University of the West of England

MODULE SPECIFICATION

(Template revised October 2005)

Code: UPNQ9P-30-3 Title: Critical Text Analysis Version: 1

Level: 3 UWE credit rating: 30 ECTS credit rating: 15

Module type: Standard

Owning Faculty: Humanities, Languages and Social Sciences Field: Linguistics

Valid from: September 2007 Discontinued from:

Contributes towards: Awards up to BA(Hons)

Pre-requisites: None

Co-requisites: None

Excluded combinations: None

Learning outcomes:

On completion of the module students are expected to:

    • Understand critical and discourse theories that account for relationships between the linguistic features of texts and the social and cultural contexts of their production. (Component A)

    • Understand the importance of metaphor and myth in representation. (Component A)

    • Apply critical and discourse theories to the analysis of some contemporary texts that show evidence of ideological themes such as immigration, gender, political persuasion and leadership. (Component B)

    • Evaluate some of the different methods that have been developed for the critical analysis of ideologies and power relations for which there is linguistic evidence in texts. (Component B)

They will be able to demonstrate their knowledge, understanding and intellectual skills by analysing and evaluating different approaches to the critical analysis of texts and by developing and applying an appropriate methodology to such analysis.

Syllabus outline:

The module aims to integrate the more theoretical approaches in critical and cultural theory that originate in European scholarship with the more empirical tradition that has developed in Anglo-American linguistics. It will incorporate the following components:

    • An introduction to critical discourse analysis: theories, approaches and perspectives on ideology and power relations in the ‘Anglo-American’ tradition: Stubbs, Fairclough, Lakoff;

    • An introduction to ‘European’ perspectives on ideology and power relations: readings from key writings (e.g. Bourdieu, Derrida, Barthes, Foucault & Bahktin, Wodak – see Burke et. al. 2001 below);

    • A comparison between ‘Anglo-American’ & ‘European’ approaches: Empirical V Theoretical approaches to research;

    • An Introduction to some methods that have been proposed for the critical analysis of texts including: Fairclough’s modification of systematic-functional approaches and the discourse-historical method (Wodak);

    • An illustration of how some existing approaches to text analysis may be adapted to provide a more ‘critical’ perspective; for example, text patterns; genre analysis and classical rhetorical approaches;

    • An understanding and demonstration of metaphor analysis as an additional methodological approach to critical text analysis. (Charteris-Black).

Possible topics include: immigration, race, environmental issues, representation of religion etc

    Selected texts for analysis will include the following:

    Multimedia

    Advertisements

    Web Sites of pressure groups

    Cartoon animations

    Spoken

    Political speeches

    Song lyrics

Written

    Party political manifestos

Press reports

Teaching and learning methods:

Teaching and learning will include the following:

• Lecture input

• Presentations by individuals or groups on selected topics

• Guided reading

• Directed independent study

• Guided writing

Reading Strategy

Each seminar in the first semester will be based around a key reading from two textbooks that students will be expected to purchase; these are collections of readings by distinguished scholars in the field of critical and discourse theory, namely:

1/ Burke, L. Crowley, T. & Girvin, A. (eds.) (2001) The Routledge Language and Cultural Theory Reader. London: Routledge

2/ Jaworski. A & Coupland, N. 2001 (2nd edition) The Discourse Reader. London: Routledge

In the second semester they will be required to read the following texts that develop methods for the critical analysis of ideological persuasion:

Charteris-Black, J. (2004) Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.

Charteris-Black, J. (2005) Politicians and Rhetoric: The persuasive power of metaphor. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave-MacMillan.

Chilton, P. (2004) Analysing Political Discourse. London & New York: Routledge

Stubbs, M. (1996) Text and Corpus analysis: Computer-Assisted Studies of Language and Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wodak, R. & M. Meyer, (eds.) (2001) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis London: Sage

In addition, students will also be encouraged to read widely, using the library catalogue, a variety of bibliographic and internet resources such as the following (and library stocks will added to as necessary):

Barthes, R. (1996) Introduction to the Structural Analysis of Texts.Eds. S. Onega and J. A. G. Landa. New York, Longman

Bourdieu, P 1984 Distinction. A social critique of the judgement of Taste. Nice, R (Trans.) Routledge

Caldas-Coulthard, C.R. & Coulthard, M. (eds.) (1996) Texts and Practices: Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge.

Charteris-Black, J. (2007) The Communication of Leadership: The Design of Leadership Style. London & New York: Routledge

Fairclough, N. (1989) Language and Power, London: Longman.

Fairclough, F. (ed.) (1992) Critical Language Awareness. London: Longman

Fairclough, N. (1995a) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language,

London/New York: Longman.

Foucault, M. (1979) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Translated by Sheridan, A. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.

Foucault, M. (2000). The essential works of Foucault (Volume 3, Power). New York: The New Press. 

Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Kress, G. & Trew, T. (1979) Language and Social Control.

London/Boston/Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Fowler, R., (1991) Language in the news: discourse and ideology in the press. London: Routledge

Fowler, R (1996) Linguistic Criticism (second edition). Oxford & New York: OUP

Geiss, M.L. (1987)The Language of Politics. New York: Springer Verlag,

Jamieson, G.H. (1985)Communication & Persuasion. London: Croom Helm

Jowett, G & O’Donnell (1992) Propaganda & Persuasion. London & Newbury Park: Sage,

Kress, G. (1992) “Critical Discourse Analysis”. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 11: 84-99.

Lakoff, G. (1991) ‘The Metaphor System used to justify war in the Gulf’, Journal of Urban and Cultural Studies, 2(1): 59-72

Lakoff, G. 1996 Moral Politics: How Liberals and Conservatives Think. Chicago: University of Chicago Press

Orwell. G. 1946 Politics and the English Language. http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/orwell46.htm

Stubbs, M. (1997) “Whorf’s children: A critical comment on critical discourse analysis (CDA)”. In Ryan, A. & Wray, A. (eds.) Evolving Models of Language, 100-16, London: Multilingual Matters.

Van Dijk, T. (1990) “Discourse and Society: A new journal for a new research focus”. Discourse and Society, 1, 1: 5-16.

Van Dijk, T. (1993b) “Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis.” Discourse and Society, 4, 2: 249-83.

Van Teeflen, T. (1994) ‘Racism and metaphor: the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in popular literature’, Discourse sand Society 5(3): 381-405

Widdowson, H.G. (2004) Text, context, pretex : critical issues in discourse analysis. London: Blackwell

Assessment

Weighting between components A and B (standard modules only) A: 40% B: 60%

ATTEMPT 1

First Assessment Opportunity

Component A Element weighting

A 3 hour written examination 40%

Component B Element weighting

    1 Submission of a critical analysis of a text. (2,500 words) 35%

Element weighting

2 Submission of an evaluation of the methodology 25%

adopted in the critical analysis of the text in 1 above. (1,000 words)

Second Assessment Opportunity (further attendance at taught classes is not required)

Component A Element weighting

A 3 hour written examination 40%

Component B Element weighting

    2 Submission of a critical analysis of a text. (2,500 words) 35%

Element weighting

2 Submission of an evaluation of the methodology 25%

adopted in the critical analysis of the text in 1 above. (1,000 words)

SECOND (OR SUBSEQUENT) ATTEMPT: Attendance at taught classes is not required.

Specification confirmed by ……Approved at VARC meeting……………Date …21.03.07………

(Associate Dean/Programme Director)

Back to top