Mátyás Bánhegyi: The Effects of Politics and Ideology on the Translation of Argumentative Political Newspaper Articles
›
Chapter 4: Translation and politics: Critical Discourse Analysis
›
4.5 Van Dijk’s (1993, 1997, 2001, 2003) Critical Discourse Analysis
›
4.5.2 Van Dijk’s CDA
›
4.5.2.2 Definition and main characteristics

4.5.2.2 Definition and main characteristics

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Van Dijk defines his CDA the following way: “Critical discourse analysis (CDA) is a type of discourse analytical research that primarily studies the way social power abuse, dominance, and inequality are enacted, reproduced, and resisted by text and talk in the [given] social and political context” (van Dijk, 2001, p. 352). In short, CDA seeks to explore the relationship between discourse and society.

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

Four inherent qualities characterise van Dijk’s CDA:

Jegyzet elhelyezéséhez, kérjük, lépj be.!

  1. This framework addresses social inequality and the question of elite groups, a certain aspect of which issue is closely related to politics and political discourse;
  2. CDA is concerned with dominance, i.e. the maintenance of social power by elites, institutions or groups, which potentially results in “social inequality, including political, cultural, class, ethnic, racial and gender inequality” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250). The reproduction of power may thus involve “the more or less direct or overt support, enactment, representation, legitimation, denial, mitigation or concealment of dominance” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250). Touching upon the pivotal aim of CDA, van Dijk claims that CDA seeks to explore and describe those properties of discourse that play a role in the reproduction of power and ideology (van Dijk 1993);
  3. In this sense, CDA intends to describe how texts reproduce or fight against dominance. Such reproduction of power and/or ideology or fight against power and/or ideology can happen in two ways: in top-down ways by imposing power on other lower status groups and in bottom-up ways, respectively, by resisting power coming from more powerful groups. This, in terms of social relations, will give rise to “relations of resistance, compliance and acceptance” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250) as far as texts and their producers are concerned. In fact, van Dijk’s “critical approach prefers to focus on the elites and their discursive strategies for the maintenance of inequality” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250), i.e. van Dijk primarily examines the top-down ways of imposing power;
  4. Van Dijk’s CDA is based on the premise that “[d]iscourse structures and power structures relate” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250). In other words, discourse must be socially and culturally situated to successfully reproduce dominance or in van Dijk’s phrasing: “special social conditions must be satisfied for […] discourse properties to contribute to the reproduction of dominance” (van Dijk 1993, p. 250). In this respect, some connection must exist between communication and the social actors exercising, accepting or resisting dominance through discourse. This link in van Dijk’s framework is termed social cognition: “social cognition is the necessary theoretical (and empirical) ‘interface’, if not the ‘missing link’, between discourse and dominance” (van Dijk 1993, p. 251). This suggests that it is not enough to examine discourse and the participants of discourse: research must extend to the cognitive and social processes involved in reproducing, accepting or resisting power, ideology and social dominance.
 
chevron_left
chevron_right
Tartalomjegyzék navigate_next
Keresés a kiadványban navigate_next
A kereséshez, kérjük, lépj be!
Könyvjelzőim navigate_next
A könyvjelzők használatához
be kell jelentkezned.
Jegyzeteim navigate_next
Jegyzetek létrehozásához
be kell jelentkezned.
    Kiemeléseim navigate_next
    Mutasd a szövegben:
    Szűrés:
    Kiemelések létrehozásához
    MeRSZ+ előfizetés szükséges.
      Útmutató elindítása
      delete
      Kivonat
      fullscreenclose
      printsave