthard (eds) Texts and Practices, pp. 32-70. London and New York: Routledge.
  68. Van Leeuwen, T. (2007). Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse and Communication 1(1): 91-112.
  69. Van Leeuwen, T. (2008). Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  70. Wagenaar, H. (2011). Meaning in Action: Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. London/New York: Routledge.
  71. Wodak, R. (2009). Politics as Usual: The Discourse of Politics in Action. London: Palgrave.
  72. Wodak, R. (2015). The Politics of Fear: What Right-wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage.
  73. Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (eds). (2016). Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd edn). London: Sage.
  74. Wodak, R. and Krzyżanowski, M. (eds) (2008). Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  75. Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting Interpretive Policy Analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  76. Yanow, D. (2007). Interpretation in policy analysis: On methods and practice, Critical Policy Studies 1(1): 110-122. DOI: 10.1080/19460171.2007.9518511.
  77. Yanow, D. (2014). Interpretive analysis and comparative research, in I. Engeli and C. Rothmayr (eds) Comparative Policy Studies: Conceptual and Methodological Challenges, pp. 131-159. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Related papers

Critical Discourse Analysis and Critical Policy Studies (2013)
Norman Fairclough
View PDFchevron_right
Critical Policy Studies Discourse and democracy: critical analysis of the language of government by Michael Farrelly
Jane Mulderrig
View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis and the Study of Policy Making
Maarten Hajer

European Political Science, 2002

View PDFchevron_right
Discourse Analysis and Policy Discourse
Des Gasper

1996

As introduction to a collection on policy discourses and patterns of argumentation in international development, this paper clarifies different meanings of `discourse' and `discourse analysis', including as applied in development studies, and explains why effective discourse analysis requires systematic attention to both text and context, based on serious methods and theories. It then outlines important areas and current work in policy discourse analysis, including with reference to metaphors, framing, and policy narratives; and comments on main emphases in a set of papers which present methodical approaches of various types, for examining a range of discourses.

View PDFchevron_right
Analysing Dominant Policy Perspectives – The Role of Discourse Analysis
David Ockwell

A Handbook of Environmental Management

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Discourse Analysis
  • Sociology
  • Political Science
  • Critical Discourse Analysis
  • Critical Policy Studies
  • Civil Discourse
  • Critical Policy Discourse Analysis

    • Cited by

    Eleştirel Söylem Analizi Bağlamında Haber Sitelerinde Dijital Kimlik Başlıklı Haberlerin İncelenmesi
    Assoc. Prof. Sevgi Kavut

    Uluslararası Kültürel ve Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi (UKSAD), 2021

    Bir dijital veya elektronik kimlik; bir birey, kurum veya nesne hakkındaki bilgilerin dijital sunumudur. Bir kişinin veya kurumun gerçek kimliğine eş değer olan bilgisayar ağı olarak tanımlanır. Bu çalışmada dijital kimlik konulu haberlerin analizinde Teun Van Dijk'in eleştirel söylem çözümlemesinden yararlanılmıştır. Haber siteleri eleştirel söylem analizi ile incelenmiştir. Van Dijk, eleştirel söylem analizini makro ve mikro yapılar olmak üzere iki şekilde analiz etmektedir. Makro seviye analizlerde haber başlıkları, fotoğrafları, haber kaynakları gibi tematik yapılar incelenmektedir. Mikro seviyede ise sözcük yapıları ve dil seçimleri incelenmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı; SimilarWeb araştırmasında ilk 3 sırada yer alan haber siteleri üzerinden dijital kimlik haberleri eleştirel söylem analizi çerçevesinde analiz etmektir. Haberlerde başlıkların, haber girişlerinin, görsellerin, gelecek zaman ifadelerinin yer aldığı görülmüştür. Haberler retorik ve ikna stratejileri açısından değerlendirildiğinde; güvenilir kaynak kullanımı, kaynağın doğrudan ifadelerinin haber içerisinde aktarılması, haberlerin kesinlik ve doğruluğunun sayısal ifadelerle ve yüzdelerle desteklenmesi, olaylarla ilgili doğrudan betimlemesi yapılması stratejilerinden ve retorikten yararlanıldığı görülmüştür. Bu doğrultuda yetkili isimlerin görüşlerini paylaştığı, Türkiye'de bir ilk, dünyada ilk vb. ifadelerinin sıkça kullanıldığı gözlenmiştir.

    View PDFchevron_right
    Between the Rhetoric of Employability and the Reality of Youth (Under)Employment: NEET Policy Rhetoric in the UK and Scotland
    Charlotte McPherson

    Journal of Applied Youth Studies, 2021

    In the UK and Scotland, considerable resources have been devoted to tackling the persistent issue of young people who are, or are at risk of becoming, not in education, employment or training (NEET), a pathologized status that incurs significant penalties for young people and the economy. Using critical discourse analysis, this paper analyses and evaluates policy rhetoric to explore how the NEET ‘problem’, agenda and population are constituted by the UK and Scottish governments. In doing so, numerous unifying and problematic NEET policy tropes are identified, challenging the popular notion of significant policy divergence between the punitive reputation of Westminster and the image of Scottish governance as more socially democratic. Moreover, this paper differs from traditional policy analysis by also evaluating policy from the perspective of young people, drawing on empirical data from a qualitative study of the school-to-work transitions of NEET and marginally employed young peopl...

    View PDFchevron_right
    580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved