Applying Discourse Theory: the Method of Articulation

  • David Howarth

Abstract

Methodological questions play something of a Cinderella role in discourse theory. Although discourse theorists attack mainstream approaches from an alternative epistemological and methodological standpoint — a stance that embodies a particular conception of social science — there are very few explicit theoretical statements of it. For the most part, such statements are either pitched at a high level of abstraction — dealing mainly with the formal ontological assumptions of discourse theory — or exist in what might be termed a practical state, that is, they are present in the outcomes of empirical research, but remain theoretically latent. This chapter begins the process of rectifying this ‘methodological deficit’ by focusing on the way discourse theory is applied to empirical objects of investigation. By reflecting upon existing research in the field and drawing upon the practice of conducting empirical research in discourse theory, especially with respect to protest movements in Britain and South Africa, I elaborate a method of articulatory practice that avoids the difficulties surrounding the mechanical application of ‘formal-abstract’ theory to ‘real-concrete’ events and processes. This involves a logic of explanation that brings together and transforms a plurality of formal social logics, together with the political logics that constitute and contest the latter, in order to elucidate a carefully problematized instance of research.

Keywords

Coherence Posit Egypt Boulder Defend 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Althusser, L. (1990) Philosophy and the Spontaneous Philosophy of the Scientists (London, Verso).Google Scholar
  2. Campbell, G. (1999) The Road to Kosovo (Boulder, Westview Press).Google Scholar
  3. Cioffi, F. (1998) Wittgenstein on Freud and Frazer (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Connolly, W. E. (1981) Appearance and Reality in Politics (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  5. Connolly, W. E. (1987) Politics and Ambiguity (Madison, University of Wisconsin Press).Google Scholar
  6. Connolly, W. E. (1995) The Ethos of Pluralization (Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press).Google Scholar
  7. Cox, R. (1981) ‘Social Forces, States, and World Orders’, Millennium, 10 (2), pp. 126–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Danto, A. (1965) Nietzsche as Philosopher (London, Macmillan).Google Scholar
  9. Derrida, J. (1976) Of Grammatology (Baltimore, John Hopkins University Press).Google Scholar
  10. Derrida, J. (1982) Margins of Philosophy (Brighton, Harvester Press).Google Scholar
  11. Dreyfus, H. (1986), ‘Why Studies of Human Capacities Modelled on Ideal Natural Science Can Never Achieve Their Goal’, in J. Margolis, M. Krausz, and R. M. Burian (eds), Rationality, Relativism and the Human Sciences (Dordrecht, Martinus Nijhoff).Google Scholar
  12. Flyvbjerg, B. (2001) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How it Can Succeed Again (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Foucault, M. (1977) Discipline and Punish (Harmondsworth, Penguin Books).Google Scholar
  14. Foucault, M. (1985) The Use of Pleasure (New York, Pantheon).Google Scholar
  15. Foucault, M. (1991) ‘Politics and the Study of Discourse’, in G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. H. Miller (eds), The Foucault Effect (London, Harvester Wheatsheaf).Google Scholar
  16. Giddens, A. (1976) New Rules of Sociological Method (London, Hutchinson).Google Scholar
  17. Griggs, S., and Howarth, D. (2002) ‘An Alliance of Interest and Identity? Explaining the Campaign against Manchester Airport’s Second Runway’, Mobilization, 7 (1), pp. 43–58.Google Scholar
  18. Habermas, J. (1987) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity (Cambridge, Polity).Google Scholar
  19. Heidegger, M. (1962) Being and Time (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
  20. Howarth, D. (1997) ‘Complexities of Identity/Difference: the Ideology of Black Consciousness in South Africa’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 2 (1), pp. 51–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Howarth, D. (2000a) Discourse (Buckingham, Open University Press).Google Scholar
  22. Howarth, D. (2000b) ‘The Difficult Emergence of a Democratic Imaginary: Black Consciousness and Non-racial Democracy in South Africa’, in D. Howarth, A. J. Norval, and Y. Stavrakakis (eds), Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change (Manchester, Manchester University Press).Google Scholar
  23. Howarth, D. (2002) ‘Ethnic and Racial Identities in a Changing South Africa: the Limits of Social Science Explanation’, South African Historical Journal, 46, pp. 250–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Howarth, D. (2004) ‘A Heideggerian Social Science? Heidegger, Kisiel and Wiener on the Limits of Anthropological Discourse’, Anthropological Theory, 4 (2), pp. 229–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Howarth, D. (2005) ‘Hegemony, Subjectivity and Radical Democracy’, in S. Critchley and O. Marchant (eds), Laclau: a Critical Reader (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  26. Jaworski, A., and Coupland, N. (eds) (1999) The Discourse Reader (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  27. Kuhn, T. (1970) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edn (Chicago, Chicago University Press).Google Scholar
  28. Lacan, J. (2002) Ecrits (New York, Norton and Company).Google Scholar
  29. Laclau, E. (1990) New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time (London, Verso).Google Scholar
  30. Laclau, E. (2000) ‘Constructing Universality’, in J. Butler, E. Laclau, and S. Žižek, Contingency, Hegemony, Universality (London, Verso).Google Scholar
  31. Landman, T. (2000) Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  32. Marx, K. (1973) Grundrisse (Harmondsworth, Penguin).Google Scholar
  33. Marx, K. (1976) Capital: a Critique of Political Economy, Vol. 1 (Harmondsworth, Penguin).Google Scholar
  34. Mitchell, T. (1991) Colonising Egypt (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  35. Mulhall, S. (1996) Heidegger and Being and Time (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  36. Nehamas, A. (1985) Nietzsche (Cambridge, Harvard University Press).Google Scholar
  37. Norval, A. J. (1996) Deconstructing Apartheid Discourse (London, Verso).Google Scholar
  38. Norval, A. j. (2004) ‘Hegemony after Deconstruction: the Consequences of Undecidability’, Journal of Political Ideologies, 9 (2), pp. 139–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Oakeshott, M. (1962) Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays (London, Methuen).Google Scholar
  40. Popper, K. (1989) Conjectures and Refutations, 5th edn (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  41. Robinson, J. (1996) The Power of Apartheid: State, Power and Space in South African Cities (Oxford, Butterworth-Heinemann).Google Scholar
  42. Said, E. (1995) Orientalism, 2nd edn (Harmondsworth, Penguin Books).Google Scholar
  43. Salecl, R. (1994) ‘The Crisis of Identity and the Struggle for New Hegemony in the Former Yugoslavia’, in E. Laclau (ed.), The Making of Political Identities (London, Verso).Google Scholar
  44. Scott, J. (1985) Weapons of the Weak (New Haven, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  45. Scott, J. (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance: Hidden Transcripts (New Haven, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  46. Scott, J. (1998) Seeing like a State (New Haven, Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  47. Shapiro, I. (2002) ‘Problems, Methods, and Theories in the Study of Politics’, Political Theory, 30(4), pp. 596–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Skinner, Q. (1969) ‘Meaning and Understanding in the history of ideas’, History and Theory, 8, pp. 3–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Skinner, Q. (2002) Visions of Politics, Vol. 1 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smith, A. M. (1994) New Right Discourse on Race and Sexuality: Britain 1968–1990 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. South African Department of Information (1973) Progress through Separate Development: South Africa in Peaceful Transition (Pretoria, South African Government Printer).Google Scholar
  52. Staten, H. (1984) Wittgenstein and Derrida (Lincoln, Nebraska, University of Nebraska Press).Google Scholar
  53. Taylor, C. (1971), ‘Interpretation and the Sciences of Man’, The Review of Metaphysics, 25 (1), pp. 3–51.Google Scholar
  54. Taylor, C. (1981) ‘Understanding and Explanation in the Geisteswissenchaften’, in S. H. Holtzman and C. M. Leich (eds), Wittgenstein: to Follow a Rule (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul).Google Scholar
  55. Taylor, C. (1985) Philosophy and the Human Sciences, Philosophical Papers 2 (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Torfing, J. (1999) New Theories of Discourse (Oxford, Blackwell).Google Scholar
  57. Tully, J. (1995) Strange Multiplicity: Constitutionalism in an Age of Diversity (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. van Dijk, T. (1997a) Discourse as Structure and Process (London, Sage).Google Scholar
  59. van Dijk, T. (1997b) Discourse as Social Interaction (London, Sage).Google Scholar
  60. Weber, M. (1949) The Methodology of the Social Sciences (New York, Free Press).Google Scholar
  61. Winch, P. (1990) The Idea of a Social Science and Its Relation to Philosophy, 2nd edn (London, Routledge).Google Scholar
  62. Wittgenstein, L. (1953) Philosophical Investigations (Oxford: Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
  63. Wittgenstein, L. (1977) Remarks on Colour (Oxford, Basil Blackwell).Google Scholar
  64. Wittgenstein, L. (1979) ‘Remarks on Frazer’s Golden Bough’, in C. G. Luckhardt (ed.), Wittgenstein: Sources and Perspectives (Sussex, Harvester).Google Scholar
  65. Wodak, R., and Meyer, M.J. (2001) Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (London, Sage).Google Scholar
  66. Žižek, S. (1994) ‘The Spectre of Ideology’, in S. Žižek (ed.), Mapping Ideology (London, Verso).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Limited 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Howarth
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of GovernmentUniversity of EssexEssexUK

Personalised recommendations