Development of discourse as an instrument of critical social analysis
Abstract
Since the concept of discourse has become almost indispensable in the contemporary research of a large number of social and political phenomena, and as such represents a transdisciplinary instrument of social analysis and critique, it is of indisputable importance to indicate what its theoretical-methodological relevance consists of. For that purpose, the genesis of this polyvalent concept is given in this paper through the developmental presentation of various analytical levels of its consideration within the context of general frameworks of scientific insights relevant for its theoretical operationalization. Particular analytical attention was given to the concepts of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas, not only because those are two of the most influential discourse theories in the twentieth century, but also because the differences between them offer a more comprehensive insight into the importance of this concept.
References
Bugarski, R. (1989). Introduction to General Linguistics. Beograd: BIGZ [In Serbian]
Derrida, J. (1990). White Mythology. Novi Sad: Bratstvo-jedinstvo [In Serbian]
Flyvbjerg, В. (1998). Habermas and Foucault: Thinkers for Civil Society. The British Journal of Sociology, 49 (2), 210–233. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2237923
Foucault, М. (2007). Order of Discourse. Loznica: Karpos [In Serbian]
Foucault, М. (1998). Archeology of Knowledge. Beograd: Plato [In Serbian]
Foucault, M. (2010). Writings and Conversations. Beograd: Fedon [In Serbian]
Habermas, J. (1980). Theory and Practice - Socio-Philosophical Studies. Beograd: BIGZ [In Serbian]
Halliday, M. (1973). Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold
Halliday, M. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold
Halliday, M. (2003). On Language and Linguistics, London and New York: Continuum
Holzscheiter, А. (2014). Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives 15, 142–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/insp.12005
Kelly, M. (ed., 1994). Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Nikolić, M. (2013). Linguistic Means for Expressing Power in Confrontational Discourse (doctoral dissertation). Univerzitet u Beogradu - Filološki fakultet. Beograd. Available at: https://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:8041/bdef:Content/get [In Serbian]
Pavićević, Đ. (1995). Ethics of Discourse. Philosophy and Society VII, 129–157. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu, Institut društvenih nauka - Centar za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju [In Serbian]
Pešić, M. (2011). Conceptual Basis of Research on Discourse: Relation Power, Politics and Democracy. Srpska politička misao 4/2011, 309-334. https://doi.org/10.22182/spm.3442011.16 [In Serbian]
Pešić, M. (2016) Satirical Literary Projections of Social and Political Reality in the Public Sphere of Serbia at the End of XIX and Beginning of XX Century (doctoral dissertation). Univerzitet u Beogradu - Fakultet političkih nauka. Beograd. Available at: https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/6931?show=full [In Serbian]
Ristić, D. (2015).Meanings of Action: Sociological Analysis Discursive Practices of Ideology (doctoral dissertation). Univerzitet u Novom Sadu - Filozofski fakultet. Novi Sad. Available at: https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/4509 [In Serbian]
Searle, Rogers J. (1991). Speech Acts. Beograd: Nolit [In Serbian]
Simić, R., Jovanović, J. (2009). About Discourse. Uzdanica, 6 (2), 7–21.
Škiljan, D. (1980). A View on Linguistics. Zagreb: Školska knjiga [In Serbian]
Willa, D. (1992). Postmodernism and the Public Sphere. The American Political Science Review, Vol. 86, No 3/ 2002, 712–721.
Živković, B. (2014). Conversation Analysis: from Sociology to Linguistics. In S. Perović (ed.) Discourse Analysis: Theories and Methods (77–95). Podgorica: Institute of Foreign Languages, University of Montenegro