Chang Lijuan

Abstract: Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a discourse analysis method that has emerged in recent 20 years. It mainly reveals the ideology conveyed by discourse. This paper summarizes the origin, theoretical development, research principles, research contents, research results and new trends of critical discourse analysis, and points out the new trends of critical discourse analysis.

Keywords: critical discourse analysis; Linguistics; abstract

First, the significance of critical discourse analysis

Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a new branch of modern linguistic research, which is an interdisciplinary linguistic research aimed at studying and explaining social problems. Its social science fields include sociology, politics, communication, management, education and so on. , has a strong practical guiding role. Critical linguistics is different from traditional linguistic discourse analysis. Traditional linguistics ignores the social attribute of discourse, while critical linguistics holds that language is a social practice and an intervening force in social processes. Language not only reflects society, but also directly participates in the formation of social things and social relations. It not only studies what language is, but also studies why language is like this. Not only interested in the meaning of the text itself, but also interested in the process of how the text produces this meaning. In foreign countries, critical discourse analysis has developed rapidly, the research and practice team has been growing, the relevant monographs have been increasing, and international publications and regional cooperation projects have emerged. Comparatively speaking, critical discourse analysis started late in China, but it has already attracted the attention of linguists at home and abroad. In recent years, critical linguistics has attracted the attention of linguists at home and abroad. The number of researchers is gradually increasing, and research results are constantly emerging. In order to help people know more about the latest trends and research prospects of critical linguistics, so as to better carry out targeted research, this paper intends to comment on critical discourse analysis.

Second, an overview of critical discourse analysis

Critical discourse analysis is a linguistic trend of thought developed from the late 1970s to the early 1980s, and its source is critical linguistics. The representative figures are mainly several counter-mainstream linguists and social linguists in Britain, France and Germany, such as M Foucault, N Fairclough, G Chris, R Fowler and so on. The main reason for its formation is "criticism of western mainstream linguistics and early sociolinguistics" (Tian Hailong, 2003:40). It is a social-oriented discourse analysis method based on Halliday's Systemic Functional Linguistics (Xin Bin, 1996). The philosophical basis of critical linguistics can be traced back to Neo-Marxism in 1930s and Frankfurt School's social criticism theory. They think that society is an organic whole. All its components are a reflection of some kind of power. Roger Fowler and gunther Chris were also influenced by michel foucault. Foucault's traditional concept of "knowledge is pure" reveals the inseparability of knowledge and power. On the one hand, all knowledge is the result of a special power system. On the other hand, various forms of knowledge constitute the social reality they describe and analyze: "power and knowledge directly contain each other ... there is no power relationship that is not composed of related knowledge fields, and there is no knowledge that does not contain and constitute power relations at the same time." Through various discourses, the function of power-knowledge complex is repositioned: "It is in discourse that power and knowledge are combined." The linguistic basis of Fowler's and Chris's theories is Sapir-Wolf's linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity, and Halliday's "social semiotic theory of language" in functional grammar theory.

As a branch of linguistics or a discourse analysis method, the linguistic analysis foundation of critical discourse analysis is mainly based on various theories of modern linguistics. Halliday's Systemic Functional Grammar, in particular, absorbs the functionalist linguistic viewpoint of Prague School, the systematic thought of J.R. Firth of London School, the contextual thought of anthropologist B. Mali-Nowitzki and the code thought of sociologist B. Bernstein, and holds that language is not a system composed of rules, but a source of meaning. It is a set of meaning potential system which is related to the language application environment and can be selected by people. It emphasizes the connection between language and society. However, contemporary critical discourse analysis draws more nutrition from critical science than linguistics, although it also needs the support of language and symbolic analysis theory. Contemporary critical discourse analysts believe that discourse is a symbolic element of social practice, and rethinking discourse lays the foundation for studying discourse from a brand-new perspective.

Third, the main principles

In order to complete its main task, that is, to explore the dialectical relationship between discourse and its process, language form and society and symbolic process, critical discourse analysis needs to describe language form more forcefully. Fairclough and Wodyke summarized the main principles of critical discourse analysis as follows:

(1) Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) focuses on social issues and language, not language for language's sake, and is based on social and cultural practices and structures.

(2) The right relationship is "discourse", that is, discourse is the place where the social right relationship arises and reappears.

(3) Discourse constitutes society and culture, and discourse is the place where society and culture reappear and change.

(4) Discourse is engaged in ideological work, and the discourse structure shows, strengthens and regenerates the power and dominant position in society, and rationalizes or questions it.

(5) Discourse is historical and should be examined in context.

(6) The relationship between text and society is produced through intermediary. The relationship between discourse and social structure is dialectical. Discourse constructs social structure and is also constructed by society.

(7) Critical discourse analysis is not only descriptive, but also explanatory. It tries to explain the discourse structure according to the characteristics of social interaction, especially according to the characteristics of social structure.

(8) Discourse is a form of social action, which reveals the fuzziness of power relations.

Four. Achievements and new trends of critical discourse analysis at home and abroad

As a language research method, critical discourse analysis was first put forward by n.Fowler and others in 1979 in Language and Control. At the end of the 20th century, it made great progress in Europe and gradually formed a worldwide research upsurge. At present, critical discourse analysis has developed rapidly and formed a new trend. Therefore, critical applied linguistics including critical linguistics, critical pedagogy, critical sociology, critical discourse awareness, critical sociolinguistics and critical writing came into being. The research and practice team is growing day by day, and there are more and more related monographs, international publications and regional cooperation projects. For example, there is a critical discourse research center established by Professor VanDijk and an academic journal Discourses &；; In Britain, there is a research center established by Professor N.Fairclough and the academic journal Languageandpolities edited by Professor PaulChilton. In the past 10 years, the study of critical discourse analysis has not been systematically carried out in domestic linguistics, or it has not received enough attention. Fortunately, since 2004, there has been an upsurge of critical discourse analysis in the field of linguistics in China. Among them, Shanghai International Studies University, Guangdong University of Foreign Studies, Xiamen University, Beijing Normal University, Tianjin University of Commerce and other foreign language departments are prominent. Many professors, such as Dai Weidong of Shanghai International Studies University, Ye Qichang of Beijing Normal University and Tian Hailong of Tianjin University of Commerce, frequently published articles in foreign language core journals, introducing the research trends of western critical discourse analysis, expounding the research results of critical discourse analysis and explaining the theories and methods of critical discourse analysis.

More and more attention has been paid to the critical contrastive analysis of English and Chinese texts. While attaching importance to English corpus, the localization research of Chinese corpus has been initially strengthened. The critical contrastive study of English and Chinese texts conducted by scholars such as Xin Bin reflects this new feature and trend of critical discourse analysis in China. Some scholars (such as Zhang Maiceng, Xu Tao, Xiang Yunhua, Tian Hailong, etc. ) Not satisfied with the analysis and utilization of English corpus. A critical analysis of modern Chinese texts is under way. Some experts have made a comparative analysis of English and Chinese texts from the perspectives of cultural linguistics and systemic functional linguistics, which is very enlightening and helpful for translation studies. I believe that the research of these scholars will drive and inspire others to make contributions in this respect. Domestic research on PDA has begun, and the comparative study of CDA and PDA has also attracted attention. And strive to be in line with international standards. China's research on PDA and institutional discourse analysis is an expansion of critical discourse analysis, which will promote the in-depth research and development of critical discourse analysis theory. According to the introduction of recent domestic (critical) discourse analysis seminars and authoritative academic journals, many scholars have begun to pay attention to the study of positive discourse analysis (PDA), even the comparative study of critical discourse analysis and PDA. 2006, etc. ), the introduction and application of critical applied linguistics theory will gradually spread in China, because it is basically blank in China. It will have broad research space and development prospects. In addition, the evaluation theory of functionalism linguistics and the research results of cognitive linguistics are constantly being used. Some scholars try to apply some of their new achievements to critical discourse analysis. In terms of research methods, functional grammar analysis software and corpus construction will be used for critical discourse analysis. (Li Zhanzi, 2002) I believe that in the near future, China's research on institutional language criticism, organizational discourse criticism analysis, political discourse criticism analysis and media discourse criticism will surely flourish as abroad.

Verb (abbreviation of verb) conclusion

The author believes that critical discourse analysis, as an important aspect of discourse analysis, will be closely related to linguistics, cognition and society. The continuous development of linguistic research promotes the theoretical construction of critical discourse analysis, which actually highlights the power relationship and ideological process that people ignore in language. Compared with mainstream linguistics and mainstream discourse analysis, critical discourse analysis pays more attention to explaining the causes of discourse from the deeper level of social system and social composition. More importantly, while emphasizing the influence of society on discourse, it also pays attention to studying the reaction of discourse to society, and fully realizes the great role of discourse in social and cultural changes and reproduction in modern and post-modern society. At present, there are still many problems in the study of China. There are few research monographs and master's and doctoral dissertations, but they are very common abroad. The content also involves many aspects. Secondly, the research results of critical discourse analysis in China are mostly summary papers, and there are not many in-depth research results. In addition, the research content is not rich enough. There are not many achievements in critical analysis of modern Chinese discourse in domestic linguistics, such as critical pragmatics and critical applied linguistics. Although critical discourse analysis is not a new school of language study, there are still many defects and even contradictions. However, it represents a new perspective of language research. With the deepening of research, researchers constantly revise and improve these theories in order to better provide a more complete theoretical framework for discourse critical analysis.

References:

Language and power [M].

Longman Group Limited, 1988.

[2] Fairclough. Discourse and social change

[M]。 Cambridge: Political Science Press, 1992.

[3] wearing. Theories and Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis [J]. Foreign Language Studies, 2004(4): 12- 16.

[4] Tian Hailong. Discourse analysis in post-modern society: critical discourse analysis and reflection [J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2003(3):3 18-320.

Xin Bin. Language, Power and Ideology: Critical Linguistics [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 1996 (1).

[6] Wang Zhanbin, Yuan Chunming. A Review of Critical Discourse Analysis [J] Journal of Tianjin University of Commerce, No.5, 2007.

[7] Zhi Yongbi, New Trend of Critical Discourse Analysis [J] Foreign Language and Foreign Language Teaching 2007(3).