Page 269 - DENG504_LINGUISTICS

Unit 19: Discourse

typical of writing, but never of oral discourse, is the organization of tables, formulas, or charts Notes
which can be portrayed only in written form.
Naturally, this division into two ways of producing discourse is quite straightforward, yet, it is
possible to combine the two like, for example, in the case of a lesson, when a teacher explains
something writing on the blackboard, or when a speaker prepares detailed notes to be read out
during his speech. Moreover, some of the foregoing features are not so explicit in the event of
sophisticated, formal speech or a friendly letter.
• Discourse expressed formally and informally.
The difference in construction and reception of language was the basis of its conventional distinction
into speaking and writing. Nevertheless, when the structure of discourse is taken into consideration
more essential division into formal and informal communicative products gains importance. Formal
discourse is more strict in that it requires the use of passive voice, lack of contracted forms
together with impersonality, complex sentence structure and, in the case of the English language,
vocabulary derived from Latin. That is why formal spoken language has many features very
similar to written texts, particularly absence of vernacular vocabulary and slang, as well as the
employment of rhetorical devices to make literary-like impact on the listener.
Informal discourse, on the other hand, makes use of active voice mainly, with personal pronouns
and verbs which show feelings such as 'I think', 'we believe'. In addition, contractions are frequent
in informal discourse, no matter if it is written or spoken. Consequently it may be said that
informal communicative products are casual and loose, while formal ones are more solemn and
governed by strict rules as they are meant to be used in official and serious circumstances.
The relation of the producer of the message and its receiver, the amount of addressees and factors
such as public or private occasion are the most important features influencing selecting either
formal or informal language. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to assume that the contemporary
learner, who may easily travel and use his linguistic skills outside class, will encounter mainly
informal discourse, which due to its flexibility and unpredictability might be the most difficult to
comprehend. Accordingly, it seems rational to teach all varieties of language relying on authentic
oral and written texts.

19.6 Discourse Analysis—Its Origins and Development

Discourse analysis is a primarily linguistic study examining the use of language by its native
population whose major concern is investigating language functions along with its forms, produced
both orally and in writing. Moreover, identification of linguistic qualities of various genres, vital
for their recognition and interpretation, together with cultural and social aspects which support
its comprehension, is the domain of discourse analysis. To put it in another way, the branch of
applied linguistics dealing with the examination of discourse attempts to find patterns in
communicative products as well as and their correlation with the circumstances in which they
occur, which are not explainable at the grammatical level.
Starting point of discourse analysis
The first modern linguist who commenced the study of relation of sentences and coined the name
'discourse analysis', which afterwards denoted a branch of applied linguistics, was Zellig Harris.
Originally, however, it was not to be treated as a separate branch of study - Harris proposed
extension of grammatical examination which reminded syntactic investigations.
The emergence of this study is a result of not only linguistic research, but also of researchers
engaged in other fields of inquiry, particularly sociology, psychology, anthropology and
psychotherapy. In 1960s and 1970s other scholars, that is philosophers of language or those dealing
with pragmatics enormously influenced the development of this study as well. Among other
contributors to this field the Prague School of Linguists, whose focusing on organization of
information in communicative products indicated the connection of grammar and discourse, along
with text grammarians are worth mentioning.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 263