Discussion questions for Chapter 2 of Discourse and Discrimination

[Linnea Micciulla]

Here are some questions from Chapter 2 of Reisigl and Wodak's Discourse
and Discrimination. Please feel free to send comments on these to the
list (sign up here:
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/archives/cda-discuss.html) - or ask
your own questions - especially if you are not able to make it to
tomorrow's meeting!

1) “To speak about manipulation... could imply reductionist, hardly
provable causal assumptions about the effects of language use, about a
simple and direct relationship between discursive and other forms of
social practice.” (p. 33)

How does one avoid the pitfalls of discussing truth/deception without
claiming to be in possession of the truth? Is it possible/desirable to
avoid positioning oneself politically when doing this kind of critique?

2) “The highly political decision in the respective naming disputes must
always be left to those personally most concerned with the decision, ie.
to those persons to whom the anthroponyms refer, whether they are
heteronyms or autonyms.” (p. 69)

Does the “ingroup” (or, more realistically, representatives of the
ingroup) have an exclusive right to naming themselves? What if the
ingroup is an oppressive group? Do they then have the right to predicate
that they are somehow better than another group?

How is discriminatory speech different if it is produced by a member of
the target group?

3) Do the rules listed on p. 70-71 seem useful? Useable? Why or why not?

-Linnea