Application of Discourse Analysis to EnglishTeaching and Learning.docx

1、Application of Discourse Analysis to English Teaching and LearningApplication of Discourse Analysis to English Teaching and Learning. IntroductionDue to the influence of traditional grammar-translation teaching method, teachers do not launch on teaching from the hierarchy, structure and internal mea

2、ning but still put emphasis on the analysis of the difficult points of grammar and vocabulary teaching. This kind of teaching method has not made fundamental breakthrough of traditional grammar-translation teaching method. Therefore, students can not get the proper thinking methods and skills that s

3、tudents should obtain. Discourse analysis, as a young branch of learning sprung up in 1990s, has undergone a tremendous development, like any study of multi-disciplinary issues, it was denied and ignored by some scholars for a long time, but nowadays it becomes a prosperous subject that deals with t

4、he study and application of approaches to analyze written ,spoken or signed language. Contrary to much of traditional linguistics, discourse analysts not only study language use beyond the lexical, phrase and sentence boundary, but also prefer to analyze “naturally occurring” language use.This paper

5、, in general, is an introduction to discourse and discourse analysis, which is divided into two parts: theoretical part and practical part. The former which presents a scholarly set of ideas, and the later is devoted to the account of the study in order to support the ideas presented in the first ch

6、apter .the former part is subdivided into three chapters .The first chapter provides a thorough description of the term discourse itself, including examples of various types and features .The second one presents the origins and development of discourse analysis. And the last chapter of theoretical p

7、art provides the ways of applying the theory to teaching and learning various aspects of English language, such as grammar, text reading and comprehension, and the emphasis is put on the interpretation of written text.The practical part of this paper describes the study conducted on a group of polis

8、h learners of English .This component focuses on finding lexical chains in texts .Despite the fact that the study aims to check the perception and implementation of lexical chains in written texts ,it is also useful in understanding long speeches, the newly developed discourse analysis is an effecti

9、ve method used in English teaching and learning , which has maximized teaching effects and learning achievements of English teaching . Definition of discourse The word discourse originated from Latin discursus which denoted conversation, speech. However, discourse refers to a too wide area of human

10、life .In this thesis, only from the vantage point of linguistics is discourse explained .There is no agreement among linguists when it comes to the use of the term discourse, because some use it in reference to texts, while others claim that Discourse is a continuous stretch of (especially spoken) l

11、anguage larger than a sentence, often constituting a coherent unit such as a sermon, argument, joke, or narrative. While Dakowska notices that the differences between variety of discourses indicates the unity of communicative intentions as a vital element of each of them. And she suggests using term

12、s text and discourse almost interchangeably betokening the former refers to the linguistic product, while the latter implies the entire dynamics of the processes (Dakowska 2001:81). According to Cook (1990:7), novels, as well as short conversations or groans might be equally rightfully named discour

13、ses.Beaugrande (1981) has suggested seven criteria which have to be fulfilled to qualify either a written or a spoken text as a discourse. These include:Cohesion - grammatical relationship between parts of a sentence essential for its interpretation; Coherence - the order of statements relates one a

14、nother by sense. Intentionality - the message has to be conveyed deliberately and consciously; Acceptability - indicates that the communicative product needs to be satisfactory in that the audience approves it; Informativeness - some new information has to be included in the discourse; Situationalit

15、y - circumstances in which the remark is made are important; Intertextuality - reference to the world outside the text or the interpreters schemata; Nowadays, however, not all of the above mentioned criteria are perceived as equally important in discourse studies, therefore some of them are valid on

16、ly in certain methods of the research. 2.1 Features of discourse analysisAs it is difficult to unambiguously clarify what a discourse is, it seems reasonable to describe features which are mutual to all it links. To do it thoroughly, Saussure distinguished the language competence of the speaker and

17、the actual phenomena or data of linguistics (utterance) as langue and parole (Saussure:1959:13-14 ). Following this division , discourse relates more to parole, for it constitutes the immediately accessible data, the linguists proper object is the langue of each community, the lexicon, grammar , and

18、 phonology implanted in each individual by his upbringing in society and on the basis of which he speaks and understands his language ,while langue is abstract .Here are some additional traits : discourse is always produced by somebody whose identity, as well as the identity of the interpreter, is s

19、ignificant for the proper understanding of the message. While langue is more impersonal. Furthermore, langue is a set of convention that members of a speech community seem to abide by, while parole is the concrete use of convention not spoken by anyone. Consequently, only discourse may convey messag

20、es thanks to langue which is its framework.2.2 Types of discourse A type of discourse might be characterized as a class of either written or spoken text, which is frequently casually specified, recognition of which aids its perception, and consequently production of potential response (Cook 1990:156

21、). The Organon model is one of such divisions, which distinguishes three types of discourse: informative type of discourse, narrative discourse, argumentative discourse. This distinction is due to its suitability for written communicative products more than for spoken ones. While stegers analysis li

22、es outside the domain of written communicative products and leads to the emergence of a new, more detailed classification of kinds of spoken texts. And steger examined features of various situations and divided discourse into six types: presentation, message, report, public debate, conversation and

23、interview. However, it is worth mentioning that oral discourse might alter its character, for example, in the case of presenting a lecture when students start to ask questions the type changes into an interview, or even a conversation. The possible division of discourse types mentioned above do not

24、exhaust other divisions did by the typologies, nowadays a shift of interest in this field presently focuses on similarities and differences between written and spoken discourse ( Renkema 2004:64).2.3 Written and spoken discourseThere are also other distinctions between them. Except for obvious diffe

25、rences between speech and writing like the fact that writing includes some medium which keeps record of the conveyed message while speech is connected only to air. It is impossible for a conversation in which every sentence is to be rephrased. But talking is spontaneous, which causes mistakes, repet

26、ition, sometimes less coherent sentences where even grunts, stutters or pauses might be meaningful. This is because the speaker usually knows the fact that he is being listened to, which enables him to adjust the register. Another feature of oral discourse is that nonsense vocabulary, slang and cont

27、racted forms (lve, theyre) are used. In contrast, the author of a text does not often know who is going to read the text, thus he cannot adjust to readers specific expectations. The writer frequently has almost unlimited period of time to consider the content of his work so as to make it more cohere

28、nt, by using complex syntax. Hence neat message organization, division to paragraphs, layout are of vital importance to make comprehension easier. Additionally, the organization of tables, formulas, or charts which can be portrayed only in written form but never in oral discourse , owing to the lack

29、 of context expression such as now and here are omitted, since they would be ambiguous as texts might be read at different times and places.This kind of division is quite straightforward, and it is possible to combine the two in the case of a lesson, when a teacher explains something written on the

30、blackboard, or when a speaker prepares detailed notes to be read out during his speech. DISCOURSE ANALYSIS - ITS ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENDiscourse analysis is a general term for a number of approaches to analyzing the use of written and spoken language. The objects of discourse analysis are variously

31、defined in terms of coherent sequences of sentences, propositions , speeches and so on . Discourse analysis has been taken up in a variety of social science disciplines , including linguistics , sociology, anthropology, cognitive psychology, communication studies and translation studies, each of whi

32、ch is subject to it own assumption, dimensions of analysis, and methodology. 3.1 Starting point of discourse analysisThe term discourse analysis first came into general use following the publication of a series of papers by zelling harris beginning in 1952 and reporting on work from which he develop

33、ed transformational grammar in the late 1930s. However, because he had not worked out a comprehensive model, it was not treated as a separate branch of study. It is Robert E. Longacre, one of Kenneth L. Pikes students, that was able to disseminate it in a dissertation. In the late 1960s and 1970s, an