نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسنده

استادیار زبان‏شناسی گروه مطالعات زبانی، پژوهشکدۀ تحقیق و توسعۀ علوم انسانی «سمت» (سازمان مطالعه و تدوین)، تهران، ایران (نویسندۀ مسئول).

10.22085/jiscm.2021.309218.1273

چکیده

هدف مقالۀ حاضر، تحلیل انتقادی ‏ساختاری مقالات علمی‏ پژوهشی در حوزۀ تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی است تا تصویری از وضعیت پژوهش‎های انجام ‎شده در این حوزه و طرحی برای پژوهش‎های آتی ارائه شود. بدین منظور، مقالات چاپ شده در مجلات علمی پژوهشی حوزۀ علوم انسانی با استفاده از روش مرور ساختاری منابع تحلیل شد. در بهمن 1399 کلیدواژۀ «گفتمان انتقادی» در پایگاه آی‏اِس‏سی با قیدهای «تمامی اقلام»، «تا سال 1399»، «زبان فارسی»، «ژورنال‏های داخلی» و مقالات «علمی» جست‏وجو شد. با این قیدها، 451 مقاله استخراج شد و پس ارزبازبینی عنوان، کلیدواژه‏ها و چکیده و در برخی موارد خواندن متن مقالات، 295 مقالۀ مرتبط با «تحلیل گفتمان انتقادی» به‏عنوان داده‏های تحلیل و جامعۀ آماری پژوهش انتخاب‏شدند. یافته‎های پژوهش حاکی از آن است که بیشترین تحلیل‎ها مربوط به موضوع بازنمایی جنسیت، قدرت و ایدئولوژی در گفتمان‏های ادبی (100 مقاله)، مطبوعاتی (66 مقاله) بود و کمترین‎شان به بازنمایی ایدئولوژی، قدرت و جنسیت در رسانۀ برخط (5 مقاله)، تصاویر (6 مقاله)، گفتمان حقوقی (6 مقاله)، گفتمان ترجمه (7 مقاله)، و درنهایت گفتمان تبلیغات (7 مقاله) اختصاص داشت. نتایج پژوهش حاضر نشان می‏دهد که با توجه به گذشت بیش از دو دهه از طرح تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان در محافل دانشگاهی ایران، لزوم تأسیس مجله‏ای با موضوع خاصِ گفتمان احساس می‏شود؛ همکاری‏های بین‏المللی باید موردتوجه محققان این حوزه قرارگیرد. رویکردهای جدیدی مانند تحلیل چندوجهی و تحلیل‏های پیکره‏ای و روش‏شناسی متناسب با آن‏ها وارد تحلیل انتقادی گفتمان شود؛ گفتمان‏هایی مانند رسانۀ برخط، متون حقوقی و قانونی می‏تواند بیشتر موضوعِ تحلیل انتقادی قرار گیرد؛ و در نهایت، با توجه تحولات پیش‏آمده در روش‏های ارتباطی در جامعۀ امروز، روش‏های تحقیقی مانند پیکره‏ای، چندوجهی و روش‏های کمّی می‏تواند موجبات تدقیق یافته‏های تحلیل‏ها را فراهم آورد.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Critical-Structural Analysis of the Persian Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) Articles in the Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC)

نویسنده [English]

  • mohsen nobakht

Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistic Studies, Research Institute for Research and Development of Humanities (Organization for Researching and Composing University Textbooks in Humanities; SAMT), Tehran, Iran (Corresponding Author).

چکیده [English]

The aim of the present research is the critical-structural analysis of research articles in the area of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) so that a picture regarding the situation of the conducted research in the area and a framework for subsequent research can be presented. To do that, the articles published in scientific journals in the area of humanities were analyzed using the structural review of references method. In February 2020, the key word “Critical Discourse” was searched in the Islamic World Science Citation Center (ISC) website with these conditions: “all items”, “till 2020”, “Persian”, “Internal Journals”, and “scientific” articles. As a result of such conditions, 451 articles were extracted and after reviewing the titles, key words and abstracts, and in some cases, reading the texts of the articles, 295 articles related to “critical discourse analysis” were selected as the data for analysis and the statistical population of the research. The research findings suggest that most of the analyses were about the representation of gender, power and ideology in literary discourses (100 articles) and press discourses (66 articles) and the least were related to representation of gender, power and ideology in online media (5 articles), images (6 articles), legal discourse (6 articles), translation discourse (7 articles) and finally; advertising discourse (7 articles). The results of the present research show that considering the passage of two decades from raising critical discourse analysis as a subject in the Iranian academic circles, the necessity of establishment of a journal with the very focus of “discourse” is felt. International cooperation should be noticed by the researchers in this area. New perspectives like multi-sided approaches and corpus analyses and the corresponding methodologies should enter critical discourse analysis, discourses like the online media, legal and forensic texts can be dealt with in critical analysis and finally, concerning the developments occurred in communication methods in the present society, research methods like corpus, multi-sided, and quantitative can make accurate investigation of the analyses possible.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • critical structural review
  • Discourse
  • critical discourse analysis
 
 
Baker, P., Gabrielatos, C., Khosravinik, M., Kryzanowski, M., McEnery, T. and Wodak, R. (2008), ‘A useful methodological synergy? Combining critical discourse analysis and corpus linguistics to examine discourses of refugees and asylum seekers in the UK Press’, Discourse & Society, 19(3), 273–306.
 
Bazerman, C. (1988), Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsi  Press.
 
Bazerman, C. (1994), ‘Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions’, in A. Freedman and P. Medway (eds), Genre and the New Rhetoric. Bristol, PA: Taylor and Francis, pp. 79–101.
 
Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T. (1995), Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
 
Biber, D. (2006a), University Language: A Corpus-based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
 
Biber, D. (2010), ‘Corpus-based and corpus-driven analyses of language variation and use’, in B. Heine and H. Narrog (eds), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 159–92.
 
Chilton, P. (2004), Analysing Political Discourse: Theory and Practice. London: Routledge.
 
Dixon, B.E., McGowan, J.J. and Cravens, G.D. (2009), “Knowledge sharing using codification and collaboration technologies to improve health care: lessons from the public sector”, Knowledge Management Research and Practice, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 249–259.
 
Dixon-Woods, M. (2011), “Systematic reviews and qualitative methods”, in Silverman, D. (Ed.), Qualitative Research. Issues of Theory, Method and Practice, 3rd ed., Sage, London, pp. 331 346.
 
Dumay, J. (2014), “15 years of the Journal of Intellectual Capital and counting: A manifesto for transformational IC research”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 2–37.
 
Dumay, J. and Cai, L. (2014), “A review and critique of content analysis as a methodology for inquiring into IC disclosure”, Journal of Intellectual Capital, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 264–290.
 
Fairclough, N. (1992), Discourse and Social Change. Oxford: Polity Press.
 
Fairclough, N. (2000), New Labour, New Language. London: Routledge.
 
Fairclough, N. (2003), Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London: Routledge.
 
Fairclough, N. (2006), Language and Globalization. London: Routledge.
 
Fairclough, N., Mulderrig, J. and Wodak, R. (2010), ‘Critical discourse analysis’, in T. van Dijk (ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage (in press) (2nd edn).
 
Fowler, R., Kress, G., Hodge, R. and Trew, T. (eds) (1979), Language and Control. London: Routledge.
 
Guthrie, J., Ricceri, F. and Dumay, J. (2012), “Reflections and projections: A decade of intellectual capital accounting research”, The British Accounting Review, Vol. 44 No. 2, pp. 68–82.
 
Heller, Monica. (2001). Discourse and interaction. In Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, and Heidi E. Hamilton, eds., The Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 250–64.
 
Kress, G. and van Leeuwen, T. (2006), Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design (2nd revised edn). London: Routledge.
 
Mautner, G. (2009), ‘Checks and balances: how corpus linguistics can contribute to CDA’, in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.
 
Mulderrig, J. (2009), The Language of Education Policy: From Thatcher to Blair. Saarbrucken: VDM.
 
Ruth Wodak, Michael Meyer (2016). Critical Discourse Studies: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology. In Ruth Wodak Michael Meyer, ed,. Methods of Critical Discourse Studies 3RD Edition.SAGE. PP 18-46.
 
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D. and Smart, P. (2003), “Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review”, British Journal of Management, Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 207-222.
 
van Dijk, T. (1991), Racism and the Press. London: Routledge.
 
van Dijk, T. (1993), Elite Discourse and Racism. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
 
van Dijk, T. (2008a), Discourse and Context: A Sociocognitive Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 
van Dijk, T. (2008b), Society in Discourse. How Context Controls Text and Talk. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 
van Leeuwen, T. (2005a), Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.
 
van Leeuwen, T. (2007), ‘Legitimation in discourse and communication’, Discourse & Communication, 1(1), 91–112.
 
van Leeuwen, T. and Caldas-Coulthard, C. R. (2004), ‘The semiotics of kinetic design’, in D. Banks (ed.), Text and Texture – Systemic Functional viewpoints on the Nature and Structure of Text. Paris: L’Harmattan, pp. 356–81.
 
van Leeuwen, T. and Wodak, R. (1999), ‘Legitimizing immigration control: a discourse- historical analysis’, Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–119
 
Wodak, R. (2001), ‘The discourse-historical approach’, in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Sage, pp. 63–94.
 
Wodak, R. (2009a), The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. London: Palgrave.
 
Wodak, R. (2009b), ‘The semiotics of racism – a critical discourse-historical analysis’, in J. Renkema (ed.), Discourse, Of Course. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
 
Wodak, R. and Meyer, M. (2009a), ‘Critical discourse analysis: history, theory, agenda, and methodology’, in R. Wodak and M. Meyer (eds), Methods of CDA. London: Sage, pp. 1–33.