Discourse Analysis and Social Demand: theoretical and methodological aspects - ADDS 2008

Malcolm Coulthard (Aston University, UK)

Norman Fairclough (Lancaster University – Institute for Advanced Studies, Emeritus, UK)

Laurent Filliettaz (Université de Genève, CH)

Isabelle Leglise (CNRS, FR)

Eni Orlandi (Universidade de Campinas, Sao Paolo, BR)

Diane Vincent (Université Laval, CA)

 

From its beginnings, Discourse Analysis has been engaged in a dialogue with society. Discourse Analysis defines discourse through the latter’s relation with the different domains of social activity within which it is produced (this point of view is shared by authors like M. Bakhtin 1984 or N. Fairclough 2003): as a practice fixed in social and historic context, as an activity having social goals which may be restructured and/or interpreted by the analyst. In this way, the data submitted for analysis are partially configured and segmented by society.

 

Thus, through the formulation of hypotheses that determine the corpus’ composition, through the selection of observables, and finally through its “interpretative gesture”, Discourse Analysis questions, in one way or another, the political, media and institutional instances that produce discourse. For instance, the aims of Pêcheux’s works on political discourse were to grasp, beyond the materiality of language, discursive formations, and beyond that, ideological formations as well (D. Maldidier 1990). Because of its close relationship to the sphere of social activities, Discourse Analysis is akin to “interventionism”, i.e. the closer its ties to the world are, the greater scientific research and the discourses it produces impact upon world order and its perception (cf. Léglise 2000).

 

Due to the close relationship between discourse and society, the results provided by Discourse Analysis are often exploited and interpreted by instances-sources of analyzed discourse. Notable examples are studies of discourse in a working context (A. Borzeix & B. Fraenkel (coord.) 2001, L. Filliettaz & J.-P. Bronckart 2005, F. Mourlhon-Dallies (ed.) 2007), of political discourse (M. Tournier 1992/1997/2001, Guilhaumou 1998), of media discourse (S. Moirand 2007), of business discourse (N. Garric & I. Léglise 2005, A. Salem 1993), of academic discourse (K. Fløttum (éd.) 2007), of didactical discourse (J. Peytard & S. Moirand 1992), as well as studies of social, racial or ethnic prejudices/stereotypes which are channelled through discourse (T. Van Dijk 1996, D. Vincent 2005). With increasing frequency, institutions solicit consulting, expertise, diagnosis. This kind of demand compels Discourse Analysis to define and redefine its specificity with regard to the delimitation of the research object, the configuration of its tools, the theorization of the relationship between discourse and “out-discourse”.

 

The conference seeks to highlight the diversity of research work in France and throughout the world, and to encourage reflection on theoretical and methodological implications of social-demand oriented research: what of the relevance of descriptive tools and categories, or of the conception of discourse/out-discourse relation, or of the context of results restitution?.. The issues evoked in the title of the conference concern Discourse Analysis as well as the social domain itself. An important focus of the conference is to measure the reciprocal influences through case studies, epistemological and methodological reflections, theoretical proposals, etc.

 

One of the challenges of this conference is to propose a dialogue between different approaches to discourse: Discourse Analysis, Critical Discourse Analysis, Conversation Analysis, Forensic Linguistics, Multi-Modal Approaches of Discourse… Another challenge is to emphasize interdisciplinary cooperation and interaction with other domains that work with discourse, such as anthropology, information & communication sciences, sociology, psychology, etc.

 

Communication proposals may address one of the following topics or propose new themes in connection with the conference issues.

 

·        The relationship of the theory to the outside world and the impact of this relationship upon the theory’s development, whether it be through its concepts, perspective or modelling levels. One may treat the history and epistemology of Discourse Analysis, or discuss the ways in which study/research objects are likely to enrich theory. One may also examine Discourse Analysis’ modelling of the world (interdiscourse, discourse object, social constructions, etc.) or examine the theories proposed by Discourse Analysis in order to explain non-linguistic impacts on discourse.

·        Social demand characterization: types of social demand, outbreak context, social demand evaluation, etc. Indeed, it is sometimes difficult to know where social demand begins, since Discourse Analysis is already social-oriented. Must social demand be institutional? Should it lead to specific questioning and to actions, like interventionism?

·        Types of data and their treatment: corpus composition, presentation, and annotation; deontology (anonymization, data exploitation, etc.)…

·        Discourse Analysis and interdisciplinary research: theoretical and methodological aspects, new research areas, new corpuses, etc.

 

The scientific committee will favour proposals that expose, through concrete applications, various methodological trends while highlighting their relevance, as well as those that develop epistemological or theoretical considerations, supported by examples.

Programme Committee:
Alma Bolon (U. de la Republica, Montevideo), Sonia Branca (U. Paris 3), Bernard Bosredon (U. Paris 3), Josiane Boutet (IUFM et U. Paris 7), Helena Calsamiglia (U. Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona), Ross Charnock (U. Paris 9), Chantal Claudel (U. Paris 8), Malcolm Coulthard (U. d’Aston), Marianne Doury (CNRS), Norman Fairclough (U. de Lancaster – Institute for Advanced Studies, Emeritus), Laurent Filliettaz (U. de Genève), Daniel Gile (ESIT, U. Paris 3), Jacques Guilhaumou (CNRS), Jean-François Jeandillou (U. Paris 10), Alice Krieg-Planque (U. Paris 12), Isabelle Laborde-Milaa (U. Paris 12), Isabelle Leglise (CNRS), Dominique Maingueneau (U. Paris 12), Francine Mazière (U. Paris 13), Caroline Mellet (U Paris 10), Sophie Moirand (U. Paris 3), Florence Mourlhon-Dallies (U. Paris 3), Patricia von Münchow (U. Paris 5), Eni Orlandi (U. de Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil), Marie-Anne Paveau (U. Paris 13), Alain Rabatel (IUFM et U. Lyon 2), Jeannine Richard-Zappella (U. d’Amiens), Laurence Rosier (U. Bruxelles), André Salem (U. Paris 3), Véronique Traverso (U. Lyon 2), Diane Vincent (U. Laval)