Summary Text Analysis – 2019-2020, Semester 2a
WEEK 1 Introduction: a discourse perspective on
communication
Chapter 4 Discourse Classification 4.1-4.4, Renkema & Schubert
(2018), Introduction to discourse studies
4.1 Introduction
The book discusses that there is something called discourse variability. Meaning that there are different
types/forms of discourse depending on the communicative needs of language users. These types are also called
typologies of discourse.
4.2 Typologies of discourse
There are several types of discourse which are explained with the help of two models or frameworks:
1. The Organon Model
This is a rather simple model that discusses three types of discourse:
Organon model Functions Types
Symbol Information Informative discourse
Symptom Expression Narrative discourse (e.g. poetry or
a story)
Signal Persuasion Argumentative discourse
The first column represents the aspect of language (reference to reality).
However, this model is presented based on three downsides:
1. It is too simple of a division
2. This model indicates that these types can’t occur simultaneously
3. More types of discourse are possible instead of just three
2. Six functions of Jakobsen (have to know this for exam, it is in the lecture as well) FUNCTION
PERSPECTIIVE (COMMUNICATIVE PURPOSES)
This model is a model created by Jakobsen and indicates six types/functions of discourse that can
occur in combination. The base he uses is the basic communication model: (communicative purposes)
Thus, this model of Jakobsen is focused on discourse types based on the function or communicative
purpose it serves. Therefore, the main point here is point 3, conative, it makes people do something
like the text is persuasive, instructive, activating, etc.
Explanation:
Communication basic Discourse function Explanation
1. Context Referential function The message refers to something in the world
2. Addresser Emotive or expressive Relates to the attitude of the addresser
function
3. Addressee Conative function The action towards the addressee e.g. giving a
command or instruction. That means the conative
1
, discourse types makes people do something.
Nowadays the concept of conation has been refined
into things like persuasive, instructive, opiniating and
activating.
4. Message Poetic function Language is poetic in its purest form
5. Channel/Contact Phatic (communion) Refers to making contact like a small talk.
function It is both a physical and psychological connection.
6. Code Metalingual function e.g. symbolic signs like words
This model is a functional approach to discourse variety!
Difference between discourse types and genres
Both the Organon model and framework of Jakobsen are based on discourse types. However, the book
distinguishes between types/functions and genres.
Types, are based on a more limited number of categories that are highly generalized and abstract.
They
are more or less universal.
Genres, are more concrete and specific in which there are endless possibilities. They range from
telephone calls to telephone bills, from text message to online chat, form interrogations to lectures.
One discourse type can manifest itself in a variety of genres. Like a narrative type can be of genre like a fairy
tale, novel, biography, report, etc.
Many attempts have been made to design a classification system of discourse types. In the following, two
different approaches will be introduced. In the first approach abstract grammatical forms are the basis for
distinguishing between general discourse types to which different genres can be assigned. In the second
approach specific lexical and syntactic characteristics are related to communicative functions.
1. Egon Werlich’s discourse typology (1982) (have to know this for exam) FORM PERSPECTIVE ON
DISCOURSE TYPES
This one refers to the first approach: from abstract grammatical forms to discourse types:
Werlich distinguishes five basic forms that are fundamental to discourse types. These basic forms can
be seen in the first column. Werlich relates these basic forms to specific sentence structures. E.g.
instructive form is related to the imperative sentence structure and the narrative form is related to the
declarative sentence structure. The five basic forms are each divided into two methods of
presentation: subjective (the writer’s perception) and objective (which can be verified by readers).
Here too, discourse characteristics are named: subjective = active voice, objective = passive voice
Werlich his view on discourse variability is based on the perspective of discourse forms (that is
different than the one of Jakobsen in which the functional approach/perspective is taken). The form
approach looks at how the specific type of discourse like argumentative, narrative, etc. is made. E.g. in
a narrative text, often the past tensed verbs are used and specific ‘story characters’ are present.
2
, 2. Biber’s typology (1989) (don’t have to know this for exam)
This one relates to the second approach in which specific lexical and syntactic characteristics are
related to communicative functions. Biber did extensive research on texts with co-occurring linguistic
features like tense of verbs, word classes, use of passivication, etc. On the basis of statistical analysis,
he found that there were five clusters of features. These dimensions were labeled as follows:
Explanation:
Dimension Explanation
1 On the one hand, interactive and affective genres, like conversations and personal letters,
and, on the other hand highly informative texts, such as editorials and academic prose.
2 Narrative texts – with, among other features, many past tense verbs and third-person
pronouns – are distinguished form non-narrative texts.
3 Sets the highly explicit context-independent texts, like official documents, apart from all
other discourse types.
4 Characteries all text with persuasive elements, such as advertisements and politicians’
speeches.
5 With features like passives, characterizes the abstract and formal style.
With his statistical analysis of the co-occurrence of linguistic features and the linking to communicative
functions Biber showed that general concepts like narrative form, expository form and interactive
discourse in other models are much too vague.
The following paragraphs/sections concentrate on more specific approaches to discourse classification.
4.3 Written language and spoken interaction
The term discourse is used for all forms of oral and written communication. There are, however, important
differences between oral and written discourse. According to Wallace Chafe (1982), two factors explain the
differences between written discourse and spoken interaction:
1. Writing takes longer than speaking
2. Writers do not have contact with readers
This relates to the concept of integration in written language as opposed to fragmentation that takes place in
verbal interaction. Integration is achieved through the use of subordinate conjunctions (ondergeschikte
voegwoorden). They occur more in written than in spoken language. The second factor is responsible for the
detachment from the reading public in written language as opposed to the involvement that is present with
spoken interaction. Speakers and hearers are more involved in communication than writers and readers.
The difference can also be described in terms of situation. Spoken interaction is part of a shared situation that
includes both speakers and hearers. In such a situation, information is also passed along through means other
than language, such as posture, intonation, hand gestures, etc. Moreover, speakers can quickly react to
nonverbal reaction on the part of hearers. A piece of written discourse, on the other hand, is not part of a
shared situation existing between writer and readers.
One similarity between written text and spoken dialogue that is often overlooked is that, although writers
cannot process an addressee’s reactions, they can anticipate probable reactions and write the text accordingly.
A central idea of Mikhail Bakhtin work is that language in use cannot be considered a set of words with
abstract meanings as described in dictionaries, but that the meaning of words is actualized in discourse
owing to the interaction of the participants.
3
, 4.4 Genre theory and analysis
The difficulties in describing discourse types led to another approach to genres by Mikhail Bakhtin. Important
in Bakhtin’s work is the focus on discourse use in specific situations. The acquisition of genre knowledge is an
important part of discursive proficiency (disursief gedrag is bewust denken en al redenerend tot een resultaat
komen ipv intuitief gedrag dat in 1 opslag tot resultaat leidt).
The use of genres strongly depends on language user’s experience in interaction. Since sociocultural contexts
are constantly subject to change, for instance, in areas such as workplace, family or institutions, genres must
change and adapt accordingly. Therefore, in contrast to discourse types, genres are often highly specific and
particular.
The most important approach to genres as conventionalized (gewoonte, vast patroon) forms was developed by
Swales (1990). His characterizations of genres can be summarized as follows:
A genre is a class of communicative events with shared recognizable communicative purposes. The purposes
give rise to exploitable constraints concerning content and form.
Chapter 11 Narratives, Renkema & Schubert (2018), Introduction to
discourse studies
11.1 Introduction
Narration is one of the three fundamental text types based on the Organon model, linked to the function of
expression (see Section 4.2). In prototypical narrative discourse, a narrator relates a sequence of events and
actions that took place in the past.
11.2 A philological approach to fairy tales
Vladimir Propp did research in the topic of fairy tales and showed that while fairy tales have varied motifs and
topics, there is a consistency of structure underlying this genre.
1. Variety of topics
At first glance there would appear to be a great deal of variation, and yet all the stories are about
something being given to a hero or to the story’s protagonist (main character). Only the names and
the attributes are different.
2. The characters in fairy tales
Propp stated that there are always seven characters that appear in a fairy tale:
Villain, Donor, Helper (magical agent), princess or person looked for, dispatcher, hero, false hero.
3. Functions in magical fairy tales according to Propp
A function is the act + the location of that act in the fairy tale. The function can only be determined by
looking at the location of the act relative to the entire fairy tale. Propp distinguishes 31 functions,
however below the 7 first preliminary ones are mentioned:
1. Absentation. One of the members of a family absents him- or herself from home.
2. Interdiction. An interdiction (verbod) is addressed to the hero.
3. Violation. The interdiction is violated.
4. Reconnaissance. The villain makes an attempt at reconnaissance (verkenning).
5. Delivery. The villain receives information about his or her victim.
6. Trickery. The villain attempts to deceive his or her victim in order to take possession of his
or her belongings.
7. Complicity. The victim submits to deception and thereby unwittingly helps his or her
enemy.
The critique was that within his analysis, Propp was looking for the model of a fairy tale. Therefore, he must
have interpreted many phenomena in an unusual manner, or ignored them altogether. Despite this criticism,
Propp’s work formed the initiative towards a more formalized analysis of stories, which deals with the
structures that form the foundation of the variety in topics and motifs.
4
