This paper examines discourse analysis not as a formalized methodology but as an epistemological orientation that challenges the foundational assumptions of both quantitative and qualitative research. It traces the historical development of linguistic theory as applied to the humanities and social sciences, illustrating how discourse shapes worldviews through a case study of early modern witchcraft beliefs. The paper also distinguishes discourse analysis from conversation analysis, a more formalized offshoot that applies structured methods to natural conversation. Together, these approaches offer researchers a powerful lens for understanding how language constructs social reality across different historical and cultural contexts.
It is difficult to provide a single definition of discourse analysis in reference to its use as a research tool. Rather than constituting a formalized methodology, it is better understood as a mind-set or epistemological approach. In this sense, discourse analysis is neither a qualitative nor a quantitative research method, but a manner of questioning the basic assumptions that underlie both. It does not provide a tangible answer to problems based on scientific research; instead, it enables access to the ontological and epistemological assumptions behind a project, a statement, a method of research, or — to provide an example from the field of Library and Information Science — a system of classification (Palmquis). Furthermore, it challenges the assumptions that the scientific method places upon research. Generally, this approach questions the entire essence of the research problem itself and the inherent assumptions it makes.
Looking at history through the lens of language is a relatively new phenomenon. Linguistic theories have penetrated the humanities and social sciences in recent decades and offer an interdisciplinary alternative to historical inquiry (Boettcher). The attractiveness of this approach is fairly clear, though there is a wide array of possible applications. No matter what one says to describe an experience, or how another responds to that account, our statements are inexorably bound up in discourses (Boettcher). There is some debate about the level of control that an individual has over discourse, yet discourse provides many insights into the social practices of any given time period. What is included — or excluded — from the discourse can reveal a great deal about society as well as individual perceptions (Clark).
From this perspective, the argument is made that conflicts within discourse should be "sensed and not confronted," as it is easy to be anachronistic when looking for incoherencies in language. Thus, the conceptual strategies associated with opposition and inversion that attempt to explain demonology and its development are grounded in discourse and reflect the incoherence and the transcendent from which later discourse emerges (Clark). Although it is natural to view historical discourse through a skeptical lens inherent in the modern perspective, it is important to recognize that many intellectuals throughout history viewed contemporary events as truth based on their own experience. Studying subjects such as the spread of witchcraft through this lens is particularly illuminating, precisely because it is now understood that witchcraft was a product of the imagination.
The history of witchcraft beliefs provides a compelling example of how discourse shapes worldview. It is difficult to imagine the historical perspectives that prevailed among populations exposed to discourse promoting ideas of witchcraft and sorcery. From a modern standpoint, we automatically assume that belief in witches is an inherently false proposition. However, those living within earlier historical frameworks undoubtedly approached the witch from an entirely different epistemology and regarded witches as a real, tangible force to be feared. As a result, much of the scholarship dedicated to studying witchcraft operates under assumptions that reflect the researcher's own era. Yet it must be acknowledged that there were those at the time who believed in real witches and real sabbats, feared them, and wanted something harsh done with them (Clark).
Discourse analysis helps alleviate the modern bias that assumes an external, fixed reality, and instead applies linguistic theory to better understand how discourse shaped various worldviews. The narrative that prevails in any society illuminates the range of accepted, conventional responses to a given event — particularly through intentional transgressions against it (Boettcher). One illustrative example is provided by Pierre de Lancre, who describes the ceremonies of witches (Clark, 1999, p. 14). Everything he describes about the practice of witchcraft is presented as essentially backwards — the exact opposite of the accepted social customs of the day. Those who did not conform to socially accepted norms ran the risk of being labeled a witch. It is therefore easy to see how the fear of witchcraft reinforced and tightened the social norms that were prevalent in cultural transmission.
"Introduces conversation analysis as a formalized offshoot"
This approach is a more formalized version of discourse analysis that incorporates more of the scientific method in determining how discourse can foster a medium that allows for the transmission of ideas and culture.
Boettcher, S. "The Linguistic Turn." Writing Early Modern History. N.d.
Clark, S. Thinking with Demons. London: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Lingual Links. "What is conversation analysis?" N.d. Lingual Links. Online. 29 December 2013.
Palmquis, U. "Discourse Analysis." N.d. [University]. Online. 29 December 2013.
You’re 91% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 1 section.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.