Hello,
would like to start from “factual discourse”. It is
defined and explained in the Woofit chapter 5. However, I would like to start
asking “what is the exact place of factuality and authority in discourse
analysis?” I mean that when we conduct discourse analysis, what is the
importance of factual discourses for our analysis? I am struggling to understand
this point. I liked the example that Wootfit provides us. Gender, occupation,
marital status and religion can be used to refer a person. Therefore, they
offer factual references. I can understand that these are important for
discourse analysis, but I think they have lack of true meaning as indicated in
the context of rhetorical psychology.
In terms of Wiggins paper, I really liked reading it. I was
interesting to see an analysis which include about 200 hours video and audio
record. I know there is no need for coding everything, but it is important to transcribe
all the records, isn’t it? At this point, I have the question of whether or not
we need member checking for the gestures that are indicated in the transcripts.
If we interpret gestures and try to construct meaning from them, how can we
make sure we do it correctly?
My other concern is that discursive psychology (DP). I know
it is related to cognitive processes, but I did not see a concrete explanation
of it. Or I might missed the point. What is DP? Is it a paradigm, a theoretical
framework, a research field, or another concept?
Remzi,
ReplyDeleteGreat questions being posed here. I hope we can unpack these in class tomorrow.
Say more what you mean around "member check" in relation to gestures? How are you defining/making sense of member checking?
DP, like CDA, is a methodological and theoretical orientation to the study of discourse. Thus, it brings with it particular assumptions about how to engage in a discourse analysis. Does that help?