Poststructuralist Discourse Studies: From Structure to Practice

doi:10.1017/9781108348195.012

11 - Poststructuralist Discourse Studies: From Structure to Practice

from Part II - Perspectives and Modes of Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 September 2020

Johannes Angermuller

Edited by

Anna De Fina and

Alexandra Georgakopoulou

Show author details

Anna De Fina: Affiliation:
Georgetown University, Washington DC
Alexandra Georgakopoulou: Affiliation:
King's College London

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Poststructuralism has brought social, cultural and political theories into a productive exchange with methods and tools for analyzing text and talk. My contribution outlines the contours of poststructuralist discourse studies (PDS), which is an interdisciplinary field of discourse research inspired by poststructuralism. It gives an overview of poststructuralism, tracing its evolution and identifying its key questions. I then spell out the consequences of poststructuralism for discourse studies, where it has given birth to the new field of PDS. PDS critically relates to the structuralist, top-down tendencies that have characterized some of the pioneering “French School” and “Critical” strands in discourse studies. It defends posthumanist and antiessentialist views on power and knowledge. Perceiving language as a socially constitutive practice, it places emphasis on the critical and reflexive dimensions of discourse research. Situated at the interdisciplinary intersection of language and society, PDS aims to bridge structure- and practice-oriented strands of discourse research and to overcome the divisions between linguistics and other disciplines in the social sciences and humanities.

Keywords

Discourse social practice poststructuralism reality as social construction French School critical approaches representation agency reflexivity

Type: Chapter
Information: The Cambridge Handbook of Discourse Studies , pp. 235 - 254

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108348195.012 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Althusser, L. ([1966]2003). The Humanist Controversy and Other Writings (1966–67). London/New York: Verso.Google Scholar

Amossy, R. (2005). L’argumentation dans le discours. Paris: Armand Colin.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2007). Qu’est-ce que le “poststructuralisme français”? A propos de la réception des tendances françaises de l’analyse du discours en Allemagne. Langage et société 120: 17–34.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2014). Poststructuralist Discourse Analysis: Subjectivity in Enunciative Pragmatics. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2015). Why There Is No Poststructuralism in France: The Making of an Intellectual Generation. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2017). Renouons avec les enjeux critiques de l’Analyse du Discours. Vers les Études du discours. Langage & société 160–61:145–61.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2018a). Accumulating Discursive Capital, Valuating Subject Positions: From Marx to Foucault. Critical Discourse Studies 15(4): 415–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2018.1457551.CrossRef Google Scholar

Angermuller, J. (2018b). Truth after Post-Truth: For a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies. Palgrave Communications 4(30): 1–8. www.nature.com/articles/s41599-018–0080-1.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J., Maingueneau, D. and Wodak, R. (eds.) (2014). The Discourse Studies Reader: Main Currents in Theory and Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Angermuller, J., Nonhoff, M., Herschinger, E., Macgilchrist, F., Reisigl, M., Wedl, J., Wrana, D. and Ziem, A. (eds.) (2014). Diskursforschung. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch. Zwei Bände. Band 1: Theorien, Methodologien und Kontroversen. Band 2: Methoden und Analysepraxis Perspektiven auf Hochschulreformdiskurse. Bielefeld: transcript.Google Scholar

Ashmore, M., Myers, G. and Potter, J. (1995). Discourse, Rhetoric, Reflexivity: Seven Days in a Library. In Jasanoff, S., Markle, G., Pinch, T. and Petersen, J. (eds.) Handbook of Science and Technology Studies. London: Sage. 321–42.Google Scholar

Bachmann-Medick, D. (2006). Cultural Turns: Neuorientierung in den Kulturwissenschaften. Hamburg: Rowohlt [transl. Cultural Turns: New Orientations in the Study of Culture, Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, 2016].Google Scholar

Bamberg, M. and Georgakopoulo, A. (2008). Small Stories as a New Perspective in Narrative and Identity Analysis. Text & Talk 28(3): 377–96.Google Scholar

Baxter, J. (2016). Positioning Language and Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. In Preece, S. (ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Language and Identity. Oxford/New York: Routledge. 34–49.Google Scholar

Beetz, J. and Schwab, V. (eds.) (2017). Material Discourse – Materialist Analysis: Approaches in Discourse Studies. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Benoît, D. (2017). What Is Poststructuralism? Political Studies Review 15(4): 516–27.Google Scholar

Benveniste, É. (1974). Problèmes de linguistique générale, Vol. 2. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar

Bernstein, B. (1971). Class, Codes, and Control, 4 vols. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Bernstein, K. A. (2016). Post-Structuralist Potentialities for Studies of Subjectivity and Second Language Learning in Early Childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 17(2): 174–91.Google Scholar

Bloom, H., de Man, P., Derrida, J., Hartman, G. H. and Hillis Miller, J. (eds.) (1979). Deconstruction and Criticism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Boltanski, L. and Thévenot, L. (1991). De la justification. Les économies de la grandeur. Paris: Gallimard [transl. On Justification: Economies of Worth. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006].Google Scholar

Bröckling, U., Krasmann, S. and Lemke, T. (eds.) (2000). Gouvernementalität der Gegenwart. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar

Busch, B. (2012). The Linguistic Repertoire Revisited. Applied Linguistics 33(5): 503–23.Google Scholar

Butler, J. (1990). Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Butler, J. (1993). Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex.” London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Butler, J., Laclau, E. and Žižek, S. (2000). Contingency, Hegemony, Universality. Paris: Verso.Google Scholar

Cameron, D. and Kulick, D. (2003). Language and Sexuality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Carter, P. M. (2013). Poststructuralist Theory and Sociolinguistics: Mapping the Linguistic Turn in Social Theory. Language and Linguistics Compass 7(11): 580–96.Google Scholar

Charaudeau, P. (1983). Langage et discours. Eléments de sémiolinguistique. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar

Charaudeau, P. and Maingueneau, D. (2002). Dictionnaire d’analyse du discours. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar

Conein, B., Courtine, J.-J., Gadet, F., Marandin, J.-M. and Pêcheux, M. (1981). Matérialités discursives, Actes du Colloque des 24–26 avril 1980, Paris X-Nanterre. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille.Google Scholar

Dean, M. (1994). Foucault’s Methods and Historical Sociology. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

De Cleen, B. and Stavrakakis, Y. (2017). Distinctions and Articulations: A Discourse Theoretical Framework for the Study of Populism and Nationalism. Javnost – The Public: Journal of the European Institute for Communication and Culture 24(4): 301–19.Google Scholar

Deleuze, G. (2002). L’Île déserte et autres textes. Paris: Minuit [transl. Desert Islands and Other Texts (1953–1974). New York: Semiotexte, 2004].Google Scholar

Derrida, J. (1967). De la grammatologie. Paris: Minuit [transl. Of Grammatology. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976].Google Scholar

Derrida, J. (1999). Marx & Sons. In Sprinker, M. (ed.) Ghostly Demarcations: A Symposium on Jacques Derrida’s Specters of Marx. London/New York: Routledge. 213–69.Google Scholar

Détrie, C., Siblot, P. and Verine, B. (2001). Termes et concepts pour l’analyse du discours. Une approche praxématique. Paris: Honoré Champion.Google Scholar

Dreyfus, H. L. and Rabinow, P. (1983). Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics 2nd ed. with afterword by/interview with Foucault, Michel. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Ducrot, O., Todorov, T., Sperber, D., Safouan, M. and Wahl, F. (1968). Qu’est-ce que le structuralisme? Paris: Le Seuil.Google Scholar

Ehlich, K. (1986). Funktional-Pragmatische Kommunikationsanalyse – Ziele und Verfahren. In Hartung, W. (ed.) Untersuchungen zur Kommunikation – Ergebnisse und Perspektiven (Internationale Arbeitstagung in Bad Stuer, Dezember 1985). Berlin: Akademie. 15–40.Google Scholar

Ehrmann, J. (ed.) (1970). Structuralism. Garden City, NY: Anchor-Doubleday.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge/Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis and Critical Policy Studies. Critical Policy Studies 7(2): 177–97.Google Scholar

Fairclough, N. (2017). CDA as Dialectical Reasoning. In Flowerdew, J. and Richardson, J. E. (eds.) The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar

Flowerdew, J. and Richardson, J. (eds.) (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (1966). Les Mots et les choses. Une archéologie des sciences humaines. Paris: Gallimard [transl. The Order of Things. An Archeology of the Human Sciences. London: Routledge, 2002].Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (1969). L’Archéologie du savoir. Paris: Gallimard [transl. The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language. London: Routledge, 1989].Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (1980). Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon Books.Google Scholar

Foucault, M. ([1983]1994). Structuralisme et poststructuralisme. In Dits et écrits, tome 4. 1980–1988. Paris: Gallimard. 431–457 [transl. Structuralism and Post-Structuralism. In Faubion, J. D. (ed.) Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology: Essential Works of Foucault, 1954–1984. New York: The New Press, 1998, 433–58].Google Scholar

Foucault, M. (2004). Territoire, population, sécurité. Paris: Gallimard, Seuil [transl. Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the College de France. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007].Google Scholar

Fraser, N. (1995). Pragmatism, Feminism, and the Linguistic Turn. In Benhabib, S., Butler, J., Cornell, D. and Fraser, N. (eds.) Feminist Contentions: A Philosophical Exchange. New York: Routledge. 157–72.Google Scholar

Grossberg, L., Nelson, C. and Treichler, P. (eds.) (1992). Cultural Studies. New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Guilhaumou, J. (1993). A propos de l’analyse de discours: les historiens et le “tournant linguistique.” Langage & société 65: 5–38.Google Scholar

Hall, S., Hobson, D., Lowe, A. and Willis, P. (eds.) (1980). Culture, Media, Language. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar

Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language As Social Semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar

Harris, Z. S. (1952). Discourse Analysis. Language 28: 1–30.Google Scholar

Herzog, B. (2016). Discourse Analysis as Social Critique: Discursive and Non-discursive Realities in Critical Social Research. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRef Google Scholar

Howarth, D. and Glynos, J. (2007). Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Jäger, S. ([1993]2007). Kritische Diskursanalyse. Eine Einführung. Münster: Unrast.Google Scholar

Jameson, F. (1991). Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar

Kiesling, S. (2006). Hegemonic Identity-Making in Narrative. In De Fina, A., Schiffrin, D. and Bamberg, M. (eds.) Discourse and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 261–87.Google Scholar

Kramsch, C. (1998). Language and Culture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design, 2nd ed. London: Routledge.CrossRef Google Scholar

Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. London/New York: Verso.Google Scholar

Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar

Licoppe, C. (2010). The “Performative Turn” in Science and Technology Studies: Towards a Linguistic Anthropology of “Technology in Action.” Journal of Cultural Economy 3: 181–8.Google Scholar

Lyotard, J.-F. (1983). Le Différend. Paris: Minuit.Google Scholar

Maingueneau, D. (1990). Pragmatique pour le discours littéraire. Paris: Dunod.Google Scholar

Maingueneau, D. (1991). L’Analyse du discours. Introduction aux lectures de l’archive. Paris: Hachette.Google Scholar

Maingueneau, D. (1994). Die ‚französische Schule‘ der Diskursanalyse. In Ehlich, K. (ed.) Diskursanalyse in Europa. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang. 187–95.Google Scholar

Marttila, T. (2016). Post-Foundational Discourse Analysis: From Political Difference to Empirical Research. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar

McNamara, T. (2012). Poststructuralism and Its Challenges for Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics 33(5): 473–82.Google Scholar

Mills, S. (1997). Discourse. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Motschenbacher, H. (2009). Speaking the Gendered Body: The Performative Construction of Commercial Femininities and Masculinities via Body-Part Vocabulary. Language in Society 38: 1–22.Google Scholar

Nonhoff, M. (2017). Discourse Analysis As Critique. Palgrave Communications 3(17074).CrossRef Google Scholar

Norton, B. and Morgan, B. (2013). Poststructuralism. In Chapelle, C. A. (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. London: Wiley.Google Scholar

Orlandi, E. (1990). Análise de discurso: princípios e procedimentos. Campinas: Pontes.Google Scholar

Parker, I. and Pavón-Cuéllar, D. (eds.) (2014). Lacan, Discourse, Event: New Psychoanalytic Approaches to Textual Indeterminacy. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Pavlenko, A. (2002). Poststructuralist Approaches to the Study of Social Factors in Second Language Learning and Use. In Cook, V. (ed.) Portraits of the L2 User. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 275–302.Google Scholar

Pêcheux, M. (1969). Analyse automatique du discours. Paris: Dunod [transl. Automatic Discourse Analysis. Amsterdam/Atlanta, GA: Rodopi, 1995].Google Scholar

Pêcheux, M. (1975). Les Vérités de La Palice. Paris: Maspero [transl. Language, Semantics and Ideology: Stating the Obvious. London: Macmillan, 1982].Google Scholar

Pêcheux, M. (1990). L’inquiétude du discours. Paris: Edition des Cendres.Google Scholar

Pinto, A. G. (1997). Publicidade: um discurso de sedução. Porto: Porto Editora.Google Scholar

Possenti, S. (2009). Questões para analistas do discurso. São Paulo: Parábola Editorial.Google Scholar

Potter, J. and Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and Social Psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar

Reisigl, M. and Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse-Historical Approach (DHA). In Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (eds.) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage. 87–121.Google Scholar

Robin, R. (1973). Histoire et linguistique. Paris: Colin.Google Scholar

Rojo, L. M. (1997). El orden social de los discursos. Discurso 21(22): 1–37.Google Scholar

Rorty, R. (ed.) (1967). The Linguistic Turn: Essays in Philosophical Method. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar

Rose, N. (1989). Governing the Soul: The Shaping of the Private Self. London: Free Association.Google Scholar

Rosier, L. (1999). Le discours rapporté: histoire, théories, pratiques. Bruxelles: Duculot.Google Scholar

Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Schatzki, T. R., Knorr Cetina, K. and von Savigny, E. (eds.) (2001). The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Schmitz, J. R. (2017). English as a Lingua Franca: Applied Linguistics, Marxism, and Post-Marxist Theory. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada 17(2): 335–54. Epub March 23, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1590/1984-6398201710866.Google Scholar

Smith, D. E. (1999). Writing the Social: Critique, Theory, and Investigations. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In Nelson, C. and Grossberg, L. (eds.) Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 271–313.Google Scholar

Torfing, J. (1999). New Theories of Discourse: Laclau, Mouffe and Žižek. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Van Langenhove, L. and Harré, R. (1999). Introducing Positioning Theory. In Harré, R. and van Langenhove, L. (eds.) Positioning Theory: Moral Contexts of Intentional Action. Oxford: Blackwell. 14–31.Google Scholar

Warnke, I. (ed.) (2007). Diskurslinguistik nach Foucault: Theorie und Gegenstände. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

White, H. (1987). The Content of the Form: Narrative Discourse and Historical Representation. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar

Widmer, J. (1986). Langage et action sociale. Aspects philosophiques et sémiotiques du langage dans la perspective de l’ethnométhodologie. Fribourg: Editions Universitaires Fribourg Suisse.Google Scholar

Williams, G. (1999). French Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Wodak, R. (2007). Pragmatics and Critical Discourse Analysis: A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis. Pragmatics and Cognition 15(1): 203–25.Google Scholar

Zienkowski, J. (2012). Overcoming the Post-Structuralist Methodological Deficit: Metapragmatic Markers and Interpretive Logics in a Critique of the Bologna Process. International Pragmatics Association 22(3): 501–34.Google Scholar

Zienkowski, J. (2017). Reflexivity in the Transdisciplinary Field of Critical Discourse Studies. Palgrave Communications 3(17007).Google Scholar

Žižek, S. (1991). Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan through Popular Culture. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Book contents

11 - Poststructuralist Discourse Studies: From Structure to Practice

Summary

Keywords

Access options

References

Further Reading

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive