Dijk, T. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity. In R. Wodak, & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis. (pp. 95-121). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Dijk, T. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity. In R. Wodak, & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis. (pp. 95-121). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Reviewed by Ola El-Wassify Helwan University Cairo, Egypt
Ola.el-wassify@hotmail.com
Van Dijk, in this article, aims at creating principles and workable instructions for doing critical discourse analysis (CDA). He is focusing on the socio-cognitive interface of discourse analysis. Also he is stating that CDA is flexible with approaches depending on what the researcher wants to investigate.
However, the functions that CDA needs are stated clearly; not in a form of tips, but more like suggestions. Levels and dimensions of CDA were widely explained in this article. Dijk points out the relevant analytical choices in relation to text and context in order to study social structures and power in discourse. The article is divided into seven main points, supported by examples and other minor points.
The first point 'In favour of diversity' the aim of the article is clearly shown along with the author's method in representing CDA achievable guidelines. He states that these guidelines are not to be blindly followed, but rather learned from. Further, Dijk argued that CDA is 'diverse and multidisciplinary'. Another essential point is the definition of 'Multidisciplinary', which I would like to provide from 'The Language of Politics' by Adrian Beard. He stated that 'Multidisciplinary' provides a foundation for the analysis of texts, supporting students who want to achieve a detailed focus on language.
To introduce his approach, Dijk gives a brief informative definition of CDA. Interestingly, he started with 'What CDA is not' followed by 'what CDA is', which helps the reader to absorb the given information easily when presented together. Also presenting what does CDA combine together makes it easier to understand how it looks like, as well as presenting its main characteristics. Dijk makes it clear
Reviewed by Ola El-Wassify Helwan University Cairo, Egypt
Ola.el-wassify@hotmail.com
Van Dijk, in this article, aims at creating principles and workable instructions for doing critical discourse analysis (CDA). He is focusing on the socio-cognitive interface of discourse analysis. Also he is stating that CDA is flexible with approaches depending on what the researcher wants to investigate.
However, the functions that CDA needs are stated clearly; not in a form of tips, but more like suggestions. Levels and dimensions of CDA were widely explained in this article. Dijk points out the relevant analytical choices in relation to text and context in order to study social structures and power in discourse. The article is divided into seven main points, supported by examples and other minor points.
The first point 'In favour of diversity' the aim of the article is clearly shown along with the author's method in representing CDA achievable guidelines. He states that these guidelines are not to be blindly followed, but rather learned from. Further, Dijk argued that CDA is 'diverse and multidisciplinary'. Another essential point is the definition of 'Multidisciplinary', which I would like to provide from 'The Language of Politics' by Adrian Beard. He stated that 'Multidisciplinary' provides a foundation for the analysis of texts, supporting students who want to achieve a detailed focus on language.
To introduce his approach, Dijk gives a brief informative definition of CDA. Interestingly, he started with 'What CDA is not' followed by 'what CDA is', which helps the reader to absorb the given information easily when presented together. Also presenting what does CDA combine together makes it easier to understand how it looks like, as well as presenting its main characteristics. Dijk makes it clear