Summary Compilation - Discourse

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
PRESENTATIONS
English Education
Class A
FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

STATE UNIVERSITY OF YOGYAKARTA
2018
PREFACE
The objective in doing this project is to compile all the presentations

materials for dicourse analysis course. This course provides students with
theoretical and practical learning experience of the aspects of the study of
discourse, specifying how to analyze the written and spoken discourse.
This course aims at enabling students to gain sufficient knowledge of
discourse analysis. Added to this, it has three main aims: (i) to provide students
with an overview of theoretical models, experimental methods and current issues
in discourse analysis, (ii) to enable students to understand and assess current
scientific debates in the field of discourse analysis, and (iii) to provide students
with the necessary background for studying discourse analysis or related topics at
an advanced level.
In this project there are some summaries of presentations under the issue
of discourse analysis. Doing this project helped us to enhance our knowledge
about many theories, approaches, and the implications of discourse analysis.
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
COVER ................................................................................................................ 1
PREFACE ............................................................................................................ 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................... 3
PRESENTATIONS ............................................................................................. 4
Negotiating Meaning ............................................................................................ 5
Speech Acts ........................................................................................................... 8
What Speakers Do in Conversations ..................................................................... 10
Lexical Cohession Analysis .................................................................................. 13
Schematic Knowledge ........................................................................................... 16
Discourse and Ideology ......................................................................................... 19
Different of Text and Discourse ............................................................................ 22
Resisting Power in Discourse ............................................................................... 24
Time in Discourse ................................................................................................. 26
Classroom Discourse............................................................................................. 29
Frame and Script ................................................................................................... 32
Discourse and Media ............................................................................................. 34
Application of Critical Discourse ......................................................................... 36
Story Telling in Conversation ............................................................................... 38
Dissability of Discourse Analysis ......................................................................... 41
Tones and Their Meanings .................................................................................... 43
Discourse and Society .......................................................................................... 45
Conversation Analysis .......................................................................................... 51
Discourse of Advertising....................................................................................... 53
Lexical Ambiguity and Pun .................................................................................. 56
Background Knowledge ........................................................................................ 58
Determining Inference to be Made ....................................................................... 59
Online Discourse ................................................................................................... 60
3
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
PRESENTATIONS
4
NEGOTIATING MEANING
Presented by : Peter Eka Sanjaya

Student number : 15202241022
Summary :
Definition
Negotiation of meaning is an interpersonal skill that emerges in
conversational and communicative contexts that are natural or simulated. It helps
learners to generate input, output, and feedback that inform them of their success
in transmitting messages they intend to transmit, and it encourages them to
employ strategies that help them to get their messages across when breakdowns in
communication occur.
FOUR PROBLEMS WITH PROBLEM SOLVING THROUGH NfM

(Negotiation for Meaning)
We do not dispute that Long (1996) makes a good theoretical case for
NfM as valuable because of its privileged and productive connection of input,
internal learner capacities, selective attention, and output, but we raise four
concerns about it:
1. it can be tedious and face threatening;
2. it is typically lexical in nature and not morphosyntactic;
3. it is hard to identify because its surface structures are often ambiguous
(e.g. a clarification request can be identical in form to an expression of
enthusiastic comprehension);
4. quantifying instances of NfM may not provide an accurate depiction of the
value of a task in providing participants with opportunities for language
learning.
Regarding the first point, Aston (1986) noted that NfM is potentially
demotivating because it emphasizes a lack of success in using the target language.
Learners must acknowledge not understanding or not being understood. But, as
interaction is a social activity as well as a language learning one, its social
dimension cannot be overlooked. Learners who partially understand, ‘getting the
gist’ of what someone is saying, or who fear appearing to be pushy or a fool, may
avoid interrupting to request clarification or repetition of things that are not
entirely clear. The face-threatening nature of NfM was one explanation for why so
little of it could be detected in Foster’s (1998) study. Actively seeking to put
learners into situations where they are somehow required to track each other’s
understanding very closely (say, by designing tasks where nothing could be
achieved otherwise) invites frustration and embarrassment, two feelings which
probably do not facilitate SLA.
5
The second point is related to the first. As Lewis (1993) says, much can be
communicated successfully by lexis and contextual clues alone. (This is very
clearly the case in pidgin languages). The research on NfM has found that
communication breakdowns are more likely to be due to problems with lexis than
with morphosyntax, because morphosyntax is not so communicatively load-
bearing. Missing, incorrect or unrecognized morphemes marking tense, case, or
gender do not necessarily lead to communication failure in the way that missing,
incorrect, or unknown words do. Sato (1986), Foster (1998), Pica (1992), and Pica
et al. (1993) all find that it is predominantly problems with lexis, and not
morphosyntax, that cause communication failure. Extraordinarily, of the 569
negotiation sequences identified in the Pica (1992) data, not one was
morphological in nature. Thus, NfM is not only something which can be irritating
and frustrating, and something which people are naturally disinclined to, it is also
something which seems to miss the mark in SLA as far as morphosyntax is
concerned.
The third problem, that of identifying NfM in transcripts, is one for

researchers and not for learners. If NfM facilitates SLA, then finding out where,
how, and why it happens and what kinds of interactional adjustments it might
provoke, are all valid research questions; these questions require the researcher to
identify correctly where learners attempt to repair a communication breakdown.
As we discuss below, this is not straightforward. A rising intonation and verbatim
repetition of a partner’s utterance may signal understanding and interest in further
information just as easily as it may signal a lack of understanding and desire for
clarification.
Fourth and finally, when NfM is used as a measure of a task, the

quantitative analysis may not present an accurate depiction of a task’s value in
terms of providing opportunities for SLA. Nakahama et al. (2001) investigated
NfM in a two-way information gap task and a conversational task in a qualitative
study that combined discourse analysis and participant interviews. They conclude
that the traditional categories of NfM do not capture how the two tasks functioned
in affording learning opportunities to participants. The conversational task
resulted in fewer instances of NfM, but was more challenging and provided more
opportunities to consider the broader discourse. Nakahama et al.’s findings
suggest that the results of NfM research be considered with caution, as frequency
of NfM moves are not the only factors which make a task useful for language
learning. Their work underscores the value of a more holistic approach to SLA
which looks more broadly at the wide range of opportunities learners encounter
which result in greater facility with the language being learned.
6
Signals of comprehension difficulty
• Confirmation checks: Moves by which one speaker seeks confirmation of

the other’s
preceeding utterance through repetition, with rising intonation, of what
was perceived to be all or part of the preceding utterance.
• Clarification requests: Moves by which one speaker seeks assistance in
understanding the other speaker’s preceding utterance through questions,
...statements such as “I don’t understand,” or imperatives such as “Please
repeat.”
• Comprehension checks: Moves by which one speaker attempts to
determine whether the other speaker has understood a preceding message.
The Advantages of Negotiation of Meaning

1. Generate comprehensible input and output (Yuan and Wang, 2006).
2. Develop strategic competence through trouble-shooting strategies that help
the learner repair misunderstanding and avoid breakdown in
communication.
3. Develop sociolinguistic competence and social skills as learners try to find
a place in the group and attempt to convey their ideas according to the
roles they play in the group and consideration to the roles played by other
group members.
4. Generate feedback, negative, signaling non-understanding, or positive
confirming understanding and thus providing positive reinforcement.
5. Develop cooperative learning habits, which were found to be better
facilitators of language acquisition than competitive learning habits (Yuan
and Wang, 2006).
6. Reduce levels of anxiety in students and provide a positive atmosphere for
learning.
7. Teach students to work with others in order to achieve mutual
comprehension.
Source:
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami014
https://dept.english.wisc.edu/rfyoung/333/Pica.1987.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Rahma_Al-
Mahrooqi2/publication/288655682_Negotiating_meaning_in_the_EFL_context/li
nks/56b6702d08ae5ad36059b55a/Negotiating-meaning-in-the-EFL-context.pdf
7
SPEECH ACT
Presented by : Eva Pradana Santika

Summary
Speech-act theory was introduced in 1975 by Oxford philosopher J.L.
Austin in "How to Do Things with Words" and further developed by American
philosopher J.R. Searle. It considers three levels or components of utterances:
locutionary acts, illocutionary acts, and perlocutionary acts. Illocutionary speech
acts can also be broken down into different families, grouped together by their
intent of usage.
A. Locutionary, Illocutionary, and Perlocutionary Acts
In order to determine which way a speech act is to be interpreted, one must

first determine the type of act being performed. Austin categories all speech acts
as belonging to one of three categories: locutionary, illocutionary, or
perlocutionary acts.
According to Susana Nuccetelli and Gary Seay's "Philosophy of

Language: The Central Topics", locutionary acts are the mere acts of producing
some linguistic sounds or marks with a certain meaning and reference.
Illocutionary acts, then, carry a directive for the audience. It might be a promise,
an order, an apology, or an expression of thanks. These express a certain attitude
and carry with their statements a certain illocutionary force, which can be broken
into families. Perlocutionary acts, on the other hand, bring about a consequence to
the audience if something is not done. Unlike illocutionary acts, perlocutionary
acts project a sense of fear into the audience.
Take for instance the perlocutionary act of saying, "I will not be your
friend." Here, the impending loss of friendship is an illocutionary act while the
effect of frightening the friend into compliance is a perlocutionary act.
B. Families of Speech Acts

As mentioned, illocutionary acts can be categorized into common families of
speech acts. These define the supposed intent of the speaker. Austin again uses
"How to Do Things with Words" to argue his case for the five most common
classes:
 Verdictives, which present a finding.

 Exercitives, which exemplifies power or influence.
8
 Commissives, which consists of promising or committing to doing
something.
 Behavitives, which have to do with social behaviors and attitudes like
apologizing and congratulating.
 Expositives, which explain how our language interacts with itself.
David Crystal, too, argues for these categories in "Dictionary of

Linguistics." He says that, "Several categories of speech acts have been proposed
including directives (speakers try to get their listeners to do something, e.g.
begging, commanding, requesting), commissives (speakers commit themselves to
a future course of action, e.g. promising, guaranteeing), expressives (speakers
express their feelings, e.g. apologizing, welcoming, sympathizing), and
declarations (the speaker's utterance brings about a new external situation, e.g.
christening, marrying, resigning)."
It is important to note that these are not the only categories of speech acts
and they are not perfect nor exclusive. Kirsten said that there are many marginal
cases, and many instances of overlap, and a very large body of research exists as a
result of people's efforts to arrive at more precise classifications.
Sources:Austin JL. How to Do Things With Words. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press; 1975. https://www.thoughtco.com/speech-act-linguistics-1692119
9
WHAT SPEAKERS DO IN CONVERSATION
Presented by : Intan Prawesti

Summary
Discourse analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language 'beyond the
sentence'. This contrasts with types of analysis more typical of modern linguistics,
which are chiefly concerned with the study of grammar: the study of smaller bits
of language, such as sounds (phonetics and phonology), parts of words
(morphology), meaning (semantics), and the order of words in sentences (syntax).
Discourse analysts study larger chunks of language as they flow together.
Some discourse analysts consider the larger discourse context in order to

understand how it affects the meaning of the sentence. For example, Charles
Fillmore points out that two sentences taken together as a single discourse can
have meanings different from each one taken separately. To illustrate, he asks you
to imagine two independent signs at a swimming pool: "Please use the toilet, not
the pool," says one. The other announces, "Pool for members only." If you regard
each sign independently, they seem quite reasonable. But taking them together as
a single discourse makes you go back and revise your interpretation of the first
sentence after you've read the second.
Discourse and Frames

'Reframing' is a way to talk about going back and re-interpreting the meaning of
the first sentence. Frame analysis is a type of discourse analysis that asks, What
activity are speakers engaged in when they say this? What do they think they are
doing by talking in this way at this time? Consider how hard it is to make sense of
what you are hearing or reading if you don't know who's talking or what the
general topic is. When you read a newspaper, you need to know whether you are
10
reading a news story, an editorial, or an advertisement in order to properly
interpret the text you are reading. Years ago, when Orson Welles' radio play "The
War of the Worlds" was broadcast, some listeners who tuned in late panicked,
thinking they were hearing the actual end of the world. They mistook the frame
for news instead of drama.
Turn-taking
Conversation is an enterprise in which one person speaks, and another listens.
Discourse analysts who study conversation note that speakers have systems for
determining when one person's turn is over and the next person's turn begins. This
exchange of turns or 'floors' is signaled by such linguistic means as intonation,
pausing, and phrasing. Some people await a clear pause before beginning to
speak, but others assume that 'winding down' is an invitation to someone else to
take the floor. When speakers have different assumptions about how turn
exchanges are signaled, they may inadvertently interrupt or feel interrupted. On
the other hand, speakers also frequently take the floor even though they know the
other speaker has not invited them to do so.
Listenership too may be signaled in different ways. Some people expect frequent
nodding as well as listener feedback such as 'mhm', 'uhuh', and 'yeah'. Less of this
than you expect can create the impression that someone is not listening; more than
you expect can give the impression that you are being rushed along. For some, eye
contact is expected nearly continually; for others, it should only be intermittent.
The type of listener response you get can change how you speak: If someone
seems uninterested or uncomprehending (whether or not they truly are), you may
slow down, repeat, or over explain, giving the impression you are 'talking down.'
Frederick Erickson has shown that this can occur in conversations between black
and white speakers, because of different habits with regard to showing
listenership.
Discourse Markers
11
'Discourse markers' is the term linguists give to the little words like 'well', 'oh',
'but', and 'and' that break our speech up into parts and show the relation between
parts. 'Oh' prepares the hearer for a surprising or just-remembered item, and 'but'
indicates that sentence to follow is in opposition to the one before. However, these
markers don't necessarily mean what the dictionary says they mean. Some people
use 'and' just to start a new thought, and some people put 'but' at the end of their
sentences, as a way of trailing off gently. Realizing that these words can function
as discourse markers is important to prevent the frustration that can be
experienced if you expect every word to have its dictionary meaning every time
it's used.
Speech Acts
Speech act analysis asks not what form the utterance takes but what it does.
Saying "I now pronounce you man and wife" enacts a marriage. Studying speech
acts such as complimenting allows discourse analysts to ask what counts as a
compliment, who gives compliments to whom, and what other function they can
serve. For example, linguists have observed that women are more likely both to
give compliments and to get them. There are also cultural differences; in India,
politeness requires that if someone compliments one of your possessions, you
should offer to give the item as a gift, so complimenting can be a way of asking
for things. An Indian woman who had just met her son's American wife was
shocked to hear her new daughter-in-law praise her beautiful saris. She
commented, "What kind of girl did he marry? She wants everything!" By
comparing how people in different cultures use language, discourse analysts hope
to make a contribution to improving cross-cultural understanding.
12
LEXICAL COHESION ANALYSIS
Presented by : Ratma Siwiyandari
Summary
A. Definition
Halliday 1994:274 defines that Lexical Cohesion is a linguistic device
which helps to create unity of text and discourse. In contrast to grammatical
cohesion, lexical cohesion is the cohesive effect achieved by the selection of
vocabulary.
Lexical cohesion deals with the meaning in the text “This is the cohesive effect
achieved by the selection of vocabulary. (Halliday and Hasan, 1976). Lexical
cohesion is the cohesion that arises from semantic relationship between words.
Categories of Lexical Cohesion
1. Repetition
Repetition, or sometimes called reiteration, is the most direct and obvious

source of lexical cohesion since it is the more identical recurrence of a
preceding lexical item.
E.g.: Aldy met a bear. The bear was bulgy.
2. Synonym
Synonym refers to the fact of two or more words or expressions having the
same meaning.
E.g. : I heard a sound, but I couldn’t figure out where that noise came
from.
3. Hyponymy
Hyponymy describes a “specific-general” relationship between lexical

items.
13
E.g: Then, they began to meet vegetations – prickly cactus- like plants
and coarse grass...
4. Meronymy
It describes a “part-whole” relationship between lexical items.

5. Antonymy
It describes a relationship between lexical items that have opposite
meanings.
E.g.: Long and short.
B. Collocation
A natural combination of word; it refers to the way English words are
closely associated with each other (McCarthy et al, 2005:4). In other words, it is
the tendency of at least two lexical items to co-occur frequently in a language.
Example:
A little fat man of Bombay
Was smoking one very hot day
But a bird called a snipe
Flew away with his pipe
Which vexed the fat man of Bombay
In this example, smoke collocates with pipe and therefore makes the
occurence of pipe cohesive.
C. Lexical Chains
Lexical chains do not stop at sentence boundaries. They can connect a pair
of adjacent words or range over an entire text. Lexical chains tend to delineate
portions of the text that have a strong unity of meaning.
E.g.: In front of me lay a virgin crescent cut of pine bush. They were that kind
of trees you might see in the mountain. A lexical chain spanning these two
sentences in ( ‘virgin’, ‘pine bush’, ‘trees’ )
14
D. Why Lexical Cohesion is Important
1. Providing an essay to determine context to aid in the resolution of
ambiguityand in te narrowng to a specific of a word.
2. Providing a clue for the determination of coherence and discourse structure,
and hence the large meaning of the text.
Reference:
Article of Lexical Cohesion Analysis www.slideshare.com
15
SCHEMATIC KNOWLEDGE
Presented by : Maria Vineki Riyadini

Summary
A. BACKGROUND
According to Lopes (1986), in order to be successful in conducting the
English Language Teaching and learning process, teachers are demanded to
gain two types of knowledge sufficiently. They are systemic knowledge and
schematic knowledge.
B. DEFINITION
Systemic knowledge is the knowledge of the language. This systemic
knowledge embodies into four types of knowledge which are phonological,
syntatic, morphological and semantic knowledge. This knowledge concerns
with the inner structure of language.
In the other hand, schematic knowledge is the knowledge of content and
formal schemata. This knowledge deals with the external structure of language.
Other experts mention that schematic knowledge also can be differenciate
into frame theory and schema theory. The frame theory said that schematic
knowledge is the background knowledge that we have already construct in our
brain. This frame also known as a stereotype about something. In the other
hand, the schema theory said that the schmatic knowledge is the interlink
between the things we already known and the context of situation.
C. TYPES
According to Hedge (2008), there are four types of schematic knowledge
which are:
16
1. General knowledge :background knowledge, schemata.
2. Topic knowledge :some framework about the issue in
particular text or discourse.
3. Genre knowledge :the genre of the text or discourse.
4. Socio-cultural knowledge :social and physical environment contraints
with the language.
D. BENEFITS
Why this schematic knowlege is important? This schematic knowledge has
many benefits for the students. For example :
 This knowledge is switching the paradigm from learning language to
learning language in context.
 Contributes to success of making sense of the texts by improving hots of
the reader to comprehend the text.
 Communicate purposes are more easy to reach. It is because schematic
knowledge deals with the language in actual used that makes the students
have better understanding and exposure of English in actual used or daily
communication. In addition, the students will be more easy to
communicate in English in daily life.
E. HOW
There are some ways to promote schematic knowledge of the students
such as:
- Using authentic materials
- Using various sources to enhance students knowledge of English
- Improving the cultural awarness about local and global culture
- Actively involve in conference
- Having teacher exchange program to have a real experience.
F. CONCLUSION
With these two knowledge teacher can helps students to acquire the target
language. However, teachers tend to use the schematic knowledge because it
17
deals with the macroskills such as reading that usually students have some
problems on it. In systemic knowledge we only focus on the inner structure of
the target language and it is not enough to understand about how the language
is used in actual context.
It is not enough to deal with only the inner structure of language, we
should also understand language used in actual context. With these two
knowledge teacher can helps students to acquire the target language. Therefore,
both systemic and schematic knowledge should go hand in hand in language
teaching and learning process.
Reference(s):
18
DISCOURSE AND IDEOLOGY
Presented by : Diah Eka Hidayati

Student Number : 152022410
Summary:
People acquire, express and reproduce their ideologies largely by text or
talk. Therefore, discourse analysis is relevant to this topic. We can analyze the
ideology stated in written or spoken discourse.
A. Ideology
Ideology defines as;
a. Kinds of ‘ideas’, that is belief systems.
b. It is socially shared by the members of a collectively of social actors.
c. It is a foundational social belief of a rather general and abstract nature.
d. It is gradually acquired and (sometimes) changed through life or a life
period, and hence need to be relatively stable.
B. Ideology and Discurse Processing
It is assumed that ideologies are largely expressed and acquired by

discourse (written and spoken discourse). However, one thing to assume that
ideologies are ‘at the basis’ of discourse, and quite another to provide a detailed
theory of the actual (cognitive) processes involved in the production or
understanding of such ‘biased’ discourse. There are some things we should
consider when we analyze a discourse whether it is a racist, or sexist, or neoliberal
discourse.
1. Context
Language use in general, and discourse production and comprehension in
particular depend on, and influence, the relevant properties of the
communicative situation as interpreted by language users (define as context).
Context models control many aspects of discourse processing and make sure
that a discourse is socially appropriate. Context models may be ideologically
19
‘biased’ by underlying attitudes that are themselves ideological. Biased context
models may have biased discourse as a result.
2. Models
The meaning of discourse is controlled by subjective intrepretations of
language users of situation or events the discouse is about, that is by their
mental models. People understand a discourse if they have a mental model of
it.
3. Knowledge
Beside personal and subjective things such as context and model, people
also share something more general like knowledge, attitudes and ideologies.
This general knowledge may lead or take control in producing and
understanding discourse.
4. Group beliefs
Group beliefs are characteristically ideological. Members of a group are
controlled and organized by underlying ideologies. They control context and
models of their members when they speak or express their idea through
discourse.
C. Problems of Ideological Discourse Analysis

1. Intentionally
Whether specific discourse features, such as passive sentences or
nominalizations are ‘intentional aspects’ of ideological discourse, or
whether such structures are largely automatized and hence hardly
consciously controlled.
2. Ideological (over-) interpretation
We should be careful not to over-interpret discourse data. If the
passive sentences and nominalizations are used when agents are unknown,
this data should never be described in isolation, but in co-text as a whole
and in relation to the context.
20
3. Contextualization
Contextualization is defined as a subjective context models of
participants. Contextualization represents of the communicative situation
is ongoingly relevant for each participant at each moment of text or talk.
Context models might be assumed that it may be ideologically biased, e.g.
when speakers represent and evaluate their interlocutors in term of racist,
sexist, or other ideologies.
4. The discursive acquisition of ideologies
The primary source and medium of ideological learning are text
and talk. Ideologies usually are not merely acquired by imitating of other
members of group. Observations and participantions are usually
accompanied by reasons and explanations which may imply self-
attributions of superiority and other attributions of inferiority of difference.
In childhood, we gradually some basic elements of ideology by growing
up and participating. This kind of way we learn ideology is more or less
explicit, formalized and institutionalized. While in discourses, they may
apply ideologies more or less implicitly. Didactive ideological discourse is
much more explicit, namely by formulating the general contents of the
ideological schema of the group.
Reference(s):
21
DIFFERENT OF TEXT AND DISCOURSE
Presented by : Naufal Halim Wijaya

Student Number :
Summary:
The Difference of Text and Discourse
There are some people mentioned that discourse and text are the same but
actually they are different in many ways. Ironically, some of the different are
inconsistent even it is from known researchers.
But there are significant difference that most of the researchers agree.
Text Discourse
 Text is defined in terms of its being a  Discourse is viewed as a process.
physical product.  Spoken.
 Written.  Meaning is derived through the
 Meaning is not found in the text readers interaction with the text.
Although it is the most obvious difference, it has problems. There is

considerable overlap between the findings of studies claiming to look at text as
‘product’ and of those claiming to investigate discourse as ‘process’. Thus it is
not necessary to maintain a distinction between discourse analysis and text
analysis on the basis of investigating a process as opposed investigating a
product.
In other hand Widdowson (1973) had his own difference of both text and
discourse :
Text Discourse
 Is made up of senctences.  Is the use of such sentences.
 A text is made up of sentences  A discourse is made up of utterances
having the property of grammatical having the property of coherence.
cohesion.  Discourse analysis : Investigates
 Text Analysis : Deals with cohesion coherence.
22
Despite having more specific difference, it also has it own problems. It
contradicts the known and well-established distinction between ‘sentence’ and
‘utterance’ in literature and Widdowson did not maintain this distinction
himself. In 1978 he argued that ‘discourse’ is made up of sentences having the
properties of cohesion and coherence.
There are also differences found by researchers based on text and
discourse nature of the study which is :
Text Discourse
 To study text you will study the written  To study and analyze discourse you will
words that communicate some study who is communicating with whom
information which is structure, theme, through what medium and for what social
meaning, etc. purpose.
 To analyze text you will note the overall
structure and grasp the meaning of the
content as it answers your question.
23
RESISTING POWER IN DISCOURSE
Presented by : Iwan Susanto

Summary:
Fairclough (1994:50) argues that power is "implicit within everyday social
practices" and that it is predominant "at every level in all domains of life".
Power in discourse is concerned with discourse as a place where relations
of power are actually exercised and enacted. Meanwhile, power behind discourse
focuses on hoe certain types of discourse are shaped and constituted by relations
of power.
Strategies Power in Discourse
1. Question
2. Interruption
3. Instruction
4. Repetition
Examples
1. Question Power
Context : there are two persons A and B and they work together to
finish their worksheet which given by their teacher, but there is problem…
A : what are you doing?
A : why you just scrolling your phone?
A : why don’t you finish your job?
2. Repetition Power
Context : the class is running by learning process conducted by the
lecturer and the students, but a student come late for 20 minutes.
L : what time is it?
S : a quarter to eight
24
L : what time is it?
S : !@#$%^&
L : are you freshmen?
S : yes I am 6 semester
L : are you freshmen?
S : !@#$%^
L : now, please close the door from outside.
3. Interruption Power
Context : the time is up. Teacher must be go out from the class
because he has another class, but a student ask him about the topic they
have learnt.
T : okay, see you next week. Do not forget to study psycholinguistic,
next week we will do a quiz.
S : Sir!?
The teacher explicitly interrupts the students because of the time.
T : no question, no question!
What the paper has attempted to do is to study literary discourse as a

context for power to be resisted and
challenged from a new perspective: the conflictual strategies of power and has
been shown that discourse is not only a context for power to be enacted, exercised
and maintained but also a context for power to be questioned,
challenged, contested and resisted.
25
TIME IN DISCOURSE
Presented by : Dheanda Restu Jati Sakti

Summary:
Time in Discourse
O Time is a product of the activity of timing—the activity of measuring one
kind of activity or event sequence against another kind of activity or event
sequence
(Elias ,1992: 43)
A. Location and Extent

- The distinction between “location” goes back to the ancient distinction
between kairos, the “point in time” of an event or activity, and
26
- “extent”, chronos, its duration. In types of timing, both applicable to
location and to extent.
B. Time Summons
Timing is represented as being imposed through an authoritative
summons.
- Personalized Time Summons
it is given by someone who has, in the given context, the right to
authoritatively time the activities of another participant or type of
participant. This right to time has always been a sign of absolute
power.
It typically realized either by a verbal process clause with an
authoritative sayer and the timing of the activity as the projected clause
“It’s time to go home,” she [a mother] said.
Come when I call.
- Instrumentalized Time Summons
The time summons is instrumentalized.
Ex:
the alarm clock, the school bell, the church bell, the factory whistle,
the traffic light
- Disebodied Time Summons
A final kind of time summons has a more intangible source of
authority, time itself.
This can be variously interpreted as a kind of internalized sense of
timing (“I will know when the time comes”), as a kind of inescapable
fate, or as a form of timing ordained by time itself.
C. Synchronization
The location and/or extent of social activities are timed in relation to
other social activities, or to events in the natural world, or to artificially
created events, such as the passing of time on a clock.
- Social Synchronization
In social synchronization, activities are synchronized with other social
activities.
They start and end at the same time (or before, or after) other social
activities.
This involves awareness of the social environment, attentiveness to
what other people are doing.
Example:
By lunchtime they were ready to go.
You have to wait until we get back.
- Natural Synchronization
Here, activities are synchronized with natural events, starting or ending
(or lasting as long as) specific observable phenomena in the natural
environment (the movement of planets and stars, the flight of birds,
etc.) Example:
When the mixture is bubbling, tip in all the flour.
27
Whoever wants to go on vacation when the weather is nice is
persuaded not to do it because right at that time important orders could
come in.
- Mechanical Synchronization
Mechanical synchronization results from practices of calculating time
and devising instruments that provide artificial events with which
human actions can be synchronized.
Example:
They arrived at school at 9:30 a.m.
Children were admitted on 5 September.
They had a two-week break.
D. Punctuality
It is an increased anxiety about starting activities or getting to places
exactly on time.
Leisure activities, for instance, require less punctuality than work
activities, and it may even be embarrassing to arrive too punctually at an
evening social occasion.
Punctuality expresses itself for the most part in relational clauses with a
punctuality attribute (“late,” “early,” “on time,” “on schedule,” etc.) or in
circumstantial, as in the following examples:
We are going to be late for dinner.
We should be arriving well on schedule.
I’m sure it’s not too early to wish you a merry Christmas.
E. Exact and Inexact Timing

Timing may be exact (e.g., “at six o’clock”) or inexact.
Inexact includes cases where timing is still regulated but in a relatively
relaxed way (e.g., “during the night,” “from time to time”) and cases of
deregulated, “flexible” timing, where timing is represented as not
regulated at all.
F. Unique and Recurring Timing
- unique, pertaining only to a single instance of an activity,
- recurring, pertaining to every instance (or most instances) of a given
activity.
Source: Leeuwen, Theo van. 2008. Discourse and practice : new tools for critical
discourse analysis. Madison Avenue, NY: Oxford University Press.
28
CLASSROOM DISCOURSE
Presented by : Dina Wikantari

Summary:
A. Definition
The term classroom discourse refers to the language that teachers and
students use to communicate with each other in the classroom.
B. History
 The earliest systematic study of classroom discourse was reported in
1910 and used stenographers (people whose job is to transcribe speech
in shorthand) to make a continuous record of teacher and student talk
in high school classrooms.
 The first use of audiotape recorders in classroom was reported in the
1930s, and during the 1960s there was a rapid growth in the number of
studies based on analysis of transcripts of classroom discourse.
 In 1973, Barak Rosenshine and Norma Furst described 76 published
systems for analysing classroom discourse.
 From the early studies, it became clear that the verbal interaction
between teachers and students had an underlying structure that was
much the same in all classrooms, and all grade levels.
 Essentially, a teacher asks a question, one or two students answer, the
teacher comments on the students’ answers (sometimes summarizing
what has been said), and then asks a further question. This cyclic
pattern will repeat.
29
C. Example
This excerpt from a whole-class discussion in a fifth-grade science
class illustrates the nature of the structure. The teacher was reviewing what
the students learned earlier in the day during a science activity on light.
T: What is transparent? Something is transparent. What does that mean?

We did that this morning, didn’t we? What does transparent mean? (asking
questions)
S: Ah, it doesn’t…. It goes through. (answering question)
T: Can you explain that a little more?
S: Well, it goes through like, um… You can,, like, you shine a torch and
you can see.
T: What goes through?
S: The light.
T: The light. Light can pass through something if it’s transparent. What’s
next one? Translucent. What does it mean? Jordan? (asking another
question)
S: Um, just some light can get through.
T: absolutely. Some light can get through. Can you look around the room
and see an example of something that might be translucent? Well, you all
can tell me something in here that’s translucent because you discovered
something this morning that would let some light through. What was it?
S: Paper.
T: Right. Some paper is translucent. It will allow some light to pass
through it. Think of something else that’s translucent.
S: Oh, um, the curtains over there, you can see right through them.
T: OK. That’s interesting. They do let some light through don’t they.
Another example? Think about light bulbs. Do you think some light bulbs
would be translucent?
S: Yes.
T: They would allow some light through?
30
S: No. Transparent.
T: You think they’re transparent. They let all the light through. I’m not too
sure about that one either. So, we might investigate that one.
The excerpt illustrates how teacher use questions and student

answer to engage the students’ minds, and to evaluate what the students
know and can do.
Bracha Alpert has identified three different patterns of classroom
discourse:
1. Silent (The teacher talks almost all the time and asks only an occasional
question.)
2. Controlled (As in the excerpt above.)
3. Active (The teacher facilitates while the students talk primarily to each
other.)
• Earlier research on classroom discourse tended to focus on specific teacher

or student behaviours, and, because of the key role that they play, teacher
questions have been most frequently studied.
• Questions that challenge students to think deeply are more likely to
develop students’ knowledge and intellectual skills than questions that
require recall of facts.
• In the excerpt above, the first question required simple recall (what does
transparent mean?) while the last question required students to apply their
understanding of transparent to their own experience.
• As interest in this area developed, researchers argued that the learning
process was controlled in the participating in classroom discourse.
• There is still a need, however, for these detailed linguistics analyses of
classroom discourse to include independent evidence of how students’
knowledge and beliefs are changed by their participation in the discourse.
31
Reference:
http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/1916/Discourse.html (accessed
on April, 2nd 2018)
FRAME AND SCRIPT

Presented by : Muhammad Hariza
Summary :
Frame
One way of human gained their knowledge is based on their experience. As
Minsky said on 1975 that our knowledge is stored in memory in the form of data
structures, which it called ‘Frames’ and which represent stereotyped situations.
Some experts are tries to explain that terms, here are some of the definition that
provides by the experts:
 When one encounters a new situation (or makes a substantial change in
one’s view of the present problem) one selects from memory a structure called a
Frame. This is a remembered framework to be adapted to fit reality by changing
details as necessary. (Minsky,1975
 A process of fitting one is told into the framework established by what one
already know is. (Charniak, 1979)
The basic structure of a frame contains labeled slots which can be filled with
expressions, fillers (Which may also be other frames). For instance, in a frame
representing a typical AUSTRALIA, there will be slots labeled ‘aborigin’,
‘boomerang’, ‘kangaroo’ ‘koala etc. This means that AUSTRALIA can be
represented by filling the slots with the particular features of that individual
country.
In daily life we can see frame application in the AI technology, for example when
we type ‘P’ on google, it recommends ‘politic, party, pen’ depends on what most
people search using the word ‘P’. Furthermore the application of frame is also
used in sociology and linguistic
Script
Script is similar to frame, this because script was developed by analogy with
Minsky Frame, but specialized to deal with event sequences (Schank & Abelson,,
1977) The script concept was used by Abelson (1976) to investigate the
relationship between attitudes and behavior but, when applied to text
understanding,, it incorporates a particular analysis of language understanding
proposed by Schank (1972) as conceptual dependency.
In a development of the conceptual analysis of sentence Riesback & Schank
(1978) Describe how our understanding of what we read or we hear is very much
32
‘expectation based’. Which is when we read or hear example we have very strong
expectation about what, conceptually will be in the x- position.
For instance:
Michael has fall from his bike.
When the ambulance came, it took Michael to the x.
We will point out that x will be hospital since our expectation are conceptual
rather than lexical.
Script will also useful in analyzing stories, Riesback and Schank supplement the
conceptual analysis of sentences with a more general understanding device
described as a script which has similar function to Minskyan frame. Whereas a
frame is generally treated s an essentiallu stable set of facts about world a script is
more programmatic in that it incorporates a standard sequence of events that
describes a situation (1978).
Another application of Script is in the understanding of newspaper stories about
car accidents. Evidence of a computer understanding a stories through the a of the
script application procedure is presented in the capacity to answer questions
about a story
33
DISCOURSE AND MEDIA: ANALYZING
MEDIA TALK USING CONVERSATION
ANALYSIS
Presented by : Sintya Nirmayasari

Summary:
A. Ethnomethodology
Social order can be understood from the point of view of the member of a
society, the social ‘actor’. And here, to put it very simply, we are not
programmed, or conditioned, to act in socially acceptable ways (with non-
compliance simply being labelled as ‘deviance’); rather, social actors have
their own understandings of what counts as socially appropriate, and they find
ways of checking these out against the perceptions of fellow actors.
Socialisation can be understood, not so much as the internalisation of pre-given
social ‘norms’, rather as a continuous process of negotiation, an
‘intersubjective’ activity, where members of social groups collectively
determine the boundaries of socially acceptable behaviour.
B. Adjacency
An elementary observation that some kinds of utterance expect an
immediate and appropriate response: such that questions require answers, a
command or ‘summons’ expects a response, and recipients of greetings (such
as ‘hello’, ‘hi’, ‘good evening’ etc.) are expected to return the greeting, or at
least acknowledge it.
34
C. Turn-taking
In multi-party conversations has the potential for chaos, with everyone
trying to speak at once, but in fact a set of rules are followed which minimise
this possibility.
D. Sequencing
As developing patterns of interaction, running across several turns, which
are reflexively monitored by participants.
Resource:
Media Talk Spoken Discourse on TV and Radio by Andrew Tolson
35
APPLICATION OF CRITICAL DISCOURSE IN
MEDIA DISCOURSE STUDIES
Presented by : Biworo Retno M.

Summary :
A. Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
A branch of discourse analysis that goes beyond how and why discourse
cumulatively contributes or the reproduction of macro-structures and highlights
the traces of cultural and ideological meaning.
B. Critical Discourse Studies

 CDA is problem-oriented
 CDA is an interdisciplinary
 CDA is perceived as a social research
 CDA is interested in unethical issues
 CDA emphasizes spontaneous assessment.
C. Social Theory of Discourse

1st : discourse is both constitutive and constituted
2nd : social practice constructs the social identities and the social relationships
between various entities and classes in society
3rd : social practice contributes to the system of knowledge.
D. Van Dijk’s Ideological Square

The four principles are as follows:
 Emphasis positive things about US
36
 Emphasis negative things about Them
 De-Emphasis negative things about Us
 De-Emphasis positive things about Them
E. Wodak’s Discourse-Historical Approach

1. Three types of critique :
a. Text or discourse-immanent critique aims at discovering
inconsistencies
b. Sociodiagnostic critique
c. Future-related prospective critique seeks to contribute to the

improvement of communication
2. Three –steps analytical procedures in DHA

a. The topic of discourse is identified
b. Discursive strategies are investigated
c. The specific context-dependent linguistic realizations are examined.
F. Questions are used in DHA Analysis
1. How are persons, objects, phenomena/events, processes and actions named
and referred to linguistically?
2. What characteristics, qualities and features are attributed to social actors,

objects, phenomena/events process?
3. What arguments are employed in the discourse in question?
4. From what perspective?
5. Are the respective utterances articulated overtly; are they intensified or

mitigated?
Source : 3L: The Southest Asian Journal of English Language Studies-Vol

21 (2): 57-68
37
STORY-TELLING IN CONVERSATION
Presented by : Shofiyah
Summary :
A. Stories
Stories occur during interaction, and in telling the stories it is
accomplished collaboratively by the participants in the conversation. Stories, on
the other hand, are designed for the interaction in which they occur. In telling the
story, the teller may tell it in response to a question by a prior speaker in which
the production of the story is required as the answer.
Furthermore, story-tellers also have to deal with the legitimacy of
the story for the current conversation. This means that there is a
probability that their story may not be accepted as relevant or newsworthy
A story is categorized as tellable when the story in unknown and of
potential interest.
B. Beginning and ending stories

Identifying how the talk preceding the story is aimed at understanding how
stories are placed in conversation. Since stories are sequentially implicative, the
interactional relevance of stories will continue into the following turn at talk. So,
it can be drawn that the analysis of beginnings and endings of stories begins
before the story is told and ends after the story turn has finished.
Stories are locally occasioned by the emerging turn-by-turn talk.
Jefferson (1978) argues that this local occasioning has two possible
trajectories:
1. the prior talk may remind a participant of a particular story, which

may or may not be topically coherent with the turn-by-turn talk;
2. a story may be methodically introduced into the talk.
Where the teller is reminded of the story, it is usually preceded by
a disjunct marker such as oh, by the way or incidentally (cf. Jefferson,
1978). Stories are usually preceded by a type of pre-telling, usually
called a story preface. It deals with issues of tellability of a story, though
they perform additional interaction work. A story beginning then, involves
a three-turn structure:
1. a first turn with the story preface in which the story-teller projects a forthcoming
story and indicates a position in the conversation as a potential story-teller;
2. a second turn in which another participant aligns as the story recipient;
3. a third turn in which the story is told.
38
The following are some formulaic pre-tellings which are
potentially useable as story prefaces.
Where these forms are used, a no answer indicates that the story
being proposed is a tellable in the conversation and orients to the issue
of telling unknowns.
Story prefaces, may, therefore, be used to achieve a number of
things relevant to the telling of a story:
1. they negotiate an interactional space in which the story can be told as a multi-unit
turn;
2. they negotiate issues of tellability
3. they provide some indication roughly what the story is about.
C. Story Structure
Godwin (1984) has described the internal subcomponents of stories
as interactionally accomplished elements which participants use as
resources for structuring and understanding their participation in story-
telling. Godwin divided the structure of a story as background information
and climax
The division of the story is oriented to by the participants as a
resource for their participation in the story. The story structure which
emerges is not a mechanical performance based on the emerging speech,
but rather an interactional accomplishment of structure through the process
of interaction.
D. Second Stories
Second stories are not second simply because they occur after first
stories, they are also second in that they show relationships to first stories.
The second story is also tied to the first at a level of greater detail in that
both refer to instances of 'pressure' being the source of the problem and as
the upshot of the story. Second stories are also often not preceded by
interactional work to establish the story. They rely on their positioning
after a prior activity and invoke the structure which has previously been
made relevant.
E. Stories of shared experience
39
In telling the story, other participants may also be involved in the
events related in the story, but even those who were not involved may
insert additions, corrections, comments, questions, protests, etc. Stories of
shared experience, however, are problematic, since:
- there are two or more participants who are qualified to tell the story
- there are two or more people who are not possible recipients of the telling
(Mandelbaum, 1989).
In some cases, the teller may involve another potential teller in the story
by eliciting corroboration of the information told in the story through
means of a repair initiation (C. Goodwin, 1987).
Reference:
Liddicoat, A.J. 2007. An Introduction to Conversation Analysis. London:

Continuum.
40
DISABILITY OF DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
Presented by : Dewi Endah Astuti

Summary :
Disability is an underexplored topic in discourse analysis. A stronger
emphasis on disability issues would be in keeping with the academic principles
and political priorities of critical discourse analysis. Simultaneously, a discourse
analysis perspective is needed in disability studies. Although that field has
produced a considerable amount of discourse-oriented research, it is structured
around theoretical models that appear adversarial and incompatible. A greater
awareness of discourse analysis will aid disability studies, both in terms of
theoretical development and in furthering its goals of social change.
Disability, which was for a very long time impossible to discern in the
mosaic of the cripples, the freaks, the blind, the deaf and the dumb, has been
articulated as a distinct pattern of oppression, discrimination and stigma. The field
of disability studies, which has become an established academic discipline, aims
to explore new territory. The establishment of disability studies has also been a
way of opening new fields of inquiry, of producing new knowledge about human
experience and altering, refining or subverting old truths. On this basis, discourse
analysis and disability studies are engaged in much the same pursuit.
Disability studies, therefore, aims to make explicit the discourses that
reproduce disability as an oppressive category. One such discourse is that of the
normal/abnormal, in which deviations from the statistical mean of human ability
or appearance are construed as monstrous or deeply pathological.
The roots of discourse-focused disability studies can be found in mid-
century sociology, as in the work of Goffmann and Zola, and somewhat later in
history, as with Stiker. From the mid-1990s onwards, however, there is a
significant expansion of disability studies as an interdisciplinary endeavor. Both
41
in the USA and in the UK, scholars in the humanities and the social sciences
started to undertake research with a focus on the discourses of disability, whether
explicitly, as in the anthology Disability Discourse (Corker and French, 1999), or
implicitly, in the course of anthropological, sociological or literary investigations.
Four main strands of disability discourse studies can be discerned from
this period onwards. First, particularly in the UK, disability research that aimed at
criticizing the social model, or recalibrating it, often took a discourse approach, by
engaging with the problematic nature of the disability/impairment dichotomy of
classical social model scholarship. Second, in the Foucauldian vein, there have
been studies of the history of institutions and medical practice (Gleeson, 1999,
2001b; Tremain, 2005). Third, there have been numerous intercultural
investigations of disability, most often conducted by anthropologists (Kohrman,
2005; Livingston, 2005; Petryna, 2002), that demonstrate the importance of
national or regional cultural discourses for the meaning of disability. Fourth, there
is a considerable research tradition that centers on the various cultural discourses
of disability that manifest themselves in art, literature, cinema and various other
narrative texts or performances.
There are 2 roles of discourse analysis in disability.First, because
discourse analysis can show how the current models grew out of different
discourses, and provide an outside perspective on the potential for integrating
them. Second, because discourse analysis can make explicit how the models must
be rephrased and rethought when applied to the vast and varied fields of discourse
production in which disability is currently being introduced as a key concept.
Reference :
42
TONES AND THEIR MEANINGS
Presented by : Istian Sabarina

Summary :
A. Types of tones
These are the variation in pitch that the speaker might use.
B. Grammatical approaches
- Intonation has a grammatical function, that is to say, that there are ‘correct’
intonations for things such as questions, sentence-tags, subordinate clauses,
and so on.
- The more we look at intonation and grammar, the more we are forced to
conclude that they are separate systems which work independently, but in
harmony, to contribute to discourse meaning.
C. Attitudinal approaches
- By far the most common view of intonation is that it is related to
attitude and/or emotion, that some intonations express ‘surprise’, or
‘detachment’, and so on.
D. Interactive approaches
- The interpretation of tone choice that seems most reliable and which
seems to make most sense is to see tones as fulfilling an interactive
role in the signaling of the ‘stage of play’ in discourse.
43
- The speaker has to judge how to deliver the tone group. Should it be
delivered as open-ended as incomplete in some way, as non-conducive
with regard to a possible response, as background to what is the main
message, as referring to common ground? Or on the other hand, should
it be delivered as possessing a finality or completeness, as ‘telling’
rather than simply referring to background, as conducive towards the
response of the hearer, or as the main core of the message?
Reference:
44
DISCOURSE AND SOCIETY
Presented by : Nisa Amalia Hasanah

Summary :
It is generally agreed that an adequate study of the relations between discourse
and society presupposes that discourse should be located in society, as a form of
social practice or as an interaction of social group members (or institutions).
1. Societal analysis: power, dominance and access

Social power here is simply defined as a property of intergroup
relations in terms of the control exercised by (the members of) one group or
institution over the actions of (the members of) another group. Such power is
based on access to socially valued resources, such as force, wealth, income,
status or knowledge. For specific groups, social power may be limited to
special domains or situations (for example, those of politics, the media or
education). Also, power is seldom absolute, as long as other groups retain
some measure of freedom of action and mind. Indeed, many forms of power
breed resistance, in the form of attempts to exercise counter-power.
Critical discourse analysis is interested in dominance, defined here
as an abuse of social power abuse, that is, as a deviation from accepted
standards or norms of (inter)action, in the interest of the more powerful
group, resulting in various forms of social inequality. Dominance is
reproduced by enforcing privileged access to social resources by
discrimination. It is also reproduced by legitimating such access through
forms of mind control such as manipulation and other methods for seeking
acceptance or compliance among the dominated group. More generally, this
can be viewed as manufacturing consent and consensus.
45
Dominance also involves special access to various forms of
discourse or communicative events. Dominant groups, or elites can be
defined by their special access to a wider variety of public or otherwise
influential discourses than less powerful groups. That is, elites have more
active and better controlled access to the discourses of politics, the media,
scholarship, education or the judiciary. They may determine the time, place,
circumstances, presence and role of participants, topics, style and audience of
such discourses. Also, as a form of topical access , elites are the preferred
actors represented in public discourse, for instance in news reports. This
means that elites also have more chances to have access to the minds of
others, and hence to exercise persuasive power. Less powerful groups have
active access only to everyday conversations with family members, friends or
colleagues, less controlled access to institutional dialogues (for example, in
their interaction with doctors, teachers or civil servants), and largely passive
access to public discourses, such as those of the mass media.
The reproduction of dominance in contemporary society is largely
managed by maintaining and legitimating such unequal access patterns to
discourse and communication, and thus to the public mind: who is allowed
(or obliged) to speak or listen to whom, how, about what, when and where
and with what consequences.
2. Social Cognition
Social cognition should be analysed as the interface between
discourse and society and between individual speech participants and the
social groups of which they are members: (1) discourse is actually
produced/interpreted by individuals, but they are able to do so only on the
basis of socially shared knowledge and beliefs; (2) discourse can only affect
social structures through the social minds of discourse participants, and
conversely (3) social structures can only affect discourse structures through
social cognition. Social cognition entails the system of mental strategies and
structures shared by group members, and in particular those involved in the
46
understanding, production or representation of social objects , such as
situations, interactions, groups and institutions.
a. Models.
All social perception and action, and hence also the production and
interpretation of discourse, are based on mental representations of
particular episodes.
b. Context models.
A special and very influential type of model is the model discourse
participants form, and continuously update, of the present communicative
situation. Such context models feature representations of the participants
themselves, their ongoing actions and speech acts, their goals, plans, the
setting (time, place, circumstances) or other relative properties of the
context.
c. Social knowledge.
Knowledge about language, discourse and communication is obviously a
crucial precondition for verbal interaction, and may be applied in the
context model of a communicative event. Similarly, social members
share social knowledge, represented in scripts, about stereotypical social
episodes, such as shopping or travelling. Such social scripts are formed
through inferences from repeatedly shared models.
d. Social attitudes.
In writer’s personal opinions, as represented in models about specific
events, may be contextually specific, individual instantiations of social
opinions. These general opinions may further be organized in structured
opinion complexes, which can be denoted with the traditional notion of
attitude.
e. Ideologies.
Attitudes may in turn be grounded on and organized by ideological
frameworks. General norms, values and goals of groups and cultures
form the elements from which such ideological frameworks are built.
47
Thus ideologies are the more or less permanent, interest-bound,
fundamental social cognitions of a group. Their relationship to discourse
and language use is indirect. According to our theory of ideology, they
operate through attitudes and models before they become manifest in
action or discourse.
f. Strategies.
Models, knowledge, attitudes and ideologies are permanently formed,
updated and changed by various types of mental operations, such as the
basic processes of memory search, retrieval, (de)activation, as well as the
more complex mental work involved in interpretation, inference,
categorization and evaluation. Unlike the fixed rules of grammar, we
assume that these operations are strategic . That is to say, they are on-line
and tentative - but also fast, goal-oriented, contextdependent, parallel
(operating at several levels) and using different kinds of (often
incomplete) information at the same time.
3. The Discourse-Cognition-Society Link

This brief review of the architecture of the social mind implies that
all links between discourse and society are mediated by social cognition.
Social structures of dominance can only be reproduced by specific acts on the
part of dominant group members, and such acts are themselves controlled by
social cognition. Thus elite discourses such as news reports about ethnic
affairs influence societal structures of ethnic dominance through socially
shared representations of dominant group members about ethnic minority
groups and ethnic relations. Along both directions of influence, social
cognitions provide the crucial interface. And discourse is in turn essential for
the acquisition and change of social cognition.
Discourse structures express structures of mental models, which
are related to more permanent social representations such as knowledge,
attitudes and ideologies, which in turn are the shared ways groups and
cultures represent their goals, interests, concerns, structures or institutions.
48
An analysis of the position of discourse in society needs a
cognitive interface. Institutions, social structures, group relations, group
membership, power, dominance, at the macro level, as well as structures of
situations and interactions at the micro level of society, can only be
expressed, marked, described, enacted or legitimated in discourse through
their representations in attitudes, scripts and mental models of events. The
same is true for the way discourse affects the social situation, speech
participants, as well as broader social structures Analysis, therefore, must
always be that of discourse-cognitionsociety. In such a triangle of relations,
both discourse and cognition are not merely linguistic or psychological
objects, but also inherently social. Social cognition is acquired, used and
changed in social situations, and discourse is one of the major sources of its
development and change. No social actions or practices, and hence no group
relations of power or dominance, are conceivable without social cognition
and discourse.
Discourse plays a prominent role in the reproduction of racism
defined as ethnic group dominance. Ethnic dominance, especially of white
elites, may be enacted by limiting and controlling active or passive access to
discourse, genres or communicative events. As a consequence, minority
activities and opinions are less covered, and they are less quoted, which in
turn influences the readers models for ethnic events. These models, then, are
necessarily partial, imbalanced and organized by a white group perspective.
Thus structures of dominance, as enacted in the routines of news- gathering
and news-writing, are represented in the mental models of journalists, which
in turn influence the structures and the meanings of news reports.
On the whole, such models tend to represent minorities negatively,
and the dominant group as positive or neutral. If these models meet a number
of other conditions, such as structural resemblance, plausibility or
prototypicality, they may be generalizable to socially shared prejudices,
which in turn represent the ideological level of racism. Thus, through these
social cognitions, discourses may contribute to the reproduction of racism in
49
society. Structures and strategies of news manipulate model-building of the
readers and indirectly manufacture the ethnic consensus. Discourse topics
(such as crime, deviance, violence or cultural differences of minority groups)
define the ethnic situation, and what information should have a prominent
position in mental models. News schemata may further organize such topics
in ways that make some events more prominent, and others less prominent,
such as negative properties of the majority, primarily intolerance, prejudice
and racism. At the level of style, rhetoric and local meanings, negative
properties of minorities may be emphasized, in such a way that models easily
fit or confirm existing stereotypes or prejudices. While being able to
variously code and enact relations of dominance, or other social structures,
through the social minds of group members, discourse may in the same way
also reproduce such dominance. It does so by affecting the models and social
representations of social members, which in turn monitor social actions and
interactions that implement dominance. At the macro level, discourse thus
indirectly conditions the group relations, organizations and institutions that
define social structure. Research in the near future should focus on the more
subtle and complex of these relationships between discourse, cognition and
society.
Reference : Discourse and Cognition in Society-Teun A, van Dijk
50
CONVERSATION ANALYSIS
Presented by : Ari Bekti S.

Summary :
A. Brief History of Conversation Analysis
Conversation analysis (CA) was originated by an American
sociologist, Harvey Sacks in the 1960s. He had published some articles and
many classical studies in early CA (working together with two important
figures, Emanuel Schegloff and Gail Jefferson) that have had an enormous
influence among researchers investigating the practices of human
communication.
B. What is Conversation Analysis?

According to Hutchby (2006), conversation analysis can be
understood as part of a borader movement within both linguistics and
sociology that sought to challenge ideas about everyday language, or more
specifically, talk.
CA is also in favor of the view that language use is a form of social
action, and that the study of everyday talk cannot properly be undertaken
outside of the interactional contexts in which the talk takes place. But CA
needs to be understood not just in relation to linguistic ideas but also in terms
of a critique of prevailing sociological notions.
Another simple way to describe what conversation analysis is that
CA looks at ordinary everyday spoken discourse and aims to understand how
people manage their interactions and also how social relations are developed
through the use of spoken discourse.
51
C. Sequence and Structure in Conversation
A particular interest of conversation analysis is the sequence and structure
of spoken discourse. Aspects of conversational interactions that have been
examined from this perspective include:
 Conversational openings and closings (telephone conversations):
- Openings: Schegloff (1979) found that most U.S telephone openings
include an identification and recognition sequence.
- Closings: Button (1987) points out that telephone closings usually go
over four turns of talk, made up of pre-closing and closing.
 Turn taking: how people take and manage turns in spoken interactions.
 Adjacency pairs: utterances produced by two successive speakers in a way
that the second utterance is identified as related to the first one.
 Feedback: participants involved in conversation have to give some
feedback to the speaker to show that they are interested in what the
speaker is talking.
 Repair: participants in interaction can make corrections through repair
either on their own initiative (self-repair) or be required by the other
participants (other-repair).
Reference :
52
DISCOURSE OF ADVERTISING
Presented by : Ayu Larasati

Summary :
A. What is the discourse of advertising?

The discourse of advertising explores the language of contemporary
advertising. The words of advertisements are not viewed in isolation, however,
but in complex interaction with music and pictures, other texts around them,
and the people who make and experience them.
B. Why study advertising?

In contemporary society, advertising is everywhere. It can be found at the
street, shop, watch television, go through mail, internet, newspaper, etc.
Attitudes to advertising can be indicative of our personality, or social, and
ideological position. It may be argued that many ads are skillful, clever, and
amusing, and it is unjust to make them a scapegoat for all the sorrows of the
modern world.
Adversiting is a topic which both causes and reveals existing social
divisions. For this reasons, in an educational setting, advertising can be a
stimulus—vying with the claims made for literature in a liberal education—for
discussion of urgent issues: the destruction of the environment, the wealth gap,
the merits of socialism and capitalism, the growth of a world culture, the
struggle of feminism and patriarchy, the status of art and popular culture, the
consequences of mass communication and high technology.
Some of the sharpness of earlier differencess of opinion may have abated.
The presence of adveritising now sems so unshakable and secure. It is possible
to influence society for good as well as for bad.
Ads use fictions, word play, compressed story telling, stylized acting,
photography, cartoons, puns, rhythms in ways which are often memorable,
enjoyable, and amusing. It seems that with many ads, we suffer a split,
contradictory reaction: involuntary spontancous enjoyment, conscious
reflective rejection.
53
C. Advertising as discourse
Although the main focus of discourse analysis is on language, it is not

concerned with language alone. It also examines the context of communication.
Text: is used to mean linguictic forms, temporarily and artificially separated from
context for the purposes of analysis.
Context: includes substance, music and pictures, paralanguage, situation, co-text,
intertext, participants, and functions.
Discourse is text and context together interavting in a way which is perceived as
meaningful and unified by the participants.
Describing advertising as discourse is both complex and both difficult in which

trying to describe all these elements, and their effects on each other.
Genres
The importance of genres in a theory of communication, and of the way
participants recognize them is another reason why dsicourse analysis cannot be
limited to descriptions of extractions or idealizations (which is what single
sentences often are), but needs to describe both whole texts and their contexts,
including psychical substance.
Defining advertisement as a genre
Generally, advertising is ‘the promotion of goods or services for sale through
impersonal media’. Advertising has a function to persuade the people to buy, that
is why describing discouse as advertising is sometimes misclassified because of
two reasons. Firstly, the term is used more broadly. Secondly, to be satisfied with
this simle characterization distracts from the variety of ads, and from the points of
contact they have with other genres.
Defining ‘definition’
One way of defining a word is to look for ‘components’ of meaning which it
brings together and which describe properties of the entity or concepts to which it
refers.
 Componential definition systematizes the meaning of certain words, it
has a number of severe drawbacks.
 Prototype theory (Rosch, 1977) suggests that we choose or understand a
word by reference to a mental representation of a typical sentence.
Categories of ad: medium, product, technique, and consumer.
54
 Medium: mass media.
 Product: sell product or services.
 Technique: hardselling and softselling, reason and tickle, slow drip and
sudden burst.
 Consumer.
Reference
Cook, Guy. (2001). The Discourse of Advertising. London: Routledge
55
LEXICAL AMBIGUITY AND PUN
Presented by : Dewanti
Summary :
Lexical Ambiguity and Pun
What is Lexical Ambiguity?

Lexical ambiguity is the presence of two or more possible meanings
within a single word. In short, it can be said that lexical ambiguity is when a word
has multiple meaning, for example:
- river bank and financial bank
- lit the match and watch the match
- the bat is flying and the bat is for playing baseball
This lexical ambiguity is similar to semantic ambiguity or homonymy.

However, lexical ambiguity is more often used deliberately to create puns and
other types of wordplay.
What are the Characteristics of Lexical Ambiguity?

Below is an example taken from Johnson-Laird (1983) which illustrates two
important characteristics of lexical ambiguity:
The plane banked just before landing, but then the pilot lost control. The
strip on the field runs for only the barest of yards and the plane just
twisted out of the turn before shooting into the ground.
 First, that this passage is not particularly difficult to understand in spite of
the fact that all of its content words are ambiguous suggests that ambiguity
is unlikely to invoke special resource-demanding processing mechanisms
but rather is handled as a by-product of normal comprehension.
56
 Second, there are a number of ways in which a word can be ambiguous.
The word plane, for example, has several noun meanings, and it can also
be used as a verb. The word twisted could be an adjective and is also
morphologically ambiguous between the past tense and participial forms
of the verb to twist.
What is a Pun?
A pun is a play on words, either on different senses of the same word or on
the similar sense or sound of different words. Known in rhetoric as paronomasia.
Puns are figures of speech based on the inherent ambiguities of language.
Although puns are commonly regarded as a childish form of humour, they are
often found in advertisements and newspaper headlines.
The examples of pun:
- Store name : Julius Cedar (Lumberyard in Saskatoon, Canada),
Shoenique Shoes (Longmeadow, Massachusetts)
- Slogan : “Peace is much more precious than a piece of
land”, “Your children need your presence more than your
presents.”
57
BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE
Presented by : Laksmi Novita C.

Summary :
Background knowledge is an information that is not in a text, but is used
from memory by a reader to understand the text. Background knowlege is the one
part of discourse in conversation analysis.
Example :
 John was in his way to school last Friday. He was really worried about the
math lesson. Last week he had been unable to control the class. It was
unfair of the math teacher to leave him in charge. After all, it is not a
normal part of a janitor’s duties
This example provides us with some insight into the ways in which we build
interpretations of what we read by using a lot more information than is presented
in the words on the page. That based on our expectations of what normally
happens.
There is a lot to be needed in the creation and understanding of coherent
discourse than knowledge og the language system alone. Coherence is created by
our interacton. Schema might differ from one person to another. We fill in the
details using our bacground knowlege. We can connect some information with our
exixting knowlege even if the sender hadn’t mention that. Communication suffers
when people make false assumptions about shared schemata. When one steps
outside the predictabel pattens, miscommunication may occur.
58
DETERMINING INFERENCE TO BE MADE
Presented by : David Dwi S

Summary :
An inference is an idea or conclusion that's drawn from evidence and
reasoning. An inference is an educated guess. We learn about some things by
experiencing them first-hand, but we gain other knowledge by inference — the
process of inferring things based on what is already known.
Inference in a sense is a way to communicate while using indirect kind of
speech, in the presentation I will show how inference can affect the
surrounding as well as some examples of inference whether it’s from single
phrase or drawing inference from multiple phrases.
Example of single phrase inference
a. It’s really cold in here with that window open.
a.1. Please close the window

Example of inference on multiple phrases
a. I bought a bicycle yesterday
b. The gear can be switched
c. The bicycle has gears
Inference can be used in many kind of situations, by learning it we can

draw conclusion from the evidence and reasoning from the other. By doing so
we will gain advantages such as on the lecture we can draw conclusion without
much asking the lecturer for confirmation and it will make it more effective.
59
ONLINE DISCOURSE
Presented by : Apri Bhayu Nugroho
Overview
Online / internet / e-discourse is actually computer-mediated discourse. It is the
communication produced when human beings interact with one another by
transmitting messages via networked computers (herring, 2001).
The nature of cmd varies depending on the technical properties of the cmc system
used and the social and cultural context embedding particular instances of use.
Originally, most cmc was text based–that is, messages were typed on a computer
keyboard and read as text on a computer screen–and accessed through standalone
clients. Text-based cmc modes include email, discussion forums, newsgroups,
chat, increasingly, however, textual cmc has been supplemented by graphical,
audio, and /or video channels of communication, and multiple modes of cmc are
available on web 2.0 platforms and smartphones. All of these environments
provide rich contexts in which to observe verbal interaction and the relationship
between discourse and social practice.
Online Discourse Features

Online discourse can be considered as the midpoint between spoken and written
discourse. In some extend, it brings spoken discourse features such as real-time
communication, but also contains written discourse features, that is indirect
communication, because you need internet media to deliver your messages. Look
at the illustration below:
60
There are some special features that you can find in online discourse:
1. The interruptions and overlaps characteristics in casual conversation do not
occur.
2. Spontaneity in spoken discourse turned into typo/mistype.
3. The absence of fillers (uh, er, mmmm) from spoken discourse.
4. The use of punctuation, italicization, and capitalization to change the function
of pause and intonation from spoken discourse (e.g. capslocked sentence indicate
that you are using high intonation).
5. Combination of letter and punctuation to form smiley (e.g. :D, :p, :3, :(, etc).
6. Internet slangs used are commonly used. (e.g. LOL-laughing out loud).
7. There are some nationality-related features, e.g. to show laughter, Indonesian
uses wkwk, Portuguese/Latino uses jajaja, etc.
The use of Online Discourse

As a teacher, teaching online discourse means that you teach your students to have
good behavior in online forums or social media. You can write anything, but
make sure it does not harm other people or contain sensitive issues such as
politics, religion, racism, etc. Internet is also the place of many information, and
you can easily find hoaxes/fake news. Teach your students to be critical and
skeptical to any information in the internet, make sure to check its validity before
sharing it to anyone else.
References
Herring, S.C. Computer-mediated discourse. 2001.
Ketcham, Eric. Internet Discourse: The application of discourse analysis to
instant
messaging communication. 2011
Abdullah, M.H. Electronic Discourse: Evolving Conventions in Online Academic
Environments. 1998.
61

Summary Compilation - Discourse

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Summary Compilation - Discourse

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND ARTS

The objective in doing this project is to compile all the presentations

Presented by : Peter Eka Sanjaya

FOUR PROBLEMS WITH PROBLEM SOLVING THROUGH NfM

The third problem, that of identifying NfM in transcripts, is one for

Fourth and ﬁnally, when NfM is used as a measure of a task, the

• Confirmation checks: Moves by which one speaker seeks confirmation of

The Advantages of Negotiation of Meaning

Presented by : Eva Pradana Santika

A. Locutionary, Illocutionary, and Perlocutionary Acts

In order to determine which way a speech act is to be interpreted, one must

According to Susana Nuccetelli and Gary Seay's "Philosophy of

B. Families of Speech Acts

 Verdictives, which present a finding.

David Crystal, too, argues for these categories in "Dictionary of

Presented by : Intan Prawesti

Some discourse analysts consider the larger discourse context in order to

Discourse and Frames

Repetition, or sometimes called reiteration, is the most direct and obvious

Hyponymy describes a “specific-general” relationship between lexical

It describes a “part-whole” relationship between lexical items.

Presented by : Maria Vineki Riyadini

Presented by : Diah Eka Hidayati

B. Ideology and Discurse Processing

It is assumed that ideologies are largely expressed and acquired by

C. Problems of Ideological Discourse Analysis

Presented by : Naufal Halim Wijaya

Although it is the most obvious difference, it has problems. There is

Presented by : Iwan Susanto

What the paper has attempted to do is to study literary discourse as a

Presented by : Dheanda Restu Jati Sakti

A. Location and Extent

E. Exact and Inexact Timing

Presented by : Dina Wikantari

T: What is transparent? Something is transparent. What does that mean?

The excerpt illustrates how teacher use questions and student

• Earlier research on classroom discourse tended to focus on specific teacher

FRAME AND SCRIPT

Presented by : Sintya Nirmayasari

Presented by : Biworo Retno M.

B. Critical Discourse Studies

 CDA is perceived as a social research

 CDA is interested in unethical issues

 CDA emphasizes spontaneous assessment.

C. Social Theory of Discourse

D. Van Dijk’s Ideological Square

 De-Emphasis negative things about Us

 De-Emphasis positive things about Them

E. Wodak’s Discourse-Historical Approach

c. Future-related prospective critique seeks to contribute to the

2. Three –steps analytical procedures in DHA

2. What characteristics, qualities and features are attributed to social actors,

3. What arguments are employed in the discourse in question?

4. From what perspective?

5. Are the respective utterances articulated overtly; are they intensified or

Source : 3L: The Southest Asian Journal of English Language Studies-Vol

B. Beginning and ending stories

1. the prior talk may remind a participant of a particular story, which

E. Stories of shared experience

Liddicoat, A.J. 2007. An Introduction to Conversation Analysis. London:

Presented by : Dewi Endah Astuti

Presented by : Istian Sabarina