Discourse Analysis Lecture 3

Positioning and Point of View

When we analyse discourse, there are two main elements we pay attention to:
(1) the content of the message, i.e. the aspects of the social world that the text
producers refer to in various ways, also called representation or construction of
social reality;
(2) the modalities in which the text producers position themselves in relation to this
content (they evaluate it as positive or negative, for example) and position
readers/viewers in relation to it (they expect us to agree with them, believe them,
be persuaded by them, etc.), also called positioning/point of view.
Importantly, these two aspects cannot be separated from each other in practice, even
though they are artificially separated for analytical purposes. Today we are concerned
mainly with positioning.
Text producers
TEXT
Text consumers
(speakers/writers)
(readers/listerners/vierwers)
Alejandro Jodorowskys (Mexican film director) parable, recounted by Paul Simpson
(1993:1-2), as part of his demonstration of what point of view is:
The parable is about one-eyed, one-legged, hunch-backed king who commissions a
portrait of himself from his court artist. Faced with the obvious dilemma, the artist, trying
not to insult the king, decides to paint out any of the deformities which might cause
offence. However, the king is appalled by the untruthfulness and inaccuracy of the
portrait and, in a course of action consistent with the narrative genre, summarily
sentences the artist to death. A second artist is commissioned who, aware of the fate of
the first, decides that a straightforward, honest and accurate representation is the best
tactic.
Yet the grotesque realism of this portrait makes the king furious, and the predictable
execution ensues. The third artist does not have an easy task: on the face of it, the two
obvious strategies have been tried and both have resulted in death. After a great deal of
thought, he decides to paint the king in the role of a huntsman. By getting him to strike
the pose of drawing a bow and arrow, the artist is able to paint the king with one leg
resting on a log, with one eye closed and with one shoulder raised above the other. This
representation of the king ingeniously disguises the disfigurements which led to the
demise of the second artist, while avoiding the fabrications which resulted in the demise
of the first. The king is delighted
Analysing discourses involves a focus on language as representation, as a projection of
positions and perspectives, as a way of communicating attitudes and assumptions
(Simpson 1993:2).
Positioning/point of view:
all speakers and writers take up some position in relation to the propositions
they make. We call it speaker stance or authorial stance. (Bloor & Bloor 2007:
34)

 speakers and writers also take up a position in relation to their addressees/target

audience.
the text may be prepared by one or more individuals. The messages in the text may
be those of an individual writer or the writer may be representing the views and attitudes
of an institution or group. To complicate matters even further, the stance taken may be
explicit (also known as overt) or hidden (covert), and may be either conscious (also
known as inscribed) or unconscious. (Bloor & Bloor 2007: 33)
How do we recognise the stance taken by the author(s)?
At the macro-level, the structure and the communicative purpose(s) of the genre give us
important clues.
The stance taken by text producers is shaped by the overall purpose and specific
functions of a text, by the genre to which the text belongs. The generic structure of a text
is called the rhetorical structure and its main component parts are called moves (each
move has corresponding functions/communicative purposes; for example, in news
stories, the functions of the headline are to draw attention and introduce the main topic).
The language used to fulfil these functions also gives expression to the authorial stance.
At the micro-level, we can analyse language from various angles:
the use of positive or negative words (evaluation)
the use of pronouns (we, you, they): inclusive we (includes the addressee),
exclusive we (excludes the addressee), the use of they as an Othering
strategy (creating stereotypes, distance)
the use of shared knowledge (assumptions about the addressees)
the use of modal verbs and similar categories:
categorical statements:
Mary is right.
(speaker is sure)
modalized statements:
Mary must be right.
Mary may be right.
Mary could be right.
the use of formal/informal language
the use of rhetorical tropes: metaphor, metonymy, hyperbole, personification,
slogans, puns, stock phrases etc.
You can have a flat tummy, healthy hair, a glowing complexion and lovely make-up
by following our golden beauty rules.

Example from Bloor & Bloor (2007: 35-36):

Genre: book review
Authorial stance: conscious, explicit
Positioning towards content: positive evaluation (for the most part)
Implicit references to self: constant surprises, satisfying and haunting book (I was
surprised, satisfied, haunted.); these expressions, by excluding specific references, extend
to the readers projected reactions.
Reviews are about attitude and opinion and as readers we approach reviews knowing
that we can agree or disagree with the author or, if we prefer, reverse judgement. We do
not expect an impersonal or detached author even though writers of reviews sometimes
avoid the use of direct references to themselves. (Bloor & Bloor 2007: 36)
References:
Bloor, M. And Bloor, Th. (2007). The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: An
Introduction. London: Hodder Education.
Simpson, P. (1993). Language, Ideology and Point of View. London and New York:
Routledge.