WodakRuth CDAnalysis Introduction

See
discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261773565
Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Vol. 1
Book January 2001

DOI: 10.4135/9780857028020.d4
CITATIONS READS
395 10,683
2 authors, including:
Ruth Wodak
Lancaster University
254 PUBLICATIONS 7,521 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Transnational Governance of the University Field. (RJ FSK15-1068:1) The Travel & Translation of
Global Ideas & the Role of Intermediary Organizations View project
Special Issue Call for papers: Voluntas International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations View project
All content following this page was uploaded by Ruth Wodak on 16 January 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd i 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

SAGE Benchmarks in Language and Linguistics presents four-volume
collections that bring together the most authoritative and inuential research in
language and linguistics. Traversing the full breadth of traditional scholarly and
applied perspectives, the series is edited by world-leading experts in their elds.
Each set starts with a contextualizing introduction from the editor and system-
atically presents classic and contemporary articles that map out the history,
debates, theory and methods core to the eld. This series presents the gold
standard for university libraries throughout the world who are seeking to solidify
their linguistics reference collections.
Ruth Wodak is Distinguished Professor of Discourse Studies at Lancaster

University since 2004 and has remained afliated to the University of Vienna
where she became full Professor of Applied Linguistics in 1991. In addition to
various other prizes, she was awarded the Wittgenstein Prize for Elite Researchers
in 1996. She is past-President of the Societas Linguistica Europaea and Member
of the Academia Europaea since 2010. In 2010, she was also awarded an
Honorary Doctorate by University rebro, Sweden where she was visiting as
Kerstin Hesselgren Chair of the Swedish Parliament in 2008. Her research inter-
ests focus on discourse studies; gender studies; language and/in politics; preju-
dice and discrimination; and on ethnographic methods of linguistic eld work.
She is a member of the editorial board of a range of linguistic journals and
co-editor of the journals Discourse and Society, Critical Discourse Studies, and
Language and Politics, and co-editor of the book series Discourse Approaches to
Politics, Society and Culture (DAPSAC). Among her recent book publications are
The Politics of Exclusion (with M. Krzyzanowski, Transaction Publishers, 2009)
and The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual (Palgrave Macmillan,
2011, second revised edition); in 2010, she edited The SAGE Handbook of
Sociolinguistics (with P. Kerswill and B. Johnstone).
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd ii 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

SAGE BENCHMARKS IN LANGUAGE AND LINGUISTICS
CRITICAL
DISCOURSE
ANALYSIS
VOLUME I
Concepts, History, Theory
Edited by
Ruth Wodak
Los Angeles | London | New Delhi

Singapore | Washington DC
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd iii 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

Los Angeles | London | New Delhi
Singapore | Washington DC
SAGE Publications Ltd Introduction and editorial arrangement by

1 Olivers Yard Ruth Wodak, 2013
55 City Road
London EC1Y 1SP First published 2013
SAGE Publications Inc. Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research
2455 Teller Road or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted
Thousand Oaks, California 91320 under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, this
publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted
SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd in any form, or by any means, only with the prior
B 1/I 1 Mohan Cooperative Industrial Area permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of
Mathura RoadA reprographic reproduction, in accordance with the terms
New Delhi 110 044 of licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency.
Enquiries concerning reproduction outside those terms
SAGE Publications Asia-Pacific Pte Ltd should be sent to the publishers.
3 Church Street
#10-04 Samsung Hub Every effort has been made to trace and acknowledge all
Singapore 049483. the copyright owners of the material reprinted herein.
However, if any copyright owners have not been located
and contacted at the time of publication, the publishers
will be pleased to make the necessary arrangements at
the first opportunity.
Library of Congress Control Number: 2012936151
Typeset by:
British Library Cataloguing in Publication data
Printed on paper from sustainable
resources A catalogue record for this book is available from
the British Library
Printed by:
ISBN 978-1-4462-1058-1 (set of four volumes)
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd iv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Contents
Appendix of Sources xi
Editors Introduction: Critical Discourse Analysis xix
Ruth Wodak
Volume I: Concepts, History, Theory

1. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Rhetoric of Critique 1
Michael Billig
2. Missing Links in Mainstream CDA: Modules, Blends and the
Critical Instinct 13
Paul Chilton
3. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public
Discourse: The Universities 43
Norman Fairclough
4. Critical Discourse Analysis 79
Norman Fairclough, Jane Mulderrig and Ruth Wodak
5. Critical Discourse Analysis and Political Economy of
Communication: Understanding the New Corporate Order 103
Phil Graham and Allan Luke
6. Power and Discourse in Organization Studies: Absence and the
Dialectic of Control 131
Dennis K. Mumby and Cynthia Stohl
7. On Critical Linguistics 153
Roger Fowler
8. Theoretical and Methodological Aspects of Foucauldian Critical
Discourse Analysis and Dispositive Analysis 165
Siegfried Jger and Florentine Maier
9. Critical Discourse Analysis 195
Gunther Kress
10. Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist
Discourse Praxis 211
Michelle M. Lazar
11. Discourse, Context and Cognition 237
Teun A. van Dijk
12. Discourse and the Denial of Racism 257
Teun A. van Dijk
13. Representing Social Actors 291
Theo Van Leeuwen
14. Legitimation in Discourse and Communication 327
Theo Van Leeuwen
15. Critical Discourse Analysis, Description, Explanation, Causes:
Foucaults Inspiration versus Webers Perspiration 351
Gary Wickham and Gavin Kendall
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd v 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

vi Contents
16. Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry 371

Ruth Wodak
17. Language, Power and Identity 393
Ruth Wodak
Volume II: Methodologies

18. A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse
Analysis and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourses of Refugees
and Asylum Seekers in the UK Press 1
Paul Baker, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid KhosraviNik,
Micha Krzyzanowski, Tony McEnery and Ruth Wodak
19. Teddy Bear Stories 35
Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and Theo van Leeuwen
20. A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures 61
The New London Group: Courtney Cazden, Bill Cope,
Norman Fairclough, Jim Gee, Mary Kalantzis, Gunther Kress,
Allan Luke, Carmen Luke, Sarah Michaels, Martin Nakata and
James Cook
21. Political Discourse in the News: Democratizing Responsibility or
Aestheticizing Politics? 97
Lilie Chouliaraki
22. A Context-sensitive Approach to Analysing Talk in Strategy
Meetings 119
Ian Clarke, Winston Kwon and Ruth Wodak
23. Peer Talk as a Double Opportunity Space: The Case of
Argumentative Discourse 145
Sara Zadunaisky Ehrlich and Shoshana Blum-Kulka
24. If Both Opponents Extend Hands in Peace Why Dont They
Meet? Mythic Metaphors and Cultural Codes in the Israeli Peace
Discourse 167
Dalia Gavriely-Nuri
25. Actor Descriptions, Action Attributions, and Argumentation:
Towards a Systematization of CDA Analytical Categories in the
Representation of Social Groups 185
Majid KhosraviNik
26. Political Communication, Institutional Cultures and Linearities of
Organisational Practice: A Discourse-Ethnographic Approach to
Institutional Change in the European Union 207
Micha Krzyzanowski
27. Arab and American Computer War Games: The Inuence of a
Global Technology on Discourse 227
David Machin and Usama Suleiman
28. Time to Get Wired: Using Web-based Corpora in Critical Discourse
Analysis 251
Gerlinde Mautner
29. The Grammar of Governance 273
Jane Mulderrig
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd vi 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Contents vii
30. Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse 303

Andreas Musolff
31. Inferencing and Cultural Reproduction: A Corpus-based Critical
Discourse Analysis 319
Kieran OHalloran
32. Rhetoric of Political Speeches 347
Martin Reisigl
33. Nexus Analysis: Refocusing Ethnography on Action 373
Ron Scollon and Suzie Wong Scollon
Volume III: Doing CDA/Case Studies

34. Between Remembering and Forgetting: Uruguayan Military
Discourse about Human Rights (19762004) 1
Mariana Achugar
35. Critical Discourse Analysis as an Analytic Tool in Considering
Selected, Prominent Features of TRC Testimonies 31
Christine Anthonissen
36. Investigating Narrative Inequality: African Asylum Seekers Stories
in Belgium 55
Jan Blommaert
37. The Use of Exclusionary Language to Manipulate Opinion:
John Howard, Asylum Seekers and the Reemergence of Political
Incorrectness in Australia 97
Michael Clyne
38. The Discursive Construction of National Identities 119
Rudolf de Cillia, Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak
39. Media Representation of the Discrimination against the Roma in
Eastern Europe: The Case of Slovenia 145
Karmen Erjavec
40. Blairs Contribution to Elaborating a New Doctrine of
International Community 175
Norman Fairclough
41. Global Discourses of Democracy and an English City 197
Michael Farrelly
42. Rhetorical Strategies and Identity Politics in the Discourse of
Colonial Withdrawal 215
John Flowerdew
43. Hypercapitalism: Language, New Media and Social Perceptions of
Value 245
Phil Graham
44. Visually Branding the Environment: Climate Change as a
Marketing Opportunity 269
Anders Hansen and David Machin
45. A Shotgun Wedding: Co-occurrence of War and Marriage
Metaphors in Mergers and Acquisitions Discourse 289
Veronika Koller
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd vii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

viii Contents
46. Discourse at Work: When Women Take on the Role of Manager 313
Luisa Martn Rojo and Concepcin Gmez Esteban
47. Who Am I Gonna Do This With?: Self-Organization, Ambiguity
and Decision-Making in a Business Enterprise 345
Florian Menz
48. Get Shot of the Lot of Them: Election Reporting of Muslims in
British Newspapers 373
John E. Richardson
49. We Are Dealing with People Whose Origins One Can Clearly Tell
Just by Looking: Critical Discourse Analysis and the Study of
Neo-Racism in Contemporary Austria 395
Ruth Wodak and Bernd Matouschek
Volume IV: Applications, Interdisciplinary

Perspectives & New Trends
50. Genetically Modied Food in the News: Media Representations of
the GM Debate in the UK 1
Martha Augoustinos, Shona Crabb and Richard Shepherd
51. The Language of Critical Discourse Analysis: The Case of
Nominalization 23
Michael Billig
52. Reections on Discourse and Critique in China and the West 41
Paul Chilton, Hailong Tian and Ruth Wodak
53. Critique, the DiscourseHistorical Approach, and the Frankfurt
School 59
Bernhard Forchtner
54. Critique and Argumentation: On the Relation between the
Discourse-Historical Approach and Pragma-Dialectics 77
Bernhard Forchtner and Ana Tominc
55. Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: Methods or
Paradigms? 97
Martyn Hammersley
56. Force-Interactive Patterns in Immigration Discourse: A Cognitive
Linguistic Approach to CDA 129
Christopher Hart
57. Critical Semiotic Analysis and Cultural Political Economy 149
Bob Jessop
58. On the Problem of Bias in Political Argumentation: An
Investigation into Discussions about Political Asylum in Germany
and Austria 167
Manfred Kienpointner and Walther Kindt
59. Discourses and Concepts: Interfaces and Synergies between
Begriffsgeschichte and the Discourse-Historical Approach in CDA 201
Micha Krzyzanowski
60. Discursive Technologies and the Social Organization of Meaning 215
Jay L. Lemke
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd viii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Contents ix
61. On Combining Pragma-Dialectics with Critical Discourse Analysis 233

Constanza Ihnen and John E. Richardson
62. The Impact of Visual Racism: Visual Arguments in Political Leaets
of Austrian and British Far-right Parties 245
John E. Richardson and Ruth Wodak
63. Language and Signicance or the Importance of Import:
Implications for Critical Discourse Analysis 275
Andrew Sayer
64. Future of Europe 295
Bo Strth
65. Discourse and Manipulation 315
Teun A. Van Dijk
66. Performing Success: Identifying Strategies of Self-Presentation in
Womens Biographical Narratives 341
Ina Wagner and Ruth Wodak
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd ix 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd x 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM
Appendix of Sources
All articles and chapters have been reproduced exactly as they were rst pub-
lished, including textual cross-references to material in the original source.
Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following sources for permission to

reproduce material in this book.
1. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Rhetoric of Critique, Michael Billig

Gilbert Weiss and Ruth Wodak (eds), Critical Discourse Analysis: Theory and
Interdisciplinarity (London: Palgrave-MacMillan, 2003), pp. 3546.
Reproduced with permission of Palgrave Macmillan.
2. Missing Links in Mainstream CDA: Modules, Blends and the Critical

Instinct, Paul Chilton
Ruth Wodak and Paul Chilton (eds), A New Research Agenda in Critical
Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity (Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 2005), pp. 1951.
Reprinted with kind permission by John Benjamins Publishing Company,
Amsterdam/Philadelphia. www.benjamins.com
3. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse:

The Universities, Norman Fairclough
Discourse & Society, 4(2) (1993): 133168.
Published by SAGE Publications Ltd. Reprinted with permission.
4. Critical Discourse Analysis, Norman Fairclough, Jane Mulderrig and

Ruth Wodak
Teun A. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction
(Second Edition) (London: SAGE, 2011), pp. 357378.
5. Critical Discourse Analysis and Political Economy of Communication:

Understanding the New Corporate Order, Phil Graham and Allan Luke
Cultural Politics, 6(1) (2010): 103132.
Phil Graham and Allan Luke and Berg Publishers, an imprint of
Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. Reprinted with permission from Berg
Publishers, an imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xi 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

xii Appendix of Sources
6. Power and Discourse in Organization Studies: Absence and the Dialectic of

Control, Dennis K. Mumby and Cynthia Stohl
7. On Critical Linguistics, Roger Fowler

Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and Maalcom Coulthard (eds), Texts and
Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis (London: Routledge, 1996),
pp. 314.
Reproduced with permission of Taylor & Francis Books UK.
8. Theoretical and Methodological Aspects of Foucauldian Critical Discourse

Analysis and Dispositive Analysis, Siegfried Jger and Florentine Maier
Ruth Wodak & Michael Meyer (eds), Methods of CDA (London: SAGE,
2009), pp. 3461.
9. Critical Discourse Analysis, Gunther Kress

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11 (1990): 8499.
Cambridge University Press, reproduced with permission.
10. Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist Discourse

Praxis, Michelle M. Lazar
Critical Discourse Studies, 4(2) (2007): 141164.
2007 Taylor & Francis. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis Ltd,
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals via Copyright Clearance Centers
Rightslink service.
11. Discourse, Context and Cognition, Teun A. van Dijk

Discourse Studies, 8(1) (2006): 159176.
12. Discourse and the Denial of Racism, Teun A. van Dijk

13. Representing Social Actors, Theo Van Leeuwen

Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis (New York,
Oxford University Press, 1996), pp. 2354.
Oxford. Reprinted by permission of Oxford University Press, USA.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Appendix of Sources xiii
14. Legitimation in Discourse and Communication, Theo Van Leeuwen

Discourse & Communication, 1(1) (2007): 91111.
15. Critical Discourse Analysis, Description, Explanation, Causes: Foucaults

Inspiration versus Webers Perspiration, Gary Wickham and Gavin Kendall
Historical Social Research, 33(1) (2008): 142161.
This article was rst published in the Historical Social Research/Historische
Sozialforschung. Reprinted with permission from Historical Social Research/
Historische Sozialforschung.
16. Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry,

Ruth Wodak
Pragmatics & Cognition, 15(1) (2007): 203225.
This article was rst published in the Historical Social Research/Historische
Sozialforschung. Reprinted with permission from Historical Social
Research/Historische Sozialforschung.
17. Language, Power and Identity, Ruth Wodak

Language Teaching, 45(2) (2012): 215233.
Cambridge University Press, reproduced with permission.
18. A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse Analysis

and Corpus Linguistics to Examine Discourses of Refugees and Asylum
Seekers in the UK Press, Paul Baker, Costas Gabrielatos, Majid KhosraviNik,
Micha Krzyzanowski, Tony McEnery and Ruth Wodak
19. Teddy Bear Stories, Carmen Rosa Caldas-Coulthard and Theo van Leeuwen
Social Semiotics, 13(1) (2003): 527.
2003 Taylor & Francis Ltd. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis
Ltd, http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals via Copyright Clearance Centers
Rightslink service.
20. A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures,

The New London Group: Courtney Cazden, Bill Cope, Norman Fairclough,
Jim Gee, Mary Kalantzis, Gunther Kress, Allan Luke, Carmen Luke,
Sarah Michaels, Martin Nakata and James Cook.
Harvard Educational Review, 66(1) (1996): 6092.
Copyright 1996 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights
reserved. Used with permission from Harvard Education Publishing Group.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xiii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

xiv Appendix of Sources
21. Political Discourse in the News: Democratizing Responsibility or

Aestheticizing Politics?, Lilie Chouliaraki
22. A Context-sensitive Approach to Analysing Talk in Strategy Meetings,

Ian Clarke, Winston Kwon and Ruth Wodak
British Journal of Management, (2011): 118.
Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Reprinted with permission.
23. Peer Talk as a Double Opportunity Space: The Case of Argumentative

Discourse, Sara Zadunaisky Ehrlich and Shoshana Blum-Kulka
24. If Both Opponents Extend Hands in Peace Why Dont They Meet?
Mythic Metaphors and Cultural Codes in the Israeli Peace Discourse,
Dalia Gavriely-Nuri
Journal of Language and Politics, 9(3) (2010): 449467.
25. Actor Descriptions, Action Attributions, and Argumentation: Towards a

Systematization of CDA Analytical Categories in the Representation of
Social Groups, Majid KhosraviNik
Rightslink service.
26. Political Communication, Institutional Cultures and Linearities of

Organisational Practice: A Discourse-Ethnographic Approach to
Institutional Change in the European Union, Micha Krzyzanowski
Rightslink service.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xiv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Appendix of Sources xv
27. Arab and American Computer War Games: The Inuence of a Global
Technology on Discourse, David Machin and Usama Suleiman
Rightslink service.
28. Time to Get Wired: Using Web-based Corpora in Critical Discourse Analysis,
Gerlinde Mautner
29. The Grammar of Governance, Jane Mulderrig

Rightslink service.
30. Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse, Andreas Musolff

Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1) (2006): 2338.
Copyright 2006, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Reprinted by permis-
sion of Taylor & Francis Ltd. http://www.tandfonline.com
31. Inferencing and Cultural Reproduction: A Corpus-based Critical Discourse

Analysis, Kieran OHalloran
Text & Talk, 29(1) (2009): 2150.
Published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG. Reprinted with
permission.
32. Rhetoric of Political Speeches, Martin Reisigl

Ruth Wodak and Veronika Koller (eds), Handbook of Communication in the
Public Sphere (Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 2008), pp. 243269.
Published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG. Reprinted with
permission.
33. Nexus Analysis: Refocusing Ethnography on Action, Ron Scollon and

Suzie Wong Scollon
Journal of Sociolinguistics, 11(5) (2007): 608625.
The authors 2007. Journal compilation Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
2007. Reproduced with permission of Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

xvi Appendix of Sources
34. Between Remembering and Forgetting: Uruguayan Military Discourse

about Human Rights (19762004), Mariana Achugar
35. Critical Discourse Analysis as an Analytic Tool in Considering Selected,

Prominent Features of TRC Testimonies, Christine Anthonissen
36. Investigating Narrative Inequality: African Asylum Seekers Stories in

Belgium, Jan Blommaert
37. The Use of Exclusionary Language to Manipulate Opinion: John Howard,

Asylum Seekers and the Reemergence of Political Incorrectness in
Australia, Michael Clyne
38. The Discursive Construction of National Identities, Rudolf de Cillia,

Martin Reisigl and Ruth Wodak
39. Media Representation of the Discrimination against the Roma in Eastern

Europe: The Case of Slovenia, Karmen Erjavec
40. Blairs Contribution to Elaborating a New Doctrine of International

Community, Norman Fairclough
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xvi 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Appendix of Sources xvii
41. Global Discourses of Democracy and an English City,

Michael Farrelly
42. Rhetorical Strategies and Identity Politics in the Discourse of Colonial

Withdrawal, John Flowerdew
43. Hypercapitalism: Language, New Media and Social Perceptions of Value,

Phil Graham
44. Visually Branding the Environment: Climate Change as a Marketing

Opportunity, Anders Hansen and David Machin
Discourse Studies, 10(6) (2008): 777794.
45. A Shotgun Wedding: Co-occurrence of War and Marriage Metaphors in

Mergers and Acquisitions Discourse, Veronika Koller
Metaphor and Symbol, 17(3) (2002): 179203.
Copyright 2002, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Reprinted by permis-
sion of Taylor & Francis Ltd. http://www.tandfonline.com
46. Discourse at Work: When Women Take on the Role of Manager,

Luisa Martn Rojo and Concepcin Gmez Esteban
Gilbert Weiss and Ruth Wodak (eds) (New York: Palgrave, 2003),
pp. 241271.
Reproduced with permission of Palgrave Macmillan.
47. Who Am I Gonna Do This With?: Self-Organization, Ambiguity and

Decision-Making in a Business Enterprise, Florian Menz
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xvii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

xviii Appendix of Sources
48. Get Shot of the Lot of Them: Election Reporting of Muslims in British
Newspapers, John E. Richardson
Patterns of Prejudice, 43(34) (2009): 355377.
Rightslink service.
49. We Are Dealing with People Whose Origins One Can Clearly Tell Just by
Looking: Critical Discourse Analysis and the Study of Neo-Racism in
Contemporary Austria, Ruth Wodak and Bernd Matouschek
50. Genetically Modied Food in the News: Media Representations of the GM

Debate in the UK, Martha Augoustinos, Shona Crabb and Richard Shepherd
Public Understanding of Science, 19(1) (2010): 98113.
51. The Language of Critical Discourse Analysis: The Case of Nominalization,

Michael Billig
52. Reections on Discourse and Critique in China and the West,

Paul Chilton, Hailong Tian and Ruth Wodak
53. Critique, the DiscourseHistorical Approach, and the Frankfurt School,

Bernhard Forchtner
Rightslink service.
54. Critique and Argumentation: On the Relation between the Discourse-Historical

Approach and Pragma-Dialectics, Bernhard Forchtner and Ana Tominc
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xviii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Contents xix
55. Conversation Analysis and Discourse Analysis: Methods or Paradigms?,

Martyn Hammersley
56. Force-Interactive Patterns in Immigration Discourse: A Cognitive Linguistic

Approach to CDA, Christopher Hart
57. Critical Semiotic Analysis and Cultural Political Economy, Bob Jessop
2004 Taylor & Francis Ltd. Reprinted by permission of Taylor & Francis
Ltd, http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals via Copyright Clearance Centers
Rightslink service.
58. On the Problem of Bias in Political Argumentation: An Investigation into

Discussions about Political Asylum in Germany and Austria,
Manfred Kienpointner and Walther Kindt
Journal of Pragmatics, 27(5) (1997): 555585.
Copyright 1997 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. Reprinted with
permission from Elsevier via Copyright Clearance Centers Rightslink
service.
59. Discourses and Concepts: Interfaces and Synergies between

Begriffsgeschichte and the Discourse-Historical Approach in CDA,
Micha Krzyzanowski
Rudolf de Cillia, Helmut Gruber, Michae Krzyzanowski and Florian Menz
(eds), Politik-Identitt/Discourse-Politics-Identity (Tbingen: Stauffenburg
Verlag, 2010), pp. 125135.
Published by Stauffenburg Verlag Brigitte Narr GmbH. Reprinted with
permission.
60. Discursive Technologies and the Social Organization of Meaning,

Jay L. Lemke
Folia Linguistica, 35(12) (2001): 7996.
Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin. Published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co.
KG. Reprinted with permission.
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xix 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

xx Contents
61. On Combining Pragma-Dialectics with Critical Discourse Analysis,

Constanza Ihnen and John E. Richardson
Eveline T. Feteris, Bart Garssen and A. Francisca Snoeck Henkemans (eds),
Keeping in Touch With Pragma-Dialectics: In Honor of Frans H. van Eemeren
(Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2011), pp. 231244.
62. The Impact of Visual Racism: Visual Arguments in Political Leaets of

Austrian and British Far-right Parties, John E. Richardson and Ruth Wodak
Controversia: An International Journal of Debate and Democratic Renewal,
6(2) (2009): 4577.
Published by International Debate Education Association. Reprinted with
permission.
63. Language and Signicance or the Importance of Import: Implications for

Critical Discourse Analysis, Andrew Sayer
64. Future of Europe, Bo Strth

65. Discourse and Manipulation, Teun A. Van Dijk

66. Performing Success: Identifying Strategies of Self-Presentation in Womens

Biographical Narratives, Ina Wagner and Ruth Wodak
Discourse & Society, 17(3) (2006): 385411
0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xx 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Critical Discourse Analysis:
Challenges and Perspectives
Ruth Wodak
1. Introducing Critical Discourse Analysis
B
eginning in the late 1980s, Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) (or
Critical Discourse Studies [CDS]) has now become a well-established
eld in the social sciences. CDA cannot be regarded as a discrete
academic discipline in any traditional sense, with a xed set of theories,
categories, assumptions or research methods. Instead, CDA can be seen as
a problem-oriented interdisciplinary research programme, subsuming a
variety of approaches, each drawing on different epistemological assump-
tions, with different theoretical models, research methods and agenda.
What unites them is a shared interest in the semiotic dimensions of power,
injustice and political-economic, social or cultural change in our globalised
and globalising world and societies. The roots of CDA lie in rhetoric, text
linguistics, anthropology, philosophy, socio-psychology, cognitive science,
literary studies and sociolinguistics, as well as in applied linguistics and
pragmatics.
Many denitions of the aims and procedures, the doing of CDA, can be
found in the vast literature and, of course, also online. For example, the
glossary of CADAAD (http://cadaad.net/glossary/critical-discourse-
analysis)1 lists the following already well-known denitions, some important
scholars and several frequently cited books:
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a research enterprise which critically

analyses the relation between language and society. More specically,
CDA is a type of discourse-analytical research that studies the way ideol-
ogy, identity and inequality are (re)enacted through texts produced in
social and political contexts (Van Dijk, 2001: 352). Language is seen as
crucial in constructing and sustaining ideologies, which, in turn, are seen
as important in establishing and maintaining social identities and inequal-
ities (Wodak, 2001: 10). Some of the discourse domains and genres that
CDA has traditionally targeted include racism, xenophobia and national
identity [], gender identity and inequality [], media discourse []
and political discourse [].
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xix 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

xx Editors Introduction
In 2012, Van Dijk slightly refocused his denition:
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is discourse analytical research that pri-

marily studies the way social power abuse and inequality are enacted,
reproduced, legitimated and resisted by text and talk in the social and
political context. With such dissident research, critical discourse analysts
take explicit position, and thus want to understand, expose, and ultim-
ately challenge social inequality. This is also why CDA may be character-
ized as a social movement of politically committed discourse analysts.
(2012, in press; italics in the original)
The emphasis here is less on theory and methodology and more on the
aims and interests of critical researchers. However, not all scholars commit-
ted to CDA share every aspect of this denition: Van Leeuwen (2006: 294)
primarily emphasises the research agenda and the application of results
when describing CDA:
Critical discourse analysis is founded on the insight that text and talk play
a key role in maintaining and legitimating inequality, injustice and oppres-
sion in society. It employs discourse analysis to show how this is done,
and it seeks to spread awareness of this aspect of language use in society,
and to argue explicitly for change on the basis of its ndings.
The University of Texas, however, offers another, very different approach

to CDA rooted in postmodern theory and deconstructionism (http://www.
gslis.utexas.edu/~palmquis/courses/discourse.htm#TOP).2 Viewed from
this perspective, CDA is not primarily related to Linguistics nor to text analy-
sis; rather, CDA is regarded as a meta-approach to solving problems in a
quite intuitive and unsystematic, solely hermeneutic way (cf. Wodak,
2011a):
[.] rather than providing a particular method, Discourse Analysis can

be characterized as a way of approaching and thinking about a problem.
In this sense, Discourse Analysis is neither a qualitative nor a quantitative
research method, but a manner of questioning the basic assumptions of
quantitative and qualitative research methods. [] Expressed in todays
more trendy vocabulary, Critical or Discourse Analysis is nothing more
than a deconstructive reading and interpretation of a problem or text []
Discourse Analysis is meant to provide a higher awareness of the hidden
motivations in others and ourselves and, therefore, enable us to solve
concrete problems not by providing unequivocal answers, but by making
us ask ontological and epistemological questions.
Of course, many other denitions from overview articles, handbooks or

introductions to CDA could be quoted here which I have to neglect due to
reasons of space (cf. Caldas-Coulthard & Coulthard, 1996; Fairclough, 1992a,
b, 2010; Fairclough & Wodak, 1997; Fairclough, Mulderrig & Wodak, 2011;
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xx 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

Editors Introduction xxi
Forchtner, 2012; Fowler, Hodge, Kress & Trew, 1979; Keller, 2011; Le & Short,
2009; Locke, 2004; Machin & Mayr, 2012; Van Dijk, 2008; Van Dijk, 2012;
Van Leeuwen, 2005, 2008; Weiss & Wodak, 2007; Wodak & Chilton, 2007
(2005); Wodak, 2011a, b; Wodak & Meyer, 2009a; Young & Harrison, 2004).
As an adequate point of departure, I suggest the following framing denition
for all CDA approaches:3
In general, CDA is characterised by a number of principles (see above): for
example, all approaches are problem oriented, and thus necessarily interdiscip-
linary and eclectic. Moreover, CDA is characterised by the common interests in
demystifying ideologies and power through the systematic and retroductable4
investigation of semiotic data (written, spoken or visual). CDA researchers also
attempt to make their own positions and interests explicit while retaining their
respective scientic methodologies and while remaining self-reective of their
own research process.
Michael Toolans comprehensive reader (2002) illustrated for the
rst time the huge diversity of this quite new eld. The present four
volumes 10 years later offer insight into an even bigger range of theor-
etical approaches, epistemological histories, aims, interests and research
agendas, which all map the current complexity of the eld. Volume I
unites some seminal articles, which dened the eld at the outset 30 years
ago, as well as new important theoretical developments and critical
debates. Volume II presents the plethora of methodological approaches.
Volume III includes various case studies, which apply different methods
and address a range of social problems. Finally, Volume IV collects current
important debates, specically concerning the concept of critique and
the integration of other social science theories and methodologies from
other disciplines into CDA (such as various forms of argumentation theory
on the one hand, and history, economics, geography, gender studies and
media studies on the other). Hence, signicant new theories, methodolo-
gies, research agendas and applications are documented here. The eld is
thriving and has become much more diversied; new challenges and
debates have emerged, relevant applications in many social domains are
targeted. More specically, the approaches of CDA have been and are con-
tinuously being taken up by other neighbouring disciplines; inter- and
transdisciplinarity lead to new innovative ideas, some of which are
included in the manifold methodologies (Volume II), the case studies
(Volume III) and in the necessarily small selection of new developments
and debates in Volume IV.
The signicant difference between Discourse Studies and CDS/CDA lies
in the constitutive problem-oriented interdisciplinary approach of the latter.
CDA does not therefore study a linguistic unit per se but rather social phe-
nomena, which are necessarily complex and thus require a multi-/inter-/
transdisciplinary and multimethodical approach. The objects under investi-
gation do not have to be related to negative or exceptionally serious social
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxi 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

xxii Editors Introduction
or political experiences or events; this is a frequent misunderstanding of the

aims and goals of CDA and of the term critical, which, of course, does not
mean negative as in common sense usage (Chilton, Tian & Wodak, 2010).
Any social phenomenon lends itself to critical investigation, to be challenged
and not taken for granted.
CDA ofcially started with the launch of Van Dijks journal Discourse
and Society in 1990 as well as with the publication of several books, which,
coincidentally or because of a Zeitgeist, appeared simultaneously and were
led by rather similar research agendas.5 Since then new journals have been
created, multiple overviews have been written and nowadays CDA is an
established paradigm in Linguistics; currently, we encounter apart from
Discourse and Society Critical Discourse Studies, The Journal of Language
and Politics, Discourse and Communication and Visual Semiotics, among
many other journals; we also nd several e-journals, which publish critical
research, such as CADAAD (Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across
Disciplines; see http://www.cadaad.org/). Book series have been launched
(such as Discourse Approaches to Politics, Culture and Society), regular CDA
meetings and conferences take place and handbooks are underway.
In this introductory article, I rst focus on the salient notions of dis-
course, power, ideology and critique, which are constitutive concepts in all
CDA approaches (Section 2). Then, I briey discuss the various theoretical
and methodological approaches which have developed since the late 1980s
(Section 3) as well as the most important challenges that new social devel-
opments imply for critical research.6 In addition, I point to some important
criticisms, which CDA has been confronted with in past years (Section 4)7
before concluding with some more general perspectives.
2. Salient Concepts: Discourse, Power, Ideology and Critique

CDA has never been and has never attempted to be or to provide one single
or specic theory. Indeed, Van Dijk (2008: 823) has pointed to the lack of
theory about the norms and principles of its [CDAs] own critical activity.
More specically, what is needed Forchtner (2011: 2) argues is an exten-
sive elaboration of why ones critique is particularly reliable. As Van Leeuwen
(2006: 234) rightly states, critical discourse analysts engage not only with a
range of discourse analytical paradigms, but also with critical social theory.
In more recent work social theory may even dominate over discourse analy-
sis. It seems to be the case that more differentiated debates are needed and
better justication of why a particular social theory might lend itself to dis-
course-analytical purposes without combining or integrating quite contradic-
tory approaches (see Weiss & Wodak, 2003a).
With regard to the salient concept of ideology, for example, Van Dijk
sees ideologies as the world views that constitute social cognition: sche-
matically organised complexes of representations and attitudes with regard
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxii 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

Editors Introduction xxiii
to certain aspects of the social world, e.g. the schema [...] whites have about
blacks, which may feature a category appearance (1993: 258; 1998).
Fairclough, on the other hand, has a more Marxist view of ideology in which
ideologies are constructions of practices from particular perspectives [...]
which iron out the contradictions, dilemmas and antagonisms of practices
in ways which accord with the interests and projects of domination
(Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999: 26). But such disagreements have not led
to any major divisions within the eld; such different approaches and
epistemologies usually enhance constructive debates and developments.
What thus unites CDA and analysts is neither a restrictive and dogmatic
methodology nor a theoretical orthodoxy, but rather salient common goals,
that is, the critique and challenge of hegemonic discourses, texts and genres
that re/produce inequalities, injustices, mystication and oppression in con-
temporary societies. Researchers in CDA also rely on a variety of grammati-
cal approaches. Thus, any criticism of CDA should always specify, which
research or researcher they relate to. This is why I suggest using the notion
of a research programme, which many researchers nd useful and to which
they can relate. This programme or set of principles has changed over the
years due to the new developments in CDA and in the Social Sciences in
general (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997; Wodak, 1996, 2011b).
2.1. The Notion of Discourse

The notions of text and discourse have been subject to a hugely proliferating
number of usages in the social sciences. Almost no paper or article is to be
found, which does not revisit these notions, quoting Michel Foucault, Jrgen
Habermas, Chantal Mouffe, Ernesto Laclau, Niklas Luhmann or many others.
Thus, discourse means anything from a historical monument, a lieu de
mmoire, a policy, a political strategy, narratives in a restricted or broad sense
of the term, text, talk, a speech, topic-related conversations to language per
se. We nd notions such as racist discourse, gendered discourse, discourses
on un/employment, media discourse, populist discourse, discourses of the
past and many more thus stretching the meaning of discourse from a
genre to a register or style, from a building to a political programme. This
must and does cause confusion which also leads to much criticism and
more misunderstandings (Blommaert, 2005; Reisigl, 2007; Wodak, 2008;
Wodak & de Cillia, 2006). This is why one needs to focus on specic mean-
ings when reading particular contributions and drawing on a specic
approach to CDA.
CDA sees discourse language use in speech and writing as a form of

social practice. Describing discourse as social practice implies a dialectical
relationship between a particular discursive event and the situation(s),
institution(s) and social structure(s) which frame it: The discursive event
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxiii 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

xxiv Editors Introduction
is shaped by them, but it also shapes them. That is, discourse is socially
constitutive as well as socially conditioned it constitutes situations,
objects of knowledge, and the social identities of and relationships
between people and groups of people. It is constitutive both in the sense
that it helps to sustain and reproduce the social status quo, and in the
sense that it contributes to transforming it. Since discourse is so socially
consequential, it gives rise to important issues of power. Discursive prac-
tices may have major ideological effects that is, they can help produce
and reproduce unequal power relations between (for instance) social
classes, women and men, and ethnic/cultural majorities and minorities
through the ways in which they represent things and position people.
(Fairclough & Wodak, 1997: 260)
Within this understanding, the term discourse is used as mentioned

above very differently by different researchers and also in different aca-
demic cultures. In the German and Central European context, a distinction is
made between text and discourse, relating to the tradition in text linguis-
tics as well as to rhetoric (Wodak & Koller, 2008). In the English-speaking
world, discourse is often used both for written and oral texts (Gee, 2004;
Schiffrin, 1994). Other researchers distinguish between different levels of
abstractness: Lemke (1995) denes text as the concrete realisation of
abstract forms of knowledge (discourse), thus adhering to a more Foucauldian
approach (Jger & Maier, 2009).
Furthermore, the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) views discourse
as structured forms of knowledge about social practices, which may be
aligned to differing ideological positions, whereas text refers to concrete
oral utterances or written documents (Reisigl & Wodak, 2001, 2009; Wodak,
1986, 1996, 2001, 2011b).
2.2. Critique
In the West, and in various European languages, the term critical (or its
translation equivalents) has a rather complex history; it is clear, however,
that proponents of CDA use discourse analysis to challenge what they regard
as undesirable social and political practices (e.g. Fowler, Hodge and Kress,
who referred to their endeavours as Critical Linguistics; see Chilton et al.,
2010 for an extensive discussion of the developments in the eighteenth,
nineteenth and twentieth centuries).8 CDA encompasses varied understand-
ings of the terms critical, criticism and critique. One can distinguish at
least three interrelated concepts. First, the critical analysis of discourse can
imply to make the implicit explicit. More specically, it means making
explicit the implicit relationship between discourse, power and ideology,
challenging surface meanings and not taking anything for granted. Moreover,
critical discourse analysts do not stop after having deconstructed textual
meanings; the practical application of research results is also aimed at. For
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxiv 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

Editors Introduction xxv
instance, in Wodak (1996, 2001: 9), I refer to the application of the results
to communication problems in, for example, schools and hospitals. Chiltons
early work on the discourse of nuclear deterrence stems from peace activism
during the Cold War period (Chilton, 1988, 1996). Van Dijk (1998) stated
that CDS should be involved in the critique of social inequality. Kresss com-
ment on the goals of CDA may serve as a summary of this meaning of being
critical:
Critical studies of language, Critical linguistics (CL) and Critical Discourse

Analysis (CDA) have from the beginning had a political project: broadly
speaking that of altering inequitable distributions of economic, cultural
and political goods in contemporary societies. The intention has been to
bring a system of excessive inequalities of power into crisis by uncovering
its workings and its effects through the analysis of potent cultural objects
texts and thereby to help in achieving a more equitable social order.
(Kress, 1996: 15)
The explicitness of social and political values, which inform research

interests in CDA is not acceptable to certain linguists (such as Widdowson,
2004; see below for a discussion of various criticisms of CDA).
Secondly, being critical in CDA includes being self-reective and self-crit-
ical. In this sense, CDA does not only mean to criticise others. It also means to
criticise the critical itself, a point that is in line with Habermas and which was
made in 1989 (Wodak, 1989) and again 10 years later (Chouliaraki &
Fairclough, 1999: 9). Thirdly, critical analysis itself is a practice that may con-
tribute to social change. The same point about self-reection in the sampling
and analysis of texts is made, for example, in Reisigl and Wodak (2001: 32ff.).
There, while presenting the foundations of the DHA, we distinguish between
text-immanent critique, socio-diagnostic critique and prospective (retro-
spective) critique. While text-immanent critique is inherently oriented
towards retroductable careful text analysis, socio-diagnostic critique is based
on integrating the socio-political and structural context into the analysis and
interpretation of textual meanings. At this level, the aim is to reveal multiple
interests and contradictions in the text producers on the basis of the evidence
of the text and its context. Prospective critique builds on these two levels in
order to identify areas of social concern that can be addressed by direct social
engagement in relation to practitioners and wider audiences (Reisigl & Wodak,
2001: 34). Reisigl and Wodak (2001, ibid.) draw specically on the critical
tradition of Habermas; the integration of the Frankfurt School and Habermas
with the concept of critique and CDA is further elaborated by Chilton et al.
(2010) and Forchtner (2012) in important ways, which emphasise the role of
Habermas validity claims for an explicit normative stance in CDA.
The fact that the research system itself and thus CDA are also dependent
on social structures, and that criticism can by no means draw on an outside
position but is itself well integrated within social elds has also been strongly
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxv 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

xxvi Editors Introduction
emphasised by Pierre Bourdieu (1984). Researchers, scientists and philoso-

phers are not outside the societal hierarchy of power and status but subject
to this structure. They have frequently occupied and still occupy rather super-
ior positions in society (Wodak & Meyer, 2009a: 4ff). In any case, CDA
researchers have to be aware that their own work is driven by social, eco-
nomic and political motives, like any other academic work, and that they are
not in any superior position. Calling oneself critical only implies explicit
ethical standards: an intention to make ones position, research interests and
values explicit and ones criteria as transparent as possible, without feeling
the need to apologise for the critical stance of ones work (Van Leeuwen,
2006: 293).
2.3. Ideology and Power

Political scientists name four central characteristics of ideology (Wodak &
Meyer, 2009a: 8):
1. Ideology is more important than cognition;

2. it is capable of guiding individuals evaluations;
3. it provides guidance through action; and
4. it must be logically coherent.
Although the core denition of ideology as a coherent and relatively stable

set of beliefs or values has remained the same in political science over time,
the connotations associated with this concept have undergone many trans-
formations. During the era of fascism, communism and the Cold War in the
twentieth century, totalitarian ideology was confronted with democracy;
thus a Manichean distinction between good and evil was constructed.
Moreover, if we speak of the ideology of the new capitalism (see below),
ideology once again has an inherently negative connotation.
CDA is primarily interested in the latent type of everyday beliefs,
frequently appearing disguised as conceptual metaphors and analogies
(Lakoff & Johnson, 1980, 1999). Often enough, people with diverse back-
grounds and interests may nd themselves thinking alike in startling ways.
Dominant ideologies seem neutral, with assumptions that stay largely
unchallenged. When people in a society think alike about certain matters, or
even forget that there are alternatives to the status quo, one arrives at the
Gramscian concept of hegemony (Gramsci, 1978). Furthermore, it is the
functioning of ideologies in everyday life that intrigues CDA researchers. As
already mentioned above, Fairclough has a more Marxist view of ideologies
and perceives them as constructions of practices from particular perspec-
tives:
Ideologies are representations of aspects of the world which contribute

to establishing and maintaining relations of power, domination and
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxvi 10/22/2012 5:27:02 PM

Editors Introduction xxvii
exploitation. They may be enacted in ways of interaction (and therefore

in genres) and inculcated in ways of being identities (and therefore
styles). Analysis of texts [] is an important aspect of ideological ana-
lysis and critique []. (Fairclough, 2003: 218)
From within linguistics and literary studies, the work of Mikhail Bakhtin
(1986) has proved relevant to CDA (Lemke, 1995). In addition, Volosinovs
(1973) work was the rst linguistic theory of ideology. It claims that linguis-
tic signs are the material of ideology, and that all language use is basically to
be perceived as ideological. Bakhtins work emphasises the dialogical (and
ideological) properties of texts, while also introducing the idea of intertext-
uality (see also Kristeva, 1986).
It is important to distinguish between ideology (or other frequently used
terms such as stance/beliefs/opinions/Weltanschauung/position) and dis-
course (Purvis & Hunt, 1993: 474ff). Quite rightly, Purvis and Hunt state
that these concepts do not stand alone but are associated not only with
other concepts but with different theoretical traditions (ibid.). Thus, ideol-
ogy is usually (more or less) closely associated with the Marxist tradition,
whereas discourse has gained much signicance in the linguistic turn in
modern social theory by providing a term with which to grasp the way in
which language and other forms of social semiotics not merely convey
social experience but play some major part in constituting social objects
(the subjectivities and their associated identities), their relations, and the
eld in which they exist (ibid.: 474). The conation of ideology and dis-
course thus leads, I believe, to an inationary use of both ideologies and
discourses, both concepts thus tend to become empty signiers simultan-
eously indicating texts, positioning and subjectivities as well as belief sys-
tems, structures of knowledge and social practices (see Wodak, 2008).
Many articles in Volume I (both seminal well-known articles as well as
much more recent ones) propose manifold denitions and condense import-
ant theoretical debates about the (sometimes confused) use of the salient
concepts of critique, discourse, text, context, ideology and power.
Discussions about the various and interdisciplinary epistemological
underpinnings of CDA approaches and suggestions for new developments
can be found in Volume IV.
Power is another concept that is central to CDA, as it often analyses the
language use of those in power, who are responsible for the existence of
inequalities. Typically, CDA researchers are interested in the way discourse
(re)produces social domination, that is, power abuse by one group over
others, and how dominated groups may discursively resist such abuse. This
raises the question of how CDA researchers dene power (i.e. the relation-
ships where power is negotiated, established, enacted or performed) and
what moral standards allow them to differentiate between power use and
abuse a question, which has so far had to remain unanswered (Billig,
2008).
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxvii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxviii Editors Introduction
Gramscis observation that the maintenance of contemporary power rests

not only on coercive force but also on hegemony (winning the consent of the
majority) has been particularly inuential in CDA. The emphasis on hegem-
ony entails an emphasis on ideology, and on how the structures and practices
of ordinary life routinely normalise capitalist social relations. Althusser
(1971) made a major contribution to the theory of ideology, demonstrating
how these are linked to material practices embedded in social institutions
(e.g. schoolteaching). He also showed their capacity to position people as
social subjects, although he tended towards an overly deterministic (structur-
alist) version of this process, which left little room for action by subjects (cf.
Fairclough, Mulderrig & Wodak, 2011).
Much CDA research is concerned with differentiating the modes of exer-
cising power in discourse and over discourse in the eld of politics (Holzscheiter,
2005). Holzscheiter (2005: 69) denes power in discourse as actors struggles
over different interpretations of meaning. This struggle for semiotic hegem-
ony relates to the selection of specic linguistic codes, rules for interaction,
rules for access to the meaning-making forum, rules for decision-making,
turn-taking, opening of sessions, making contributions and interventions
(ibid.: 69). Power over discourse is dened as the general access to the stage
in macro- and micro contexts (ibid.: 57), that is, processes of inclusion and
exclusion (Wodak, 2007, 2009). Finally, the power of discourse relates to the
inuence of historically grown macro-structures of meaning, of the conven-
tions of the language game in which actors nd themselves (ibid.: 61).9 The
individual inuence of actors might contribute to changing these macro-
structures. Power struggles are obviously not always related to observable
behaviour. Lukes (2005: 28) emphasises the ideological dimensions of power
(relations):
Is it not the supreme and most insidious exercise of power to prevent

people, to whatever degree, from having grievances by shaping their per-
ceptions, cognitions, and preferences in such a way that they accept their
role in the existing order of things, either because they see it as natural
and interchangeable, or because they value it as divinely ordained and
benecial?
Michel Foucault primarily focuses on technologies of power: discipline is a

complex bundle of power technologies developed during the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries. Power is thus exercised with intention but it is not
individual intention. Foucault relies on what is accepted knowledge about
how to exercise power (Jger & Maier, 2009; Wodak, 2011b). He recom-
mends an analysis of power with a rather functionalist strategy: in his his-
torical analysis in Surveiller et Punir (Foucault, 1975), Foucault raises
questions concerning the social functions and effects of different technol-
ogies of surveillance and punishment: How do things work at the level of
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxviii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxix
ongoing subjugation, at the level of those continuous processes, which sub-

ject our bodies, govern our gestures and dictate our behaviours? In texts,
discursive differences are negotiated; they are governed by differences in
power that are, in part, encoded in and determined by discourse and by
genre. Therefore, texts are often sites of struggle in that they show traces of
differing discourses and ideologies contending and struggling for domin-
ance.
3. Main Research Agenda and Salient Challenges

In the following, I present some important research agendas in CDA.10
Although we encounter a vast amount of research and also many methodo-
logical and theoretical challenges, I have decided to restrict myself to four
major areas, which also relate to some major theoretical, epistemological
and methodological approaches that I discuss briey below (see Wodak &
Meyer, 2009a: 11ff for more information):
a. Analysing, understanding and explaining the impact of the Knowledge-

Based Economy (KBE) on various domains of our societies; related to
this, the recontextualisation of KBE into other parts of the world and
other societies (transition) and the interdependence with the manifold
forms of globalisation and globalising economies.
b. Integrating approaches from cognitive sciences into CDA; this requires
complex epistemological considerations and the development of new
tools. Moreover, some scholars question in which ways such approaches
could be dependent on more specic Western cultural contexts.
c. Analysing, understanding and explaining new phenomena in our political
systems, which are due to the impact of (new) media and to new trans-
national and global tendencies, on the one hand, and local developments
and related institutions, on the other. Related to this is the attempt to
grasp the impact of new media and new genres, which entails developing
new multimodal, theoretical and methodological approaches. Moreover,
methodologies, which integrate various approaches to argumentation
theory, rhetoric, narrative theory and pragmatics attempt to deconstruct
more or less intentional strategies in political debates in public fora and
online.
d. Analysing, understanding and explaining the relationship between com-
plex historical processes, hegemonic narratives and CDA approaches.
Identity politics on all levels always entails the integration of past experi-
ences, present events and future visions in many domains of our lives.
Forms of intertextuality and recontextualisation, on the one hand, and
legitimation and justication, on the other, are inherently tied to an
interdisciplinary discourse-historical approach.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxix 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxx Editors Introduction
Moreover, I would like to emphasise one methodological challenge, which

many researchers in CDA have recently mentioned (see Volumes II and III for
examples): Avoiding cherry picking (choosing the examples that best t the
assumptions) by integrating quantitative and qualitative methods (i.e. trian-
gulation) and by providing retroductable self-reective presentations of past
or current research processes.
3.1. The KBE and its Impact on Discourse

In Jessop, Fairclough and Wodak (2008), many aspects and dimensions of
the impact of KBE on higher education are explored from sociological, edu-
cational and CDA perspectives. KBE has penetrated most domains of our
Western societies and is also colonising other parts of the world. Indeed,
globalisation and competitiveness rhetoric (Muntigl, Weiss & Wodak, 2000)
seem to be ubiquitous, and the quantication and economisation of know-
ledge serve to rank social institutions and individuals. Through detailed case
studies, the recontextualisation of more global policy strategies can be illus-
trated on the micro-level. This, of course, requires interdisciplinary research
as well as new theories on transition and social change (see Krzyzanowski &
Wodak, 2009).
The Dialectical-Relational Approach (DRA) by Norman Fairclough
(1992a, b, 2000, 2003, 2010) focuses upon social conict in the Marxian
tradition and tries to detect its linguistic manifestations in discourses, in
particular elements of dominance, difference and resistance. According to
the DRA, every social practice has a semiotic element. Fairclough under-
stands CDA as the analysis of the dialectical relationships between semiosis
(including language) and other elements of social practices. These semi-
otic aspects of social practice are responsible for the constitution of
genres and styles. The semiotic aspect of social order is called the order of
discourse. His approach to CDA oscillates between a focus on structure
and a focus on action. Both strategies ought to be problem based: by all
means CDA should pursue emancipatory objectives and should be focused
upon the problems (or social wrongs) confronting what can be referred
to as the losers within particular forms of social life. DRA draws upon
Systemic Functional Linguistics (Halliday, 1985), which analyses language
as shaped (even in its grammar) by the social functions it has come to
serve.
In the same vein, Jane Mulderrig develops a methodology and interdisci-
plinary theoretical framework for historically analysing the exercise of gov-
ernmental power in a specic policy eld, thus addressing at least three of
the aforementioned challenges. At the theoretical level, this work employs
an interdisciplinary approach to CDA by grounding close textual analysis in
both educational sociology and neo-Marxist state theory. This research also
develops novel ways of using corpus tools in CDA (Mulderrig, 2006).
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxx 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxxi
Phil Graham elaborates the problems of New Capitalism while integrating

a strong historical perspective (Graham, 2002). The main focus of Grahams
research is to explore and explain the relationships between new communi-
cation technologies and genres, institutions and social change at a macro-
level. The perspective is primarily historical, political-economic, relational
and dynamic. Genres are produced, textured and transformed within
institutional contexts over long periods of time. In turn, institutions invest
years in some cases, millennia developing, maintaining and adapting
generic forms to changing social conditions in order to maintain or to gain
power. Graham believes that at certain times in history, certain genres become
very effective for motivating or manipulating large sections of society.
3.2. Discourse and Cognition

The seminal book by Teun Van Dijk and Walter Kintsch, Strategies of Discourse
Comprehension (1983), triggered research in discourse and cognition from
interdisciplinary and critical perspectives. In this book, they consider the rele-
vance of discourse to the study of language processing. Their cognitive model
of discourse comprehension in individuals gradually developed into cognitive
models for explaining the construction of meaning at a societal level.
Currently, interest in cognition has grown, and many scholars attempt a com-
bination of new cognitive theories (on conceptual metaphors, for example)
with CDA (Charteris-Black, 2006; Koller, 2004).
Much of the focus in this area has been placed on researching social inclu-
sion and exclusion. Van Dijk, for example, has recently paid special attention
to the discursive reproduction of racism in Spain and Latin America (Van
Dijk, 2005). The study by Richardson (2004) on the (Mis)representation of
Islam and subsequent research on the representation of migrants, asylum
seekers and refugees in the British press have elaborated research on racism,
anti-Semitism and xenophobia in intricate ways, by combining quantitative
and qualitative methods, and by focusing on argumentation as well (Baker
et al., 2008; Delanty, Wodak & Jones, 2011; Messer, Schroeder & Wodak,
2012; Richardson & Wodak, 2009).
Moreover, the focus on theorising context and knowledge is salient. Van
Dijk argues that whereas (critical and other) Discourse Studies have paid
extensive attention in the last few decades to the structures of text and talk,
they only paid lip service to the necessity of developing the relations between
text and context (see also Panagl & Wodak, 2004). Most approaches, also in
CDA, dene the inuence of the social context on language variation and
discourse in terms of objective social variables, such as gender, class, race,
ethnicity or age. Van Dijk shows that the subjective denitions and percep-
tions of the relevant properties of communicative situations inuence text
and talk. These denitions are made explicit in terms of mental models
(Van Dijk, 2008, 2009). In sum, Van Dijk emphasises that language use and
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxi 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxxii Editors Introduction
discourse always presuppose intervening mental models, goals and general

social representations (knowledge, attitudes, ideologies, norms, values) of
the language users. In other words, the study of discourse mediates between
society/culture/situation, cognition and discourse/language.
Paul Chilton has rarely applied the term CDA to his own work and has
always worked within a cognitive framework, principally on the discourse of
politics and international relations (cf. Chilton, 1994, 1996; Chilton & Lakoff,
1995). His more recent (2004, 2005) and ongoing works raise major ques-
tions referring to the relationship between language and social cognition in
the evolution of the human species. He draws on cognitive evolutionary
psychology to ask whether an innate critical instinct might exist. Linked to
this approach is a concern with universal aspects of language and the human
mind, which is also reected in his current collaborative work on compara-
tive discourse analysis that crosses linguistic, cultural and political bounda-
ries (Chilton et al., 2010). In terms of descriptive methodology, Chilton has
always differed from many practitioners of CDA, such as Fairclough, for
example. His analyses do not draw on Hallidayan linguistics, which he
regards as inadequate because of its inability to deal with a range of prag-
matic and semantic phenomena, such as presupposition, implicature, meta-
phor and blending.
3.3. Multimodality and the New Media

The social semiotic theory put forward by Kress and Van Leeuwen (1996)
provides a useful framework for considering the communicative potential of
visual devices in the media. Social semiotics highlights the multisemiotic and
potentially ideological character of most texts in contemporary society and
explores ways of analysing the intersection of language, images, design,
colour, spatial arrangement and so forth. Van Leeuwen (2011) is now focus-
ing on the question of colour, as well as on the constraints imposed by certain
software, PowerPoint templates and so on. Thus, it is important for social
semiotics to provide models of semiotic practice that are appropriate to the
practices they model, and as different semiotic practices are very differently
organised, it is not possible to apply a single model to all. Van Leeuwen
claims that the role and status of semiotic practices in society are currently
undergoing change as a result of the fact that it is increasingly global corpor-
ations and semiotic technologies, rather than national institutions, which
regulate semiotic production and consumption (Van Leeuwen, 2009).
Jay Lemkes recent work has emphasised multimedia semiotics, multiple
timescales and hypertexts/traversals (Lemke, 2001). This work emphasises
implicit value systems and their connections to institutional and personal
identity in new multimodal genres. The work on multiple timescales, for
example, is an extension of earlier work on ecological-social systems as com-
plex dynamical systems with semiotic cultures. Building on research on the
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxxiii
semantic resources of hypertext as a medium, Lemke proposes that postmod-

ern lifestyles are increasingly liberated from particular institutional roles,
and that we tend to move, on multiple timescales, from involvement in one
institution to another, creating new kinds of meaning, less bound to xed
genres and registers, as we surf across channels, websites and lived experi-
ences. This is seen as a new historical development, not supplanting institu-
tions, but building up new sociocultural possibilities on and over them.
Related to multimodality and recent developments in CDA, Theo Van
Leeuwen (2006: 292) rightly emphasises that:
[c]ritical discourse analysis has also moved beyond language, taking on

board that discourses are often multimodally realized, not only through
text and talk, but also through other modes of communication such as
images [] Overall, then, critical discourse analysis has moved towards
more explicit dialogue between social theory and practice, richer context-
ualization, greater interdisciplinarity and greater attention to the multi-
modality of discourse.
3.4. Discourse and Politics

The study of political discourse after WWII was triggered in part by the inves-
tigation of National Socialist language (Klemperer, 1975/1947); it was
essential to understand and explain the role(s) and importance of language
and communication in totalitarian regimes and their propaganda.11
The systematic ethnographic and discourse analytical study of political
institutions and of everyday life and decision making in organisations has
recently become a major focus of CDA (Wodak 1986, 1996; Lalouschek et al.
1990; Muntigl et al. 2000). Krzyzanowski and Oberhuber (2007) have ana-
lysed the European Convention in detail. The focus on discursive dimensions
of transnational political organisations also led to the elaboration of discur-
sively constructed visions/conceptions of the social and political order in
Europe/EU. Wodak (2011b) focuses on the everyday lives of Members of the
European Parliament (MEPs) and other politicians, because the frequently to
be observed depoliticisation of voters is to the so-called democracy decit
and the huge dissatisfaction over the strong ritualisation of politics and the
tiny snapshots provided by media; indeed, little differentiated knowledge
about doing politics on the backstage is indeed accessible to laypeople. Such
studies allow insights into politics as a profession and into the complexity of
political decision making on the backstage of politics.
Much CDA research in this domain centres on right-wing populist rhet-
oric, as this rhetoric is becoming inuential in many European countries (see
Haiderisation; Krzyzanowski & Wodak, 2009a; Wodak, KhosraviNik & Mral,
2012). This research is triggered by the rising dominance and hegemony of
right-wing populism and its apt use of indirect strategies to address multiple
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxiii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxxiv Editors Introduction
audiences (calculated ambivalence; Engel & Wodak, 2009, 2012). Research

on this kind of rhetoric also integrates new methodologies into CDA: the use
of ethnography, focus groups and narrative interviews, combined with more
traditional datasets such as newspapers and political speeches.
Research in this area necessarily integrates a historical dimension: The
study for which the Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA) was rst developed
attempted to trace in detail the constitution of an anti-semitic stereotyped
image, or Feindbild, as it emerged in public discourse in the 1986 Austrian
presidential campaign of Kurt Waldheim (Wodak et al., 1990). In order to be
able to study the discourse about the Waldheim Affair, its context was
unravelled in various dimensions; this study led to the elaboration of the
Four-Level Model of Context (Wodak, 2001). The DHA has been further
developed in a number of more recent studies: in studies on the discourse
about nation and national identity in Austria and Hungary (Kovcs & Wodak,
2003; Wodak, de Cillia, Reisigl & Liebhart, 2009) and in the European Union
(Muntigl et al., 2000; Wodak & Van Dijk, 2000). The DHA also borrows some
concepts from argumentation theory (Krzyzanowski & Wodak, 2009b;
Kienpointner, 1996; Van Eemeren & Grootendorst, 2004; Wengeler, 2003)
and integrates these in the analysis.
Here, several new methodologies rise to the challenges mentioned above:
insights and methodologies from conceptual history are integrated into
research on politics, as well as approaches to argumentation theory and
quantitative methods such as corpus linguistics (cf. Fairclough & Fairclough,
2010; Forchtner & Tominc, 2012; Krzyzanowski, 2010; Mautner, 2008, 2009;
Wodak & Reisigl, 2012). Volumes II and IV contain important articles, which
discuss and propose new ways to deal with the many (also online) forms of
politics and the aforementioned dangers of cherry-picking.
Furthermore, current research focuses on commemorative events, which
manifest hegemonic ways of dealing with traumatic pasts in various soci-
eties.12 In most of these studies, media, schoolbooks, speeches at national
days and the like are analysed to illustrate the myths, which are constructed
to provide new sanitised narratives which cover up ruptures, war crimes
and conicts that have occurred in the past. The following Figure 1 summa-
rises the most important approaches and their epistemological backgrounds
in a heuristic way (adapted from Wodak & Meyer, 2009a).
4. Criticisms
It is not surprising that CDA is frequently confronted with manifold criti-
cisms in respect of the inherent fuzziness of its concepts and denitions,
although it is precisely the latter that allows for rapid innovative develop-
ment of the eld (cf. Renkema, 2004: 284; Wodak, 2006, 2009). CDA has
mostly received some strong-worded critiques from within linguistics where
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxiv 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxxv
Overall research Main theoretical

strategy attractor
Discourse-Historical
Approach (Ruth Wodak and
Inductive detailed
Martin Reisigl) M. Foucault

case studies
Corpus-Lingustics
Approach (Gerlinde Critical
Mautner) Theory
Social Actors Approach

(Theo van Leeuwen) S. Marx
Dispositive Analysis
(Siegfried Jger and
Deductive general
S. Moscovici
Florentine Maier)
perspective
Sociocognitive Approach
Symbolic
(Teun van Dijk)
Interactionism
Dialectical Relational
Approach
M.K. Halliday
(Norman Fairclough)
Figure 1: Summary of approaches in CDA and their respective epistemological background

(adapted from Wodak & Meyer, 2009a)
a certain suspicion of CDA (and critical theory) seems to be encouraged,

especially in contexts where linguistics is taught and practised as a neutral
scientic enterprise. For example, Widdowson (1995, 1996) argues that
critical discourse analysts confuse discourse analysis with quite intuitive
textual interpretation. Moreover, Widdowson (2004) has pointed to what
he sees as a lack of systematic analysis and representative data. While this
criticism might be justied in relationship to some studies, it can certainly
not be generalised to the entire CDA paradigm. In the following, I briey
engage with some of Widdowsons critiques, as stated in his book Text,
Context, Pretext (2004).
In promoting his own denitions of text, context, pretext, Widdowson
attempts to distinguish himself inter alia from more sociolinguistic approaches
(Stubbs, Chafe, Firth, Hymes), from Pragmatics (Grice, Sperber, Wilson),
from Functional Systemic Grammar (Halliday, Hasan), from CDA (Fairclough,
Van Dijk, Wodak), from Corpus Linguistics (Stubbs), from Critical Linguistics
(Fowler, Kress) and others. If one looks at the huge range of research he chal-
lenges, it is unfortunate that he includes very little recent research, no
research in languages other than English, and also neglects relevant research
in related elds like text linguistics.
In a similar vein, Stubbs (1997) calls the analyses of critical discourse
analysts textual commentaries. Like Widdowson, Stubbs mainly targets
Fairclough, conveniently ignoring the wide range of critical discourse work
published over the years in journals such as Discourse and Society, Journal of
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxv 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxxvi Editors Introduction
Language and Politics, Visual Communication, Discourse and Communication,

Critical Discourse Studies, TEXT and TALK and so forth.
Most of all, however, these critiques take offence at the explicit social
and political goals of CDA. Thus, Widdowson argues that texts are differ-
ently interpreted by different readers, and that critical discourse analysts
unfairly privilege their own interpretations. From the point of view of
CDA, traditional sociolinguistic and stylistic approaches to the study of lan-
guage in social life may have succeeded in describing patterns of language
use and patterns of language change, but they have not explained them. In
contrast, critical discourse analysts are seeking to explain why texts might be
the way they are, and why they change the way they do (Van Leeuwen, 2006),
and they look for the answers to these questions in the social, economical
and political world, by integrating social theories as well as empirical stud-
ies in to their research (in the many different ways presented across the
four volumes).
Critical discourse analysts are, of course, aware that their own work, too,
is driven by social, economical and political motives, but emphasise that this
obviously applies to all academic work (see Habermas, 1967). Critical dis-
course analysts at least make their position explicit, they continue the tradi-
tion of reasoned debate that has been fundamental to democratic societies
since Antiquity and feel that their work as scholars entails greater social
responsibilities than providing facts for others to interpret and use (Van
Leeuwen, 2006).
Michael Billig has also engaged critically with CDA many times, albeit in
constructive ways. In 2003 he stated that CDA had established the same rit-
uals and institutional practices as other academic disciplines. Ironically, he
asks the question whether this might mean that CDA had become or might
become uncritical or if the use of acronyms such as CDA might serve the
same purposes as in other traditional noncritical disciplines, namely to
exclude outsiders and to mystify the functions and intentions of the research.
Most recently, Billig has reiterated this question under a new umbrella: do
scholars who employ CDA write in the same way, for example by mainly
using nominalisations, like the many texts, which they critically deconstruct
(Billig, 2008)? Thus, he states that we should be examining nominalising
(not nominalisation), representing (not representations), repressing (not
repression) and so on. Billig (2008) ends his quite provocative argument by
claiming:
[t]here is no reason for supposing that for academics, writing their aca-
demic articles, the active forms are psychologically primary. In my article
and in this reply, I have struggled to resist the grammatical forms with
which my ngers are so familiar. I have redrafted, often with a struggle,
many sentences which spontaneously spilled out in the passive form. I
have probably used the rst person singular here more times than I have
done in all the rest of my publications put together. And so now, I do not
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxvi 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxxvii
want to end by promoting a new label. To adapt a very famous phrase,

the point is not to categorize language, but to change it. (2008: 799)
It is impossible to follow Billigs recommendations in detail or to answer his

questions fully in this chapter. However, I believe that he points to potentially
very fruitful and necessary debates for CDA. More specically, Billig points to
the danger that can befall any discipline (or school or group) when it becomes
institutionalised after having been marginalised for a long time. Once estab-
lished, he argues, one might forget the basic desiderata and become cor-
rupted by the system in our case, the KBE, which inuences all our lives in
so many ways (Billig, 2003).
5. Perspectives
The goal of this introduction was to provide a summary of CDA approaches
and contextualise the articles in the four volumes; moreover, I discuss some
of the similarities and differences as well as the epistemological background
and salient concepts, which are relevant for all research in the CDA tradition.
One of CDAs volitional characteristics is its diversity. Nevertheless, a few
stable elements can be detected:
CDA works eclectically in many aspects. The whole range between grand
theories, middle-range theories (both drawing on critical theory and the
social sciences) and linguistic theories is adopted, although each single
approach emphasises different levels.
Interdisciplinarity is inherently necessary to grasp complex social phe-
nomena.
There is no accepted canon of data collection, but many CDA approaches
work with existing data, that is, texts not specically produced for their
respective research projects. However, ethnography and eldwork have
become more common as many scholars recognise the inherent limita-
tions of written data or ritualised and staged data like parliamentary
debates, public speeches, and so forth.
Operationalisation and analysis are problem oriented and imply linguistic
expertise.
The most evident similarity is a shared interest in social processes of

power, hierarchy building, identity politics, globalisation and glocalisation,
inclusion/exclusion and subordination. In the tradition of Critical Theory,
CDA investigates the discursive aspects of societal disparities and inequali-
ties. CDA frequently detects the linguistic means used by the elites in power
to stabilise or even intensify the inequities in society, in public and in private
domains, frontstage and backstage. All CDA research entails systematic
linguistic (rhetorical, pragmatic, text-linguistic, argumentative) analysis,
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxvii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xxxviii Editors Introduction
self-reection at every point of ones research, and distance from the data
that are being investigated. It is important to keep description and interpre-
tation apart, thus enabling transparency and retroduction. Of course, not all
of these recommendations are consistently followed, and they cannot always
be implemented in detail because of time pressures and similar structural
constraints; therefore, some critics will continue to state that CDA is torn
between too much linguistic analysis or too much focus on context; social
research and political argumentation or de-contextualised micro-analysis;
quantitative data or qualitative case studies; traditional data such as newspa-
pers or ethnography and new social media and so forth. Dichotomies never
make sense as research in CDA is much more differentiated; triangulation is
a major characteristic of many studies, thus the integration of multiple data
sources and methodologies has become common. In any case, such criticism
keeps a eld alive because it encourages self-reection, new questions and
related responses and thus innovation.
Notes
1. Accessed 22 August 2012.
2. Accessed 22 August 2012.
3. Fairclough and Wodak provide a list of the eight main tenets of CDA (1997) which
continue to remain salient (see also Fairclough, Mulderrig & Wodak, 2011 in Volume
I). In spite of some reformulations of this list, the core principles have remained stable
over the years (such as that CDA addresses social problems; power relations are dis-
cursive; discourse constitutes society and culture; discourse does ideological work;
and so forth).
4. Retroductable, a translation of the German term nachvollziehbar, means that in the
Humanities and Social Sciences (and in qualitative research in general), we cannot
test hypotheses or prove them like in the quantitative paradigm. In contrast, though,
qualitative analyses must be transparent, selections and interpretations justied and
value positions made explicit. In this way, the procedures and meanings of qualitative
analyses remain intersubjective and can, of course, also be challenged.
5. See Language and Power by Fairclough (1989), Language, Power and Ideology by Wodak
(1989), Prejudice in Discourse by van Dijk (1985).
6. See Fairclough and Wodak (1997); Reisigl and Wodak (2001, 2009); Weiss and Wodak
(2007a, b [2003a, b]); Wodak and Meyer (2001, 2009a, b).
7. See Billig (2003, 2008); Chilton and Wodak (2007 [2005]); Wodak and de Cillia
(2006) for an extensive discussion of this issue.
8. The meanings of the word critical in English also include nontechnical meanings,
such as censorious and in some contexts denunciatory. However, the predominant
sense in English and European languages is cognitive. That is, to engage in critique
is to engage in a rational conceptual activity. It is useful to distinguish this sense from
everyday uses of the verb criticize, which denotes an interactive social activity that
somehow incorporates a normative ethical or quasi-ethical standpoint. The verb criti-
cize in this sense is a speech act verb (Chilton et al., 2010).
9. Here, Holzscheiter refers to the concept of language game, as introduced by the
philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein in his seminal book Philosophical Investigations
(Wittgenstein, 1967). Language games dene rule-governed context-dependent units
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxviii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xxxix
of social and communicative behaviour into which we are all socialised in our respect-
ive cultures. This concept captures verbal and nonverbal meaning-making, thus all
forms of semiosis.
10. Unfortunately, it is necessary to neglect here much research, which could certainly be
also categorised as critical, such as feminist CDA (Lazar, 2005 [2007]).
11. See Wodak and Richardson (2012) for fascist text and talk historically and also the
continuities to date.
12. See Blommaert (2005); Heer, Manoschek, Pollak and Wodak (2008); Martin and
Wodak, (2003); Reisigl (2007).
References
Althusser, Louis (1971) Ideology and ideological state apparatus. in: Lenin and Philosophy
and Other Essays. London: New Left Books.
Baker, Paul, Gabrielatos, Costas, Khosravinik, Majid, Krzyzanowski, Micha, McEnery, Tony
& Wodak, Ruth (2008) A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse
analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers
in the UK press. Discourse & Society 19(3): 273305.
Bakhtin, Mikhael (1986) Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Austin, TX: University of
Texas Press.
Billig, Michael (2003) Critical discourse analysis and the rhetoric of critique. in: Wodak,
Ruth & Weiss, Gilbert (Eds.) CDA and Interdisciplinarity. London: Macmillan, pp.
3546.
Billig, Michael (2008) Nominalizing and de-nominalizing: a reply. Discourse & Society
19(6): 783800.
Blommaert, Jan (2005) Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Homo Academicus. Paris: Les ditions de Minuit.
Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen-Rosa & Coulthard, Malcolm (Eds.) (1996) Texts and Practices:
Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London, England: Routledge.
Charteris-Black, Jonathan (2006) Politics and Rhetoric. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Chilton, Paul (1988) Orwellian Language and the Media. London: Pluto.
Chilton, Paul (1994) La plaie quil convient de fermer... Les mtaphores de discourse
raciste. Journal of Pragmatics 21(6): 583619.
Chilton, Paul (1996) Security Metaphors: Cold War Discourse from Containment to Common
European Home. Berne: Peter Lang.
Chilton, Paul (2004) Analyzing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London:
Routledge.
Chilton, Paul (2005 [2007]) Missing links in mainstream CDA. Modules, blends and the
critical instinct. in: Wodak, Ruth & Chilton, Paul (Eds.) A New Agenda in (Critical)
Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins, pp. 1952.
Chilton, Paul & Lakoff, George. (Eds.) (1995) Metaphor in Foreign Policy Discourse.
Dartmouth: Aldershot.
Chilton, Paul, Tian, Hailong & Wodak, Ruth (2010) Reections on discourse and critique
in China and the West. Journal of Language and Politics. 9(4) (2010): 489506.
Chouliaraki, Lilie & Fairclough, Norman (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Delanty, Gerard, Wodak, Ruth & Jones, Paul (Eds.) (2011) Migration, Identity and
Belonging. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Engel, Jakob & Wodak, Ruth (2009) Kalkulierte Ambivalenz: Strungen und das
Gedankenjahr: Die Causen Siegfried Kampl und John Gudenus. in: de Cillia, Rudolf &
Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) Gedenken im Gedankenjahr. Innsbruck: Studienverlag, pp. 79100.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xxxix 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xl Editors Introduction
Engel, Jakob & Wodak, Ruth (2012) Calculated ambivalence and the denial of the
Holocaust. in: Wodak, Ruth & Richardson, John E. (Eds.) Analyzing Fascist Discourse.
Fascism in Text and Talk. London: Routledge (in press).
Fairclough, Norman (1989) Language and Power. London, New York: Longman.
Fairclough, Norman (1992a) Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.
Fairclough, Norman (1992b) Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman.
Fairclough, Norman (2000) New Labour, New Language? London: Routledge.
Fairclough, Norman (2003) Analyzing Discourse: Text Analysis for Social Research. London:
Routledge.
Fairclough, Norman (2010) Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd rev. edn). London: Longman.
Fairclough, Norman & Fairclough, Isabela (2010) Argumentation analysis in CDA. in: De
Cillia, Rudolf, Gruber, Helmut, Krzyzanowski, Micha & Menz, Florian (Eds.) Diskurs,
Politik, Identitt. Tbingen: Stauffenburg, pp. 5971.
Fairclough, Norman & Wodak, Ruth (1997) Critical discourse analysis. in: van Dijk, Teun
A. (Ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage, pp. 258284.
Fairclough, Norman, Mulderrig, Jane & Wodak, Ruth (2011) Critical discourse analysis.
in: Van Dijk, Teun A (Ed.) Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage, pp. 357378.
Forchtner, Bernhard (2011) Critique, the discourse historical approach, and the Frankfurt
School. Critical Discourse Studies 8(1): 114.
Forchtner, Bernhard (2012) Critical Discourse Analysis, in: Chapelle, Carol A (Ed.) The
Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell (in press).
Forchtner, Bernhard & Tominc, Ana (2012) Critique in the discourse-historical approach.
Journal of Language and Politics 11(1) (2012): 3150.
Foucault, Michel (1975) Surveiller et punir. Naissance de la prison. Paris: Gallimard.
Fowler, Roger, Hodge, Bob, Kress, Gunther & Trew, Tony (1979) Language and Control.
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Gee, James (2004) Discourse Analysis. Theory and Method. London: Routledge.
Graham, Phil (2002) Space and cyberspace: on the enclosure of consciousness. in:
Armitage, John & Roberts, Jay (Eds.) Living with Cyberspace: Technology & Society in
the 21st Century. London: The Athlone Press.
Gramsci, Antonio (1978 [19211926]) Selections from the Political Writings (Ed. Quentin
Hoare). London: Lawrence and Wishart.
Habermas, Jrgen (1967) Erkenntnis und Interesse Knowledge and Interest. Frankfurt:
Suhrkamp.
Halliday, Michael AK (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward
Arnold.
Heer, Hannes, Manoschek, Walter, Pollak, Alexander & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2008) The
Discursive Construction of History: Remembering the German Wehrmachts War of
Annihilation. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Holzscheiter, Anna (2005) Power of discourse and power in discourse. An investigation
of transformation and exclusion in the global discourse of childhood. PhD Thesis, FU
Berlin.
Jger, Siegfried & Maier, Florentine (2009) Theoretical and methodological aspects of
Foucauldian critical discourse analysis and dispositive analysis. in: Wodak, Ruth &
Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 3461.
Jessop, Bob, Fairclough, Norman & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2008) Higher Education and the
Knowledge-Based Economy in Europe. Rotterdam: Sense.
Keller, Rainer (2011) Diskursforschung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Kienpointner, Manfred (1996) Argumentationstheorie. Munich: UTB.
Klemperer, Viktor (1975/1947) LTI Lingua Tertii Imperii: Die Sprache des Dritten Reiches.
Leipzig: Reclam.
Koller, Veronika (2004) Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: a Critical
Cognitive Study. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xl 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xli
Kovcs, Andras & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2003) Nato, Neutrality and National Identity: The
case of Austria and Hungary. Vienna: Bhlau.
Kress, Gunter (1996) Representational resources and the production of subjectivity: ques-
tions for the theoretical development of critical discourse analysis in a multicultural
society. in: Caldas-Coulthard, Carmen R. & Coulthard, Malcolm (Eds.) Texts and
Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge, pp. 1531.
Kress, Gunter & Van Leeuwen, Theo (1996) Reading Images. London: Routledge.
Kristeva, Julia (1986) Word, dialogue and novel. in: Moi, Toril (Ed.) The Kristeva Reader.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Krzyzanowski, Micha (2010) The Discursive Construction of European Identity. Bern: Peter
Lang.
Krzyzanowski, Micha & Oberhuber, Florian (2007) (Un)Doing Europe. Bern: Peter Lang.
Krzyzanowski, Micha & Wodak, Ruth (2009a) The Politics of Exclusion. The Austrian Case.
Boulder: Transaction Press.
Krzyzanowski, Micha & Wodak, Ruth (2009b) Theorising and analysing social change
in Central and Eastern Europe: the contribution of critical discourse analysis. in:
Galasinska, Alexandra & Krzyzanowski, Micha (Eds.) Discourse and Transformation
in Central and Eastern Europe. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 1740.
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark (1980) Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George & Johnson, Mark (1999) Philosophy in the Flesh. New York: Basic Books.
Lazar, Michelle M (Ed.) (2005) Feminist critical discourse analysis. Gender, power, and ideol-
ogy in discourse. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Le, Thao & Short, Megan (2009) Critical discourse analysis. An interdisciplinary perspective.
Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Lemke, Jay (1995) Textual Politics. London: Arnold.
Lemke, Jay (2001) Discursive technologies and the social organization of meaning. Special
Issue of Folia Linguistica 35(12): 7996.
Locke, Terry (2004) Critical Discourse Analysis. London, New York: Continuum.
Lukes, Steven (2005 [1974]) Power: A Radical View. Cambridge: Polity.
Machin, David & Mayr, Andrea (2012) How To Do Critical Discourse Analysis. London:
Sage.
Martin, Jim & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2003) Rereading the Past. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mautner, Gerlinde (2008) Analysing newspapers, magazines and other print media. in:
Wodak, Ruth & Krzyzanowski, Micha (Eds.) Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social
Sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 3053.
Mautner, Gerlinde (2009) Checks and balances: how corpus linguistics can contribute to
CDA. in: Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp.
122143.
Messer, Michi, Schroeder, Renee & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2012) Migrations. Interdisciplinary
Perspectives. Berlin: Springer.
Mulderrig, Jane (2006) The governance of education. A corpus-based critical discourse
analysis of UK Education Policy Texts 1972 to 2005. PhD Thesis. Lancaster University.
Muntigl, Peter, Weiss, Gilbert & Wodak, Ruth (2000) European Union Discourses of
Un/employment. An Interdisciplinary Approach to Employment Policy-Making and
Organizational Change. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Panagl, Oswald & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2004) Text und Kontext. Mnchen: Konigshausen.
Purvis, Trevor & Hunt, Alan (1993) Discourse, ideology, ideology, discourse, ideology
BJS 44(3): 473499.
Reisigl, Martin (2007) Nationale Rhetorik in Gedenk und Festreden. Tbingen:
Stauffenburg.
Reisigl, Martin & Wodak, Ruth (2001) Discourse and Discrimination. Rhetorics of Racism
and Antisemitism. London: Routledge.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xli 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

xlii Editors Introduction
Reisigl, Martin & Wodak, Ruth (2009) The discourse-historical approach. in: Wodak, Ruth
& Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 87121.
Renkema, Jan (2004) Introduction to Discourse Studies. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Richardson, John (2004) (Mis)representing Islam. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Richardson, John & Wodak, Ruth (2009) Visual argumentation in racist discourse.
Controversia 6(2): 4577.
Schiffrin, Deborah (1994) Approaches to Discourse. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stubbs, Michael (1997) Whorfs children: critical comments on critical discourse analysis
(CDA). in: Ryan, Ann and Wray, Alison (Eds.). Evolving Models of Language. Clevedon:
Multilingual Matters, pp. 100116.
Toolan, Michael (Ed.) (2002) Critical Discourse Analysis Critical Concepts in Linguistics (4
Volumes). London: Routledge.
Van Dijk, Teun A (1985) Prejudice in Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Van Dijk, Teun A (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society 4(2):
249283.
Van Dijk, Teun A (1998) Ideology. London: Sage.
Van Dijk, Teun A (2001) Multidisciplinary CDA: a plea for diversity. in: Wodak, Ruth &
Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 95120.
Van Dijk, Teun A (2005) Racism and Discourse in Spain and Latin America. Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Van Dijk, Teun A (2008) Discourse and Context. A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Van Dijk, Teun A (2009) Critical Discourse Studies: a sociocognitive approach. in: Wodak,
Ruth & Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 6286.
Van Dijk, Teun A (2012) Critical Discourse Analysis. in: Hamilton, Heidi, Tannen, Deborah
& Schiffrin, Deborah (Eds.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: OUP (in press).
Van Dijk Teun A & Kintsch, Walter (1983) Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New
York: Academic Press.
Van Eemeren, Frans & Grootendorst, Rob (2004) A Systematic Theory of Argumentation:
The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Leeuwen, Theo (2005) Typographic meaning. Visual Communication 4(2): 137142.
Van Leeuwen, Theo (2006) Critical Discourse Analysis. in: Brown, Keith (Ed.) Encyclopedia
of Language and Linguistics (2nd edn., Vol. 3). Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 290294.
Van Leeuwen, Theo (2008) Analyzing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.
Van Leeuwen, Theo (2009) Discourse as the recontextualisation of social practice: a
guide. in: Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp.
144161.
Van Leeuwen, Theo (2011) The Language of Colour. London: Routledge.
Volosinov, Valentin I. (1973 [1928]) Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. New York:
Seminar.
Weiss, Gilbert & Wodak, Ruth (2003a [2007a]) Introduction models of interdisciplin-
arity. in: Weiss, Gilbert & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) CDA. Theory and Interdisciplinarity.
Basingstoke: Palgrave, pp. 137.
Weiss, Gilbert & Wodak, Ruth (Eds.) (2003b [2007b]) CDA. Theory and Interdisciplinarity.
Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Wengeler, Martin (2003) Topos und Diskurs. Tbingen: Niemeyer.
Widdowson, Henry G (1995). Discourse analysis: a critical view. Language and Literature
4(3): 157172.
Widdowson, Henry G (1996). Reply to Fairclough: discourse and interpretation: conjec-
tures and Refutations. Language and Literature 5(1): 5769.
Widdowson, Henry G (2004) Text, Context, Pretext. Critical Issues in Critical Discourse
Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd xlii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

Editors Introduction xliii
Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1967) Philosophische Untersuchungen. Frankfurt am Main:

Suhrkamp.
Wodak, Ruth (1986) Language Behavior in Therapy Groups. Los Angeles: University of
California Press.
Wodak, Ruth (Ed.) (1989) Language, Power and Ideology. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Wodak, Ruth (1996) Disorders of Discourse. London: Longman.
Wodak, Ruth (2001) The discourse-historical approach. in: Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael
(Eds.) Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 81115.
Wodak, Ruth (2006) Dilemmas of discourse (analysis). Language in Society 35:
595611.
Wodak, Ruth (2007) Pragmatics and critical discourse analysis. Pragmatics and Cognition
15(1): 203225.
Wodak, Ruth (2008) Introduction: terms and concepts. in: Ruth, Wodak & Micha,
Krzyzanowski (Eds.) Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. Basingstoke:
Palgrave, pp. 142.
Wodak, Ruth (2009) Semiotics of racism. in: Renkema, Jan (Ed.) Discourse, Of Course.
Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Wodak, Ruth (2011a) Complex texts. Analysing, understanding, explaining and interpret-
ing meanings. Discourse Studies 13(5): 623633.
Wodak, Ruth (2011b) The Discourse of Politics in Action Politics as Usual. Basingstoke:
Palgrave (second revised edition).
Wodak, Ruth & Chilton, Paul (Eds.) (2007 [2005]) A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse
Analysis. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Wodak, Ruth & de Cillia, Rudolf (2006) Politics and language: overview. in: Keith, Brown
(Ed.) Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics (Vol. 9). Oxford: Elsevier, pp. 706719.
Wodak, Ruth, KhosraviNik, Majid, Mral, Brigitte (Eds.) (2012) Rightwing Populism:
Discourse and Politics. London: Bloomsbury.
Wodak, Ruth & Koller, Veronika (Eds.) (2008) Handbook of Communication in the Public
Sphere Berlin: De Gruyter.
Wodak, Ruth & Krzyzanowski, Micha (Eds.) (2008) Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the
Social Sciences. Basingstoke: Palgrave.
Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (2009a) Critical discourse analysis: history, agenda, theory,
and methodology. in: Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (Eds.) Methods of CDA. London:
Sage, pp. 133.
Wodak, Ruth & Meyer, Michael (Eds.) (2009b [2001]) Methods in Critical Discourse Analysis
(2nd rev. edn.). London: Sage.
Wodak, Ruth, Nowak, Peter, Pelikan, Johanna, Gruber, Helmut, de Cillia, Rudolf & Mitten,
Richard (1990) Wir sind alle unschuldige Tter!. Diskurshistorische Studien zum
Nachkriegsantisemitismus. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
Wodak, Ruth & Van Dijk, Teun A (Eds.) (2000) Racism at the Top. Klagenfurt: Drava.
Wodak, Ruth & Reisigl, Martin (2012) Discourse and racism. in: Hamilton, Heidi, Tannen,
Deborah & Schiffrin, Deborah (Eds.) Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: OUP (in
press).
Wodak, Ruth & Richardson, John E. (Eds.) (2012) Analyzing Fascist Discourse. Fascism in
Text and Talk. London: Routledge.
Young, Lynne & Harrison, Claire (Eds.) (2004) Systemic Functional Linguistics and Critical
Discourse Analysis. Studies in Social Change. London: Continuum.
0 Introduction_FPP.indd
View publication stats xliii 10/22/2012 5:27:03 PM

WodakRuth CDAnalysis Introduction

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

WodakRuth CDAnalysis Introduction

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See

Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Vol. 1

Book January 2001

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd i 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

Ruth Wodak is Distinguished Professor of Discourse Studies at Lancaster

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd ii 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

Los Angeles | London | New Delhi

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd iii 10/12/2012 3:57:03 PM

SAGE Publications Ltd Introduction and editorial arrangement by

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012936151

ISBN 978-1-4462-1058-1 (set of four volumes)

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd iv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Volume I: Concepts, History, Theory

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd v 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

16. Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry 371

Volume II: Methodologies

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd vi 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

30. Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse 303

Volume III: Doing CDA/Case Studies

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd vii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Volume IV: Applications, Interdisciplinary

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd viii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

61. On Combining Pragma-Dialectics with Critical Discourse Analysis 233

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd ix 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

Grateful acknowledgement is made to the following sources for permission to

1. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Rhetoric of Critique, Michael Billig

2. Missing Links in Mainstream CDA: Modules, Blends and the Critical

3. Critical Discourse Analysis and the Marketization of Public Discourse:

4. Critical Discourse Analysis, Norman Fairclough, Jane Mulderrig and

5. Critical Discourse Analysis and Political Economy of Communication:

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xi 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

6. Power and Discourse in Organization Studies: Absence and the Dialectic of

7. On Critical Linguistics, Roger Fowler

8. Theoretical and Methodological Aspects of Foucauldian Critical Discourse

9. Critical Discourse Analysis, Gunther Kress

10. Feminist Critical Discourse Analysis: Articulating a Feminist Discourse

11. Discourse, Context and Cognition, Teun A. van Dijk

12. Discourse and the Denial of Racism, Teun A. van Dijk

13. Representing Social Actors, Theo Van Leeuwen

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

14. Legitimation in Discourse and Communication, Theo Van Leeuwen

15. Critical Discourse Analysis, Description, Explanation, Causes: Foucaults

16. Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry,

17. Language, Power and Identity, Ruth Wodak

18. A Useful Methodological Synergy? Combining Critical Discourse Analysis

20. A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies: Designing Social Futures,

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xiii 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

21. Political Discourse in the News: Democratizing Responsibility or

22. A Context-sensitive Approach to Analysing Talk in Strategy Meetings,

23. Peer Talk as a Double Opportunity Space: The Case of Argumentative

25. Actor Descriptions, Action Attributions, and Argumentation: Towards a

26. Political Communication, Institutional Cultures and Linearities of

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xiv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

29. The Grammar of Governance, Jane Mulderrig

30. Metaphor Scenarios in Public Discourse, Andreas Musolff

31. Inferencing and Cultural Reproduction: A Corpus-based Critical Discourse

32. Rhetoric of Political Speeches, Martin Reisigl

33. Nexus Analysis: Refocusing Ethnography on Action, Ron Scollon and

0 Vol1-FM_ZazaEunice_FPP.indd xv 10/12/2012 3:57:04 PM

34. Between Remembering and Forgetting: Uruguayan Military Discourse

35. Critical Discourse Analysis as an Analytic Tool in Considering Selected,

36. Investigating Narrative Inequality: African Asylum Seekers Stories in

37. The Use of Exclusionary Language to Manipulate Opinion: John Howard,