Language and Power (2001) Recommended Text for BBI 3303 (Language and Power) Fairclough, Norman. (2001). Language and Power. 2 nd ed. London: Longman Pearson Education Ltd.

Chapter 1: Introduction Language and Power (2001; 2 nd Ed.): connections between language use and unequal relations of power Aims: –To help understand the importance of language in the production, maintenance, and change of social relations of power –To help understand how some people use language to dominate others

Introduction (cont’d…) Linguistics, especially sociolinguistics does not explain: the interrelationships between language and power the production of relations of power and power struggles in society Sociolinguistic conventions that have a dual relation to power (differences in, and production of power)

Introduction (cont’d…) Fairclough’s (2001) focus on explaining how existing conventions arise from social power relations and power struggle Ideologies as ‘common sense’ assumptions: Linked to social conventions of language use and underlying power relations Legitimize existing social relations and differences of power

Introduction (cont’d…) Exercise of power in modern societies is achieved through the ideological workings of language –‘linguistic turn’ in social theory (Cf. Pierre Bourdieu, Michel Foucault and Jurgen Habermas) –Focus on visual language in postmodernistic culture It is important to study language in its social context, esp. since there is a gap in people’s understanding

Introduction (cont’d…) Power cannot be reduced to the workings of language alone Power exists in different modalities: –Coercion ie. use of physical force –Manufacture of consent (via ideology)

Introduction (cont’d…) How people use language to dominate others: –Need to see to what extent language use is based on common sense assumptions –Need to see how assumptions are ideologically shaped by power relations –For resistance and change, people need to develop a critical consciousness of domination and its modalities

Introduction (cont’d…) Relevance of critical language awareness (CLA) for: –Students and teachers in higher education –Educators and teacher trainers –Specialists in vocational and professional training –Other social activists engaged in education

Introduction (cont’d…) Critical language analysis to be complemented by pamphlets, leaflets and other types of materials Socialist position of the writer/analyst: –Affected by social experiences, values and political commitments –To promote the emancipation (empowerment) of the socially oppressed

Introduction (cont’d…) About Critical Language Study (CLS) as an approach: –‘Critical’ concerns exposing hidden connections between language, power and ideology –CLS investigates social interactions to focus on language use and its hidden sources of power in social relationships

Approaches to Language Study Why CLS? Current approaches to language study have major limitations from a critical point of view Present approaches reviewed by Fairclough: –linguistics –sociolinguistics –pragmatics –cognitive psychology and AI –conversation analysis –discourse analysis –language in social theory

Linguistics The term ‘linguistics’ used in 2 broad ways: –All branches of language study –‘mainstream linguistics’ or ‘linguistics proper’ comprising phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics

Linguistics (cont’d…) Linguistics is a narrow conception of language Concerned with the study of langue (language as a system/competence) rather than parole (‘speaking/performance) Langue to be studies as a ‘synchronic’ rather than ‘diachronic’ system Asocial way of studying language in use

Sociolinguistics Influence of anthropology and sociology Studies systematic connections between changes in linguistic form and social variables (e.g. social class and relationships) Major influence of sociolinguistics on CLS

Sociolinguistics (Cont’d…) But sociolinguistics is strongly shaped by ‘positivist’ concepts from natural science Strong on ‘what?’ but weak on ‘why?’ and ‘how?’ Concept of social class is taken for granted in neutral terms Cf. Marxist view of social class and related class struggle

Sociolinguistics (Cont’d…) Neglect of social conditions which give rise sociolinguistic orders Sociolinguistics tends to legitimize social orders and underlying power relations in terms of ‘appropriate’ linguistic forms for a particular social situation

Pragmatics Interpretations of the field as: –‘the science of language use’ –Sub-discipline of linguistics that deals with language use (Anglo-American Pragmatics) AAP associated with ‘speech acts’ or using language to get things done (Austin and Searle) Language is a form of action

Pragmatics (Cont’d…) Main weakness of pragmatics is its focus on the individual i.e. the individual language user is capable of independent action and strategies to realise his/her social ‘goals’ or ‘intentions’ Most individuals are constrained by (i.e. they follow) social conventions even as some struggle against them

Pragmatics (Cont’d…) Individuals in social interactions do not have equal control over ‘ground rules’ and do not contribute equally to the interaction. ‘Cooperative interaction’ is presented as an idealized ‘prototype’ (ie. same for everyone) but is actually composed of social struggles and inequalities of power.

Pragmatics (cont’d…) Pragmatics generally focuses on single, invented utterances (ie. sentences) rather than extended discourse (whole situated stretches of language use). The notion of ‘speech acts’ become problematic as social context is not given due critical attention.

Cognitive Psychology and Artificial Intelligence CP concerns processes of comprehension (‘what is meant’) and production (‘what is said’). In CLS, comprehension does not simply mean that people ‘decode’ what they hear by matching it with similar structures stored in their long-term memory. Comprehension is the product of interactions between utterance interpretation and ‘MR’ (stored prototypes which are social in origin and are constantly modified)

CP and AI (cont’d…) CP and AI have given scant attention to how MR originate from the social contexts. The MR in people’s heads are determined by social factors and shaped by ideologies that are routinely accepted as ‘common sense’ assumptions. Such assumptions are a important way for maintaining social relations of (unequal) power.

Conversation analysis and Discourse analysis DA is seen as a new ‘cross-discipline’ formed from other existing disciplines and shares common ground with CLS. Ethnomethodologists study how people as social actors use conversation skillfully to produce and understand daily social actions. CA studies real conversation to show that it is structured systematically and participants control their participation as well as react to what others say.

CA and DA (cont’d…) Conversational structures are social structures and are (re)produced in everyday action as people interact socially. However, CA does not make explicit the connections between ‘micro’ structures of conversation and the ‘macro’ structures of society.

CA and DA (cont’d…) Conversation does not exist in a social vacuum but is subject to abstract social structures/orders. E.g. ‘Casual conversation between equals’, especially telephone conversation, is never based on equal relations of power CA answers ‘what?’ but not ‘how?’ and ‘why?’ questions.

Some Recent Social Theory Recent work in social theory has explored the role of language in how people exercise, maintain and change relations of power: –theory of ideology as a way of exercising power in modern societies – language as an (the) important ‘source’ of ideology and power

Some Recent Social Theory (cont’d…) Michel Foucault – views on development of modern forms of power Jurgen Habermas – ‘theory of communicative action’ ie. present communication practices are affected or distorted by new forms of power Such contributions must be applied in a practical way in CLS

Relationship of CLS to Approaches CLS more than complements existing approaches; it provides an entirely different perspective on language study and has the potential to transform established approaches Power determines a particular way of dividing up disciplines and maintaining these divisions (this is what ‘linguistics proper’ has done now)

Relationship of CLS to Approaches (cont’d…) Sub-disciplines of linguistics take the cue from mainstream linguistics but there are signs of resistance e.g. sociolinguistics and pragmatics CLS favours social study of language and is supported by ‘functionalist’ approaches such as Halliday’s systemic functional linguistics (SFL) rather than ‘formalist’ approaches (see Chomskyan linguistics)

Relationship of CLS to Approaches (cont’d…) Current approaches to language study that are compatible with CLS include systemic linguistics, continental pragmatics, cross- disciplinary discourse analysis Fairclough (2001) focuses on doing critical analysis of discourse samples but goes beyond current approaches by providing the required theoretical concepts and frameworks for analysis.