Questions related to Discourse Studies
I am a student doing a systematic review as a master's dissertation. I came across an issue with a few papers I have included into my project. I need to do quality appraisal for all included studies, however, 3 of my papers are analytical discourse studies and I cannot find any relevant tool for this type of study design. Would anyone give me a hint how to process it? Or refer me to a useful source where to find information.
Thank you in advance!
Crismore et al. (1993) define metadiscourse as: "linguistic material in texts, written or spoken, which does not add anything to the propositional content but that is intended to help the listener or reader organize, interpret and evaluate the information."
Language/Discoure Understanding is a matter of language/discourse meaning seek and meaning demonstration. In language/discourse meaning treatment-based studies, Linguistics offers two basic sub-branches: Semantics and Pragmatics from Cognitive Science where Psychology, Psycholinguistics and Linguistics compete. Yet, sometimes if not often, there is not a clear cut between the two sub-branches and scholars happen to take one for the other or simply reject one. The problem is more complex when the target language/discourse of the study is a specialized one.
Interpersonal or interactional metadiscourse was designed for the analysis of academic genres in English (Vande Kopple 1985, Crismore et al. 1993, Hyland & Tse 2004, Hyland 2005, 2008). The scope of texts being subject to this analysis has widened with time, including not only academic but also professional and social genres of different domains. The result of these analyses has challenged the general methodological framework, suggesting new perspectives that can develop it with theoretical and socio-linguistic implications (Suau Jiménez 2012, 2014, 2016, 2017). A re-framing of the model would possibly be necessary if we want it to cater for new research in a variety of genres, domains and languages.
I'm working on proximisation in the presidential address, applying Cap's (2013) theory. But I want to incorporate how speakers (presidents) negotiate access to addressees via cognitive. lexical and discourse forms.
Advantages vs. disadvantages between the two approaches? I've used discourse analysis before but am leaning towards using frame analysis in my next study. Grateful for any suggestions, advice or experiences shared. Thanks!
I'm develop a discourse corpus which is used to support a discourse research. Now I am building a annotation system to annotate discourse structure(turn-taking). Is there any system that I can utilize ?
I would also appreciate works that critique this view of context.
I am working on a research study on reading discourse problems in an EFL context in Pakistan. I would like to review and adapt a questionnaire survey suiting my research objectives. I will be highly thankful if anyone provide some samples of questionnaire survey of reading discourse problems at intermediate level.
I think the rhetorical positionings of person deixis (I/you and exclusive we/ inclusive we) are predictable and over-flogged
I am already aware of research concerning story grammar and other structural models, and of scales that compare film vignettes for their ability to evoke certain emotions, but have not found any scales that compare film vignettes structurally, so that one might use them interchangeably over time with the same participants. The scale (or other measure) needs to provide as much assurance as possible that the film vignettes are equivalent as stimuli for discourse production. Any leads would be greatly appreciated.
It is very difficult to accurately specify the theories underpinning CDA. Into the bargain, problematization of events and realities as the epicenter this discipline,presumably without a precise theoretical background, has created misgivings among some scholars . I'd be delighted and elated to to receive your reflections and thoughts on this significant quandary .
Is this epideictic discourse rather than deliberative one? Or are the two types mixted according to Aristotle's harmony of rhetorical genres?
Literature about fishing practices and fishing communities usually describes men as the central protagonists of this activity. Some researchers (Motta-Maues, 1999) even argue that we, as researchers, are co-responsible to legitimize this situation, because whenever one studies fishing communities, s/he focuses on fishermen work and relegates women to secondary/complementary activities in the community.
Is it really like that?
The mentioning of some words and / or objects is forbidden in some cultures i.e. unmentionables. Among the Akans of Ghana, for instance, the unmentionable objects include potentially destructive items like the pestle, wooden mortar and broom; and diseases such as whitlow, cancer and tuberculosis. There are other historical calamities which should not be referred to in the society. It is believed that spoken reference to any of such incidences is capable of leading to its reoccurrence. Does your culture have some of these verbal taboos? What are they and how are they managed in oral discourse? Your views will enrich our literature.
I'm in the process of writing a thesis looking at the construction of infertile selves through talk in doctor-patient encounters, looking at the ways infertile couples create, transform and resist culturally available discourses in the process of constructing their various identities. Has anyone come across a similar topic or piece of research, or could suggest a framework for analysis that would take into account the different variables my topic suggests?
I am searching for reasons as to why there differing defecation practices. Could it that different community hold different discourses that influence the practices?
Philanthropy is a new term in the academic discourse which started in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Now, it attracts some colleges and universities especially in the West. For instance, Lilly School of Philanthropy in Indiana University deals with philanthropy studies exclusively. It is particularly essential to understand the role of gender in philanthropy.