The methodology of discourse analysis depends on the theoretical framework you’re drawing from—linguistic, Foucauldian, psychoanalytic, poststructuralist, etc.—but at its core, discourse analysis is about examining how language constructs meaning, identity, power, and reality.
Here’s a structured overview that captures key methodological principles across various approaches:
I. What Is Discourse Analysis?
Discourse = more than language. It’s how language produces social meaning, shapes subjectivity, and organizes power relations.
Discourse analysis = the study of systems of meaning and how they structure what can be said, thought, felt, and done.
II. Core Assumptions
1. Language is not neutral—it shapes reality.
2. Meaning is contextual, relational, and historical.
3. Subjects are positioned by discourse—identity is not prior to discourse.
4. Power operates through discourse, often subtly.
5. Discourse limits and enables—what can be said, who can speak, what is thinkable.
III. Methodological Steps (Generic Structure)
1. Define the Research Question
• What do you want to analyze?
• E.g., How does media discourse frame migration? How is mental illness talked about in therapy settings?
2. Gather Textual Data
• Texts can be interviews, media articles, speeches, policy documents, memes, visuals, etc.
• The “text” is any form of meaning-bearing material.
3. Contextualize the Discourse
• Consider the historical, institutional, and cultural context in which the discourse occurs.
• Who is speaking? When? For whom?
4. Identify Discursive Formations
• What patterns of meaning, recurring metaphors, key signifiers, or narratives appear?
• Are there dominant “storylines” (e.g., “the migrant crisis,” “mental illness as brain disease”)?
5. Analyze Subject Positions
• How are people positioned by the discourse?
• Victim? Threat? Expert? Dependent?
• How do subjects take up or resist these positions?
6. Examine Power/Knowledge Relations
• Following Foucault: how does this discourse enable or constrain what can be known or done?
• Who has the authority to speak?
• What kinds of truth are being produced?
7. Look for Contradictions and Silences
• What is left unsaid?
• Are there ruptures, slippages, or contested meanings?
• These are often where the Real (in Lacanian terms) breaks through.
IV. Types of Discourse Analysis (Brief Overview)
|
Type |
Focus |
Key Figures |
Method |
|
Foucauldian DA |
Power, institutions, subjectivity |
Michel Foucault |
Analyze discursive practices, genealogies, regimes of truth |
|
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) |
Power and ideology in language |
Norman Fairclough, Teun van Dijk |
Examine micro-linguistic features + macro structures |
|
Lacanian DA |
Language and the unconscious |
Ian Parker, Ernesto Laclau (partly) |
Analyze fantasy, lack, master signifiers, subjectivity |
|
Narrative DA |
Story structures in discourse |
Margaret Somers, Bamberg |
Identify plotlines, turning points, narrative positions |
|
Conversation Analysis |
Turn-taking and interaction |
Harvey Sacks |
Close analysis of talk-in-interaction (empirical) |
V. Discourse Analysis as Ethical and Political Practice
• DA is not just about analyzing speech—it’s about interrogating the systems of power that structure what can be said, who can speak, and how we become subjects.
• It invites an ethical sensitivity to language, representation, and silence.
VI. Common Tools and Concepts
• Master Signifier (S1) – anchors meaning in a discourse (Lacan)
• Discursive Complex – discourse + affect + subjectivity (Parker)
• Articulation – how elements are linked to form meaning (Laclau & Mouffe)
• Interpellation – how ideology “hails” subjects (Althusser)
• Genealogy – history of the present (Foucault)
• Jouissance – libidinal charge of discourse (Lacan)
• Floating signifier – ambiguous term open to contestation (Laclau)
If you want, I can help build a tailored discourse analysis framework for your own project—say, analyzing nationalism, therapy, resistance, or CCP ideology.
