Advertisement

Discourse Practices and Power

Chapter
  • 102 Downloads
Part of the Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse book series (PSDS)

Abstract

This chapter outlines the main Linguistics publications that have inspired, supported and driven the perspectives from which the case studies analysed in the book are investigated. It also draws from studies belonging to other disciplines in order to explain why an investigation into the discourse of the promotion of everyday cycling from a linguistic perspective can provide fruitful insights. The notion of discourse and a brief history of the school of Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) is explained. The chapter focuses on what connects (re)framing the environment and the hegemonic tendency towards marketisation in language. The centrality of metaphors is highlighted, showing that we think through metaphors by referring to studies from other disciplines and in particular to the very first economic theories. The chapter also introduces the notion of dehumanisation, reporting a few studies that have applied it to people who cycle.

Keywords

Metaphorical thinking Dehumanisation Critical Discourse Studies Semiotics Economic theories 

References

  1. Andrews, N., Clement, I., & Aldred, R. (2018). Invisible Cyclists? Disabled People and Cycle Planning—A Case Study of London. Journal of Transport and Health, 8, 146–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Angermuller, J. (2015). Discourse Studies. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 6, pp. 510–515). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angermuller, J. (2018). Truth After Post-truth: For a Strong Programme in Discourse Studies. Palgrave Communications, 4(30), 1–8.Google Scholar
  4. Angermuller, J., Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (Eds.). (2014). The Discourse Studies Reader: Main Currents in Theory and Analysis. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  5. Basford, L., Reid, S., Lester, T., Thomson, J., & Tolmie, A. (2002) Drivers’ Perceptions of Cyclists. Prepared for Charging and Local Transport Division, Department for Transport (TRL Report TRL549). https://trl.co.uk/sites/default/files/TRL549.pdf. Accessed 16 May 2019.
  6. Blommaert, J. (2013) Etnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
  7. Bloor and Bloor. (2007). The Practice of Critical Discourse Analysis: An Introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Delbosc, A., Nanzin, F., Haslam, N., & Haworth, N. (2019). Dehumanization of Cyclists Predicts Self-reported Aggressive Behaviour Toward Them: A Pilot Study. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 62, 681–689.Google Scholar
  9. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fairclough, N. (2016). A Dialectical-Relational Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis in Social Research. In R. Wodak & M. Mayer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed., pp. 86–108). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  11. Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction (pp. 258–284). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Foucault, M. (1971). L’Ordre du Discours. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  13. Guroff, M. (2016). The Mechanical Horse: How the Bicycle Reshaped American Life. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
  14. Halliday, M. A. K. (2001). New Ways of Meaning: The Challenge to Applied Linguistics. In A. Fill & P. Mühlhäusler (Eds.), The Ecolinguistics Reader: Language, Ecology and Environment (pp. 175–202). London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  15. Haslam, N., & Stratemeyer, M. (2016). Recent Research on Dehumanization. Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 25–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Jäger, S., & Maier, F. (2016). Analysing Discourses and Dispositives: A Foucauldian Approach to Theory and Methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed, pp. 109–136). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  17. Johnson, M. (2014, September 17). Why Do We Still Hear People Joke About Hitting Cyclists? The Conversation. https://theconversation.com/why-do-we-still-hear-people-joke-about-hitting-cyclists-31214. Accessed 16 May 2019.
  18. Kiernan, P. (2018). Language, Identity and Cycling in the New Media Age. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kubiszewski, I., Costanza, R., Franco, C., Lawn, P., Talberth, J., Jackson, T., & Aylmer, C. (2013). Beyond GDP: Measuring and Achieving Global Genuine Progress. Ecological Economics, 93, 57–68.Google Scholar
  20. Lakoff, G. (2010). Why It Matters How We Frame the Environment. Environmental Communication, 4(1), 70–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (2003). Metaphors We Live by. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lang, J. (2017). Explaining Genocide: Hannah Arendt and the Social-Scientific Concept of Dehumanization. In P. Baehr & P. Walsh (Eds.), The Anthem Companion to Hannah Arendt (pp. 175–196). London: Anthem Press.Google Scholar
  23. Martin, J. R. (2004). Positive Discourse Analysis: Solidarity and Change. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 49, 179–200.Google Scholar
  24. Mautner, G. (2010). Language and the Market Society: Critical Reflections on Discourse and Dominance. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mulderrig, J. (2018). Multimodal Strategies of Emotional Governance: A Critical Analysis of ‘Nudge’ Tactics in Health Policy. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(1), 39–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Oosterhuis, H. (2019). Entrenched Habit or Fringe Mode: Comparing National Bicycle Policies, Cultures and Histories. In T. Myllyntaus & T. Männistö-Funk (Eds.), Invisible Bicycle: Parallel Histories and Different Timelines. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  27. Raser, E., Gaupp-Berghausen, M., Dons, E., Anaya-Boig, E., Avila-Palencia, I., Brand, C., … Panis, L. I. (2018). European Cyclists’ Travel Behavior: Differences and Similarities Between Seven European (PASTA) Cities. Journal of Transport & Health, 9, 244–252.Google Scholar
  28. Rifkin, J. (2011). The Third Industrial Revolution. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  29. Sheller, M. (2018). Mobility Justice: The Politics of Movement in an Age of Extremes. London and New York: Verso Books.Google Scholar
  30. Stibbe, A. (2018). Positive Discourse Analysis: Rethinking Human Ecological Relationships. In A. F. Fill & H. Penz (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Ecolinguistics (pp. 165–178). New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Stiglitz, J. E. (2004). Evaluating Economic Change. Daedalus Summer, 2004, 18–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2010). Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn’t Add Up. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  33. van Dijk, T. A. (2013). CDA Is Not a Method of Critical Discourse Analysis. EDISO Debate—Asociacion de Estudios Sobre Discurso y Sociedad. https://www.edisoportal.org/debate/115-cda-not-method-critical-discourse-analysis. Accessed 16 May 2019.
  34. Williams, N. (2018, September) Radio Discourse and Cycling. Poster presentation at Cycling and Society, University of West England. http://www.cyclingandsociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/P_Williams.pdf. Accessed 16 May 2019.
  35. Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2016). Methods of Critical Discourse Studies (3rd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Culture, Politics and SocietyUniversity of TurinTurinItaly

Personalised recommendations