LIMITS OF DISCOURSE: EXAMPLES FROM POLITICAL, ACADEMIC, AND HUMAN-AGENT INTERACTION

Josef Schmied

doi:10.5817/DI2020-2-89

LIMITS OF DISCOURSE: EXAMPLES FROM POLITICAL, ACADEMIC, AND HUMAN-AGENT INTERACTION

Vol.13,No.2(2020)

Josef Schmied

https://doi.org/10.5817/DI2020-2-89

PDF

Abstract

This contribution looks at modern discourse from two perspectives. It tries to show that the term ‘discourse’ has been expanded over the last few decades to include more phenomena and more disciplines that use it as a basis for their analyses. But it also tries to show that discourse in the sense of effective interaction has met its limits. The fundamental question is: When is discourse real discourse, i.e. more than a series of unrelated utterances and when is it coherent interactive communication? This paper does not intend to provide a new overall theoretical-methodological model, it uses examples from political discourse to demonstrate that popular discourse is often unfortunately less interactive than seems necessary, examples from academic discourse to illustrate that community conventions are being standardised more and more, and from humanoid-human discourse to argue that it is still difficult to construct agents that are recognised as discourse partners by human beings. Theoretical approaches to discuss these limits of discourse include coherence and
intentionality. They can be applied to show where lack of cohesion in discourse indicates lack of cohesion in society.

Keywords:
discourse; interaction; political discourse; academic discourse; human-agent discourse; intentionality; cohesion

References

Block, D. (2019) Post-Truth and Political Discourse. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-00497-2

Bolter, J. D. (2019) ‘Social media are ruining political discourse. The endless flow of content doesn’t need to make sense to create engagement.’ The Atlantic. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <https://tinyurl.com/yya56vwj>.

Burton-Roberts, N. (1989) The Limits to Debate: A Revised Theory of Semantic Presupposition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Cadell, C. (2018) ‘And now for something completely different: Chinese robot news readers.’ Reuters Technology News. 9 November 2018. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-tech-ai-
anchor/and-now-for-something-completely-different-chinese-robot-news-readers-idUSKCN1NE19O>.

Cayley, R. (2014b) Social media and writing style explorations in writing style. A blog about academic writing. April 2 2014. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <https://explorationsofstyle.com/2014/04/02/social-media-and-writing-style/>.

Culpeper, J. (1996) ‘Towards an anatomy of impoliteness.’ Journal of Pragmatics 25, 349-367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00014-3

Darics, E. (ed.) (2015) Digital Business Discourse. London: Palgrave Macmillan. Davies, M. (2016) Corpus of News on the Web (NOW): 10 billion words from 20 countries, updated every day. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020. <https://www.english-corpora.org/now/>.

Discourse. (n.d.) Glossary of Multimodal Terms. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <https://multimodalityglossary.wordpress.com/discourse/>.

Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2009) Analysing Genre: The Colony Text of UNESCO Resolutions. Brno: Masaryk University.

Finn, A. N., Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., Elledge, N., Jernberg, K. A. and Larson, L. M. (2009) ‘A meta-analytical review of teacher credibility and its associations with teacher behaviors and student outcomes.’ Communication Education 58, 516-537. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520903131154

Gee, J. ([2009] 2015) Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses. 5 th ed. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315722511

Grice, P. (1991 [1989]) Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman. Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiesen, C. (1999) Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition. London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. (2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. 4 th ed. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771

Hardaker, C. (2017) ‘Flaming and trolling.’ In: Hoffmann, C.R. and Bublitz, W. (eds) Pragmatics of Social Media. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 493-522. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110431070-018

Hasan, R. (1984) ‘Coherence and cohesive harmony.’ In: Flood, J. (ed.) Understanding Reading Comprehension: Cognition, Language, and the Structure of Prose. Newark, DE: International Reading Association. 181-219.

Herring, S. C. (ed.) (1996) Computer-Mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social and Cross-Cultural Perspectives. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.39

Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L. and Kelley, H. H. (1953) Communication and Persuasion: Psychological Studies of Opinion Change. New Haven, CT, US: Yale University Press.

Lee, D. Y. W. and Swales, J. (2006) ‘A corpus-based EAP course for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available specialised corpora to self-compiled corpora.’ English for Specific Purposes 25(1), 56-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.010

Li, E., Lui, P. and Fung, P. (2019) Systemic Functional Political Discourse Analysis: A Text-based Study. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429433542

Jankovic, M. and Ludwig, K. (eds) (2018) The Routledge Handbook of Collective Intentionality. London: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315768571

Jucker, A. H. and Taavitsainen, I. (2000) ‘Diachronic speech acts: Insults from flyting to flaming.’ Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1), 67-95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.1.1.07juc

Kress, G. (2012) ‘Multimodal discourse analysis.’ In: Gee, J. P. and Handford, M. (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Discourse Analysis. London: Routledge. 35-50.

Makerspace, T. (2017) ‘Calling all robot bachelors: Sophia the robot might want to start a family’. 28 November 2017. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <http://towsonmakerspace.blogspot.com/2017/11/calling-all-robot-bachelors-sophia.html>.

Opeibi, T. (2018) ‘Gaining political capital through social media: A study of Akinwunmi Ambode’s Twitter campaigns during the 2015 elections in Nigeria.’ In: Opeibi, T. and Schmied, J. (eds) From the Virtual Sphere to Physical Space: Exploring Language Use in Nigerian Democracy (REAL Studies 13). Göttingen: Cuvillier, 1-29.

Pickering, M. J. and Traxler, M. J. (1998) ‘Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study.’ Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(4), 940-961. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.24.4.940

Posner, R. (1993) ‘Believing, causing, intending: The basis for a hierarchy of sign concepts in the reconstruction of communication.’ In: Jorna, R. J., van Heusden, B. and Posner, R. Signs, Search, and Communication: Semiotic Aspects of Artificial Intelligence. Berlin: De Gruyter. 215-270. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110871579.215

Renkema, J. and Schubert, C. (2018) Introduction to Discourse Studies. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/z.219

Rutherford, A. T., Demberg, V. and Xue, N. (2016) ‘Neural network models for implicit discourse relation classification in English and Chinese without surface features.’ Retrieved on 02 October 2020. <https://arxiv.org/abs/1606.01990>.

Roberts, L. and Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2013) ‘Using eye-tracking to investigate topics in L2 acquisition and L2 processing.’ Studies in Second Language Acquisition 35(2), 213-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263112000861

Schmied, J. (2012) ‘Social digital discourse: New challenges for corpus and sociolinguistics.’ Topics in Linguistics: Approaches to Text and Discourse Analysis 10, 43-56.

Schmied, J. (2015) ‘Academic writing in English in comparison: Linkers and adverbs in the ChemCorpus and comparable Data-bases.’ In: Plo, R. and Pérez-Llantanda, C. (eds) English as a Scientific and Research Language in Europe. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, 159-184.

Schmied, J. (2017) ‘Linguistic Approaches to Credibility in Academic and Media Texts.’ In: J. Schmied and I. van der Bom (eds) Working with Media Texts: Deconstructing and Constructing Crises in Europe. Göttingen: Cuvillier, 1-16.

Schmied, J. (2018) ‘Web discourses in Nigeria’s democracy: How new Digital Humanities methodologies can be used to follow national language practices.’ In: Opeibi, T. and Schmied, J. From the Virtual Sphere to Physical Space: Exploring Language Use in Nigerian Democracy (REAL Studies 13). Göttingen: Cuvillier. 31-41.

Schmied, J., Hoffmann, M. and Albrecht, S. (fc.) ’Linguistic Credibility as a key issue in the communication between humans and humanoids in a Hybrid Society.’

Seabrook, J. (2019) ‘The next word. Where will predictive text take us?’ The New Yorker. 14 October 2019. Online document. Retrieved on 02 October 2020 <https://tinyurl.com/y2g5nbeu>.

Searle, J. (1983) Intentionality. An Essay in the Philosophy of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173452

Sperber, D. and Wilson, D. (1995) Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

Stalnaker, R. C. (1999) Context and Content. Essays on Intentionality in Speech and Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stolk, A., Noordzij, M. L., Verhagen, L., Volman, I., Schoffelen, J. M., Oostenveld, R., Hagoort, P. and Toni, I. (2014) ‘Cerebral coherence between communicators marks the emergence of meaning.’ Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(51), 18183-18188. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1414886111

Romero-Trillo, J. (ed.) (2016) Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2016: Global Implications for Society and Education in the Networked Age. Berlin: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-41733-2

Unger, C. (2006) Genre, Relevance and Global Coherence. The Pragmatics of Discourse Type. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230288201

Metrics