CDA is NOT a method of critical discourse analysis

Wodak, Ruth r.wodak at lancaster.ac.uk
Wed Mar 13 11:58:57 UTC 2013


This link is not accessible, unfortunately
Ruth

From: critics-l-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu [mailto:critics-l-bounces at listserv.cddc.vt.edu] On Behalf Of Teun A. van Dijk
Sent: 13 March 2013 11:13
To: critics-l at listserv.cddc.vt.edu
Subject: [Critics-l] CDA is NOT a method of critical discourse analysis


For debate, please see this brief piece of debate on the new website<http://www.aediso.org> of the (new, Spanish and Portuguese) Association for the Study on Discourse and Society (EDiSo):

CDA is NOT a method of critical discourse analysis<http://www.aediso.org/debate/115-cda-not-method-critical-discourse-analysis>

Maybe it helps to get less theses, books or papers in discourse journals that claim to do CDA as a method, instead of specifying, in detail, what explicit and systematic method(s), among many in the humanities, psychology and the social sciences, they are going to apply to describe the structures, strategies and contexts of socially situated text or talk.


Teun
___________________________________________________
Teun A. van Dijk
Pompeu Fabra University
Dept. of Translation and Language Sciences
138, Roc Boronat
08018 Barcelona, Spain
E-mail: vandijk at discourses.org<mailto:vandijk at discourses.org>
Web: www.discourses.org<http://www.discourses.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/critics-l/attachments/20130313/3fbc4b7c/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Critics-l mailing list
Critics-l at listserv.cddc.vt.edu
http://listserv.cddc.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/critics-l


More information about the Critics-l mailing list