CHAPTER II: REVIEW ON RELATED LITERATURE
D. Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Analysis’s Framework
26
explanatory and uses a systematic methodology to connect the text and its context; and (8) CDA is a scientific paradigm that has a social commitment that continuously tries to dissolve and change what is happening in a context. (Darma, 2009:57)”
According to Fairclough, the functionality of language in texts and discourse is structured socially. This is because of that the use of language is simultaneously composed of (i) social identity, (ii) social relations, and (iii) knowledge and belief systems. The use of language is a reproduction of the phenomena of composing social identities, social relations, and knowledge systems in society. Thus, discourse analysis is an analysis of the use of language and socio-cultural structures. Discursive events are marked by texts, discursive practices (acts of language), and social practices. At the textual level, first, an analysis of the form (texture) and linguistic characteristics of the text, such as vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and sentence coherence (Jørgensen &
Phillips, 2002:128-129).
27
a) Text Dimensions (Micro Structure) According to Fairclough, the text here is analyzed linguistically, by looking at vocabulary, semantics, and sentence structure. It also includes coherence and coherence in discourse, how words or sentences are combined to form contradictory or mutually supportive meanings. All elements analyzed are used to look at the following three problems.
First, representation refers to what one wants to display in the text. The representation here will reveal the representation of each sentence in the discourse.
This analysis basically wants to see how something is displayed in the text that may carry ideological content. Second, relation, refers to the analysis of how the relationship is constructed between the writer and the reader. Is there an equal relationship between writers and readers, writers and public participants (politicians, religious leaders, experts, etc.), and is there a relationship between the three, namely between writers, participants, and the audience? In addition, such as whether the text is delivered informally or formally or openly or closed. Third, identity refers to certain constructions of the identities of writers and readers, and how these personalities and identities are to be presented.
b) Practice of Discourse (Mesostucture)
The dimension of discourse practice seen from a three-dimensional analytical framework shows that for each discursive event, how text producers, and language power utilize socially available resources to form discourse sequences. The two main centripetal forces in any discursive event are language and discourse order. Discursive
28
events, on the one hand, depend on and are shaped by them (text producers), but on the other hand they are cumulatively restructured producers.
Based on this, intertextuality analysis links the text dimensions and discourse practice dimensions of a critical discourse analysis framework and shows where texts relate to social networks. In addition, the discourse order, how the text actualizes, and how the text expands the potential in the discourse order (Fairclough, 1995: 11).
Discourse practices, discourse orders, and intertextuality have important mediating roles in the framework of critical discourse analysis.
A characteristic of this framework is that it combines Bakhti's theory of genres (in the analysis of discourse practice) and Gramsci's theory of hegemony (in the analysis of sociocultural practice). This theory highlights the productivity and creativity of discourse practice and its realization in texts that are heterogeneous in form and meaning, the heterogeneity that arises from their intertextuality, texts consisting of other texts that have already been produced and from potentially diverse text types (genres, discourses). Hegemony theory highlights how power relations limit and vice versa.
c) Sociocultural Practices (Macrostructure)
The dimension of sociocultural practice relates to all contexts that exist outside the text. That is, the context in question has a wider scope to the relationship between culture and society as well as politics. Relationships when dimensions are analyzed to
29
reveal discourse constructs. At this stage, the dimensions of the text that will be analyzed in depth are textually at the linguistic level to reveal the ideology that is implied behind the texts contained in a discourse.
Furthermore, it relates to interpretations that can be revealed through the process of intertextuality, text production, text consumption, and text distribution. In that case, this dimension can involve all parties who contribute in making a discourse so that the background of these parties will affect the content of a discourse. The last dimension is related to sociocultural practices that reach all. Elements outside the text which are divided into three levels, namely: situational, institutional and social levels.
d) Ideology
The word ideology comes from the Greek, namely idea which means idea, and straightforward which means science, so literally, ideology means the science of ideas in accordance with the times, the development of science, and knowledge. In Sukanto's Sociology Dictionary (in Darma, 2009), ideology is defined as (a) a socially determined set of beliefs, (b) a belief system that protects the interests of elite groups, and (c) a belief system. Furthermore, Fairclough explains that ideology is a meaning that serves power (Jorgensen & Phillips, 2002). More precisely, he understands ideology as a construction of meaning that contributes to the production, reproduction, and transformation of relations of domination. Ideology in Thompson's view is a practice that operates in the process of producing everyday meaning, and meaning is mobilized in order to maintain power relations (Thompson, 2013). This focus contradicts the
30
ideological conception of many Marxist approaches. Marxists are very much uninterested in the structure of certain ideologies, or in how ideologies are articulated in particular social contexts. However, they have treated ideology as an abstract value system that functions as a social glue, ie binding people together, and thereby confirming the coherence of the social order.
Jorgensen and Phillips explain that in cultural and communication studies, there is currently a consensus that the meaning of texts is partially created in the process of interpretation. Fairclough also has the same consensus position, that texts have several potential meanings that may conflict with each other and are opened to several different interpretations. There is a possibility of resistance even though people are not necessarily aware of the ideological dimensions of the practice. Fairclough explains that the subject is positioned ideologically, but the subject is also capable of acting creatively to create connections between the diverse practices and ideologies in which the subject is exposed and rearrange the practice and structure (Jorgensen & Phillips, 2002).
Fairclough also rejects Althusser's understanding of ideology as a whole entity.
Fairclough believes that people can be positioned in different and competing ideologies and this condition can lead to uncertainty, the effect of which can create awareness of ideological effects (Flatschart, 2016). This point of view is based on Gramsci's idea that common sense contains several competing elements that are the result of negotiation meaning where all social groups participate.
31
CHAPTER III