Bibliographie
Aristotle, translated by Dufour (Médéric), Rhétorique, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1967.
Amossy (Ruth) & Koren (Roselyne), “Argumentation et discours politique”, Mots. Les langages du politique, no 94, November 2010, pp. 13-21.
Amossy (Ruth), La Présentation de soi. Ethos et identité verbale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, “L’interrogation philosophique”, 2010.
Amossy (Ruth), L’Argumentation dans le discours, Paris, Armand Colin, 2nd ed., 2009 (2006).
Amossy (Ruth), “Ethos at the Crossroads of Disciplines: Rhetoric, Pragmatics, Sociology”, Poetics Today, no 22, Spring 2001, pp. 1-23.
Amossy (Ruth), “How to Do Things with Doxa: Toward an Analysis of Argumentation in Discourse”, Poetics Today, no 23, Fall 2002, pp. 465-487.
Amossy (Ruth), La Présentation de soi. Ethos et identité verbale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, “L’interrogation philosophique”, 2010.
Barthes (Roland), Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes, Paris, Seuil, 1975.
Blommaert (Jan), Discourse. A Critical Introduction, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, “Key Topics in Sociolinguistics”, 2005.
Bourdieu (Pierre), Language and Symbolic Power, translated by G. Raymond and M. Adamson, edited and introduced by John B. Thompson, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1991.
Charaudeau (Patrick) & Maingueneau (Dominique), Dictionnaire d’analyse du discours, Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2002.
Charaudeau (Patrick), “Réflexions pour l’analyse du discours populiste”, Mots. Les langages du politique, no 97, November 2011, pp. 101-116.
Chávez Frías (Hugo), “Una cita con el futuro. 12 de febrero de 2009”, in Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Comunicación y la Información, Las líneas de Chávez. Tomo I. Números 1 a 56. Enero 2009 - Enero 2010, 2010, Caracas, Publicaciones MCI, pp. 52-56.
Chouliaraki (Lilie) & Fairclough (Norman), Discourse in Late Modernity. Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, “Critical Discourse Analysis”, 1999.
Ducrot (Oswald), Le Dire et le dit, Paris, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1984.
EZLN, Comunicado del 12 octubre de 1994, consulted on March 15th 2013, URL: http://palabra.ezln.org.mx/comunicados/1994/1994_10_12_b.htm
Fairclough (Isabela) & Fairclough (Norman), Political Discourse Analysis. A method for Advanced Students, London and New York, Routledge, 2012.
Fairclough (Norman), “A Dialectical-Relational approach to Critical Discourse Analysis”, in Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), eds., Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London, Sage Publications, 2009 (2001) 2nd ed., « Introducing Qualitative Methods » pp. 162-186.
Fairclough (Norman), “Critical discourse analysis in practice: interpretation, explanation, and the position of the analyst”, in Fairclough (Norman), Language and Power, Harlow, Pearson Education, 2001 (1989) 2nd ed., « Social Life Series », pp. 117-139.
Fairclough (Norman), Discourse and Social Change, Cambridge and Malden, Polity, 1992.
Fairclough (Norman), Language and Power, Harlow, Pearson Education, “Social Life Series”, 2nd ed., 2001 (1989).
Fairclough (Norman), New Labour, New Language?, London and New York, Routledge, 2000.
Foucault (Michel), L’Ordre du discours, Paris, Gallimard, 1970.
Hymes (Dell), Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality . Toward an Understanding of Voice, London and Bristol, Taylor & Francis, “Critical Perspectives on Literacy and Education”, 1996.
Israel (Jonathan I.), Democratic Enlightenment. Philosophy, Revolution, and Human Right. 1750–1790, Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 2011.
Laclau (Ernesto), “Why Do Empty Signifiers Matter to Politics?”, in Laclau (Ernesto), Emancipation(s), 2007 (1996), London and New York, Verso, pp. 36-46.
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 2nd ed., Harlow, Longman, 1992 (1987), pp. 1003.
Maingueneau (Dominique), Le Discours littéraire. Paratopie et scène d’énonciation, Paris, Armand Colin, 2004.
Maingueneau (Dominique), “L’ethos”, in Id., Le Discours littéraire. Paratopie et scène d’énonciation, 2004, Paris, Armand Colin, pp. 203-221.
Maingueneau (Dominique), “L’idéologie: une notion bien embarrassante”, COnTEXTES, n°2, 2007, consulted on March 9th, 2013, URL : http://contextes.revues.org/189.
Maingueneau (Dominique), Dhondt (Reindert) & Martens (David), “Un réseau de concepts. Entretien avec Dominique Maingueneau au sujet de l’analyse du discours littéraire”, Interférences littéraires/Literaire interferencties, no 8, 2012, pp. 160-187, URL : http://www.interferenceslitteraires.be/node/162.
Meizoz (Jérôme), “Introduction”, COnTEXTES, n°1, 2006, consulted on March 9th 2013, URL : http://contextes.revues.org/83.
Oswick (Cliff) & Richards (David), “Talk in Organizations: Local Conversations, Wider Perspectives”, Culture and Organization, 10 (2), 2004, pp. 107-123.
Perelman (Chaïm), Rhétoriques, Brussels, Éditions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 1989.
Perelman (Chaïm) & Olbrechts-Tyteca (Lucie), Traité de l’argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique, Bruxelles, Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 6th ed., 2008 (1958).
Ramírez (Claudio), “Entre el ethos y la doxa: la literatura en los textos ensayísticos de Hugo Chávez”, in Castilleja (Diana), Eugenia Houvenaghel & Dagmar Vandebosch (eds.), El ensayo hispánico: cruces de géneros, síntesis de formas, Genève, Droz, “Romanica Gandensia”, 2012, pp. 119-129.
Ramírez (Claudio), América Latina en la prensa de calidad flamenca: el caso venezolano (1998-2006), unpublished Master’s thesis, KU Leuven, 2007.
Steger (Manfred B.), Globalisms. The Great Ideological Struggle of the Twenty-First Century, Landham and Plymouth, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, “Globalization”, 3rd ed., 2009 (2004).
Vanden Berghe (Kristine), “Intertextualidad y parodia en Don Durito de la Lacandona”, in Id., Narrativa de la rebelión Zapatista. Los relatos del Subcomandante Marcos, Madrid y Frankfurt am Main, Iberoamericana y Vervuert, “Nexos y diferencias”, 2005, pp. 161-193.
Vanden Berghe (Kristine), “Idéologie et critique dans les récits zapatistas du Sous-commandant Marcos”, COnTEXTES, n°2, 2007, URL: http://contextes.revues.org/208.
Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), “Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology”, in Id. (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, London, Sage Publications, “Introducing Qualitative Methods”, 2009 (2001) 2nd ed., pp. 1-33.
Wodak (Ruth), The Discourse of Politics in Action. Politics as Usual, Houndsmill and New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 (2009).
Wodak (Ruth), “What CDA is about - a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments”, in Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael) (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis. London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi, Sage Publications, “Introducing Qualitative Methods”, 2001, pp. 1-13.
Haut de page
Notes
Fairclough (Norman), Language and Power, Harlow, Pearson Education, “Social Life Series”, 2nd ed., 2001 (1989).
Wodak (Ruth), “What CDA is about - a summary of its history, important concepts and its developments”, in Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), eds., London, Thousand Oaks and New Delhi, Sage Publications, “Introducing Qualitative Methods”, 2001, p. 1.
Bourdieu (Pierre), Language and Symbolic Power, translated by G. Raymond and M. Adamson, edited and introduced by John B. Thompson, Cambridge, Polity Press, 1991.
Ducrot (Oswald), Le dire et le dit, Paris, Les Éditions de Minuit, 1984; Maingueneau (Dominique), “L’ethos”, in Id., Le discours littéraire. Paratopie et scène d’énonciation, Paris, Armand Colin, 2004, pp. 203-221; Amossy (Ruth), La présentation de soi. Ethos et identité verbale, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, “L’interrogation philosophique”, 2010.
This focus should not be understood as a rejection of the importance of the institutional position as such. For example, works of Maingueneau reformulate some elements of Bourdieu’s theory of field, e.g. “Elle [la sociologie du champ] a beau faire, elle ne peut sortir de l’opposition entre structure et contenu […] Une telle sociologie ne vise pas à articuler les structurations des « contenus », l’énonciation et l’activité de positionnement dans un champ, alors que c’est pourtant là le moteur de l’activité créatrice”, Maingueneau (Dominique), Le Discours littéraire. Paratopie et scène d’énonciation, op. cit., p. 38. For a more elaborated discussion, see Meizoz (Jérôme), “Introduction”, COnTEXTES, n°1, 2006, accessed 9 March 2013, URL: http://contextes.revues.org/83.
Globalist discourse is a discourse on globalisation promoting a neoliberal variant. See Steger (Manfred B.), Globalisms. The Great Ideological Struggle of the Twenty-First Century, Landham and Plymouth, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, “Globalization”, 3rd ed., 2009 (2004).
Fairclough (Norman), op. cit. (supra note 1), p. 167.
For an up to date overview see: Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), “Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology”, in Id., eds. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, op. cit., pp. 1-33.
Blommaert (Jan), Discourse. A Critical Introduction, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, “Key Topics in Sociolinguistics”, 2005, p. 27.
Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), art. cit. (supra note 8), p. 3.
Blommaert (Jan), op. cit., p. 24.
Oswick (Cliff) & Richards (David), “Talk in Organizations: Local Conversations, Wider Perspectives”, Culture and Organization, 10 (2), 2004, pp. 107–123, cited in Wodak (Ruth), The Discourse of Politics in Action. Politics as Usual, Houndsmill and New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2011 (2009), pp. 54.
Wodak (Ruth) & Meyer (Michael), art. cit. (supra note 8), p. 2.
Wodak (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 2), p. 1.
Blommaert (Jan), op. cit., p. 68.
Hymes (Dell), Ethnography, Linguistics, Narrative Inequality. Toward an Understanding of Voice, London and Bristol, Taylor & Francis, “Critical Perspectives on Literacy and Education”, 1996, p. 65.
Ibid., p. 70.
Aristotle, Rhétorique, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 1967, cited in Maingueneau (Dominique), op. cit. (supra note 4), p. 204 (the translation is ours).
Charaudeau (Patrick) & Maingueneau (Dominique), Dictionnaire d’analyse du discours, Paris, Éditions du Seuil, 2002, p. 239 (the translation is ours).
Ibid., p. 515 (the translation is ours).
Amossy (Ruth), “Ethos at the Crossroads of Disciplines: Rhetoric, Pragmatics, Sociology”, Poetics Today, no 22, Spring 2001, p. 1.
Maingueneau answers Amossy’s critique about his “réticence par rapport à la notion d’ethos [pré-discursif (prior ethos)]”: “Je voulais seulement dire quelque chose qui me paraît de bons sens: pour exploiter efficacement la relation ethos pré-discursif/ethos discursif on doit prendre en compte le genre de discours concerné” Maingueneau (Dominique), Dhondt (Reindert) & Martens (David), “Un réseau de concepts. Entretien avec Dominique Maingueneau au sujet de l’analyse du discours littéraire”, Interférences littéraires/Literaire interferenties, n° 8, 2012, p. 218, URL : http://www.interferenceslitteraires.be/node/162.
Amossy (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 4), p. 72 (original emphasis, the translation is ours).
Amossy (Ruth), “How to Do Things with Doxa: Toward an Analysis of Argumentation in Discourse”, Poetics Today, n° 23, Fall 2002, p. 466.
Amossy (Ruth) & Koren (Roselyne), “Argumentation et discours politique”, Mots. Les langages du politique, no 94, November 2010, p. 18 (the translation is ours).
The authors do not cite recent work of discourse analysis in the French speaking world.
Fairclough (Isabela) & Fairclough (Norman), Political Discourse Analysis. A method for Advanced Students, London and New York, Routledge, 2012, p. 242 (original emphasis).
For example, Charaudeau investigates populism using the concept of ethos, see Charaudeau (Patrick), “Réflexions pour l’analyse du discours populiste”, Mots. Les langages du politique, no 97, November 2011, pp. 101-116.
Amossy (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 4), p. 159.
Maingueneau (Dominique), op. cit. (supra note 4), p. 205 (the translation is ours).
Fairclough (Norman), Discourse and Social Change, Cambridge and Malden, Polity, 1992, pp. 62-100.
Ibid., p. 75.
Amossy (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 21), p. 8.
“On constate déjà qu’une bonne part de ce que recouvre traditionnellement la notion d’idéologie se retrouve distribué aujourd’hui sur d’autres notions plus ou moins concurrentes : ‘doxa’, ‘sens commun’, par exemple”, Maingueneau (Dominique), “L’idéologie: une notion bien embarrassante”, COnTEXTES, n°2, 2007, accessed 9 March 2013, URL : http://contextes.revues.org/189.
Perelman (Chaïm), Rhétoriques, Brussels, Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, 1989, p. 362 cited in Amossy (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 21), p. 5 (translated by Amossy, our emphasis).
Stereotypes are not limited to a negative and deformed representation of ‘the other’, e.g. racist or sexist stereotypes. Stereotypes can also be necessary pre-existing cultural schemes and ready-made images to facilitate the interpretation of reality, a cultural short-cut in order to filter an infinite stream of observations and changing settings.
Amossy (Ruth), op. cit. (supra note 24), p. 467.
“La Doxa […], c’est l’Opinion publique, l’Esprit majoritaire, le Consensus petit-burgeois, la Voix du Naturel, la Violence du Préjugé”, Barthes (Roland), Roland Barthes par Roland Barthes, Paris, Seuil, 1975, p. 51, cited in Amossy (Ruth), L’argumentation dans le discours, Paris, Armand Colin, 2nd ed., 2009 (2006), p. 101.
Amossy (Ruth), Ibid. (the translation is ours).
Blommaert (Jan), op. cit., p. 30 (our emphasis).
Amossy (Ruth) & Koren (Roselyne), op .cit., pp. 93, 158 (the translation is ours).
Laclau (Ernesto), “Why Do Empty Signifiers Matter to Politics?”, in Laclau (Ernesto), Emancipation(s), London and New York, Verso, 2007 (1996), p. 43.
There are probably as many wordings of definitions as there are dictionaries. We were inspired by the definition from the Longman dictionary because it corresponds with our view on how solidarity is articulated in discourse. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, 2nd ed., Harlow, Longman, 1992 (1987), p. 1003.
Foucault (Michel), L’Ordre du discours, Paris, Gallimard, 1970, p. 110 (the translation is ours).
Fairclough (Norman), op. cit. (supra note 31), p. 199. For further discussion about the descriptive, interpretative and/or explanatory character of discourse analysis, we refer to Fairclough (Norman), “Critical discourse analysis in practice: interpretation, explanation, and the position of the analyst”, in Fairclough (Norman), op. cit. (supra note 1), pp. 117-139; the section “2.5 Pros and Cons of CDA” in Blommaert (Jan), op. cit., pp. 31-38; and the section “The Interpretative Process: Understanding and Explanation” in Chouliaraki (Lilie) & Fairclough (Norman), Discourse in Late Modernity. Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis, Edinburgh, Edinburgh University Press, 1999, « Critical Discourse Analysis », pp. 67-69.
Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional.
EZLN, Comunicado del 12 octubre de 1994, accessed 15 March 2013, URL: http://palabra.ezln.org.mx/comunicados/1994/1994_10_12_b.htm (the translation is ours).
After the fall of the last military dictatorship in Venezuela in 1958, the social- and Christian-democrats (and a minor party that later exited the pact) agreed on the Punto Fijo Pact to share power by in practice excluding other parties.
Chávez Frías (Hugo), “Una cita con el futuro. 12 de febrero de 2009”, in Ministerio del Poder Popular para la Comunicación y la Información, Las líneas de Chávez. Tomo I. Números 1 a 56. Enero 2009 - Enero 2010, Caracas, Publicaciones MCI, 2010, p. 52 (the translation is ours).
As an example of the application of CDA to political discourse, we refer to Fairclough (Norman), New Labour, New Laguage?, London and New York, Routledge, 2000.
Comité Clandestino Revolucionario Indígena-Comandancia General.
It could be a coincidence, but even the name of the high Zapatista institution, the Clandestine Revolutionary Indigenous Committee-General Command, has an ironic ring to it combining the most uncommon “Clandestine” with the more classic and pompous “Committee” and “General Command”.
For a discussion of post-modernism in the Zapatista discourse we refer to Vanden Berghe (Kristine), “Intertextualidad y parodia en Don Durito de la Lacandona”, in Id., Narrativa de la rebelión Zapatista. Los relatos del Subcomandante Marcos, Madrid y Frankfurt am Main, Iberoamericana y Vervuert, 2005, « Nexos y diferencias », pp. 161-193. See also Vanden Berghe (Kristine), “Idéologie et critique dans les récits zapatistas du Sous-commandant Marcos”, COnTEXTES, n°2, 2007, URL: http://contextes.revues.org/208.
We refer specifically to the CTV union, the dominant union during the pre-Chávez years and an crucial element of the two-party state system. Chávez’s supporters created the UNT union to counter its influence.
In fact, several highly placed representatives of this informal coalition of opponents officially supported the far-right military coup against Chávez in 2002 by signing the “Act of Constitution of the Government of Democratic Transition and National Unity” and thus legitimising the new de facto government. Growing massive popular protests in the streets of Caracas and the decision of the majority of the Armed Forces to respect the Constitution, restored Chávez to his function after two days.
In our research we discovered that this is also the case for some media auto-categorised as progressive, see Ramírez (Claudio), América Latina en la prensa de calidad flamenca: el caso venezolano (1998-2006), unpublished Master’s thesis, KU Leuven, 2007.
A common trait in many of Chávez’s texts is an ethos based on the values of the Enlightenment, see: Ramírez (Claudio), “Entre el ethos y la doxa: la literatura en los textos ensayísticos de Hugo Chávez”, in Castilleja (Diana), Eugenia Houvenaghel & Dagmar Vandebosch, eds., El ensayo hispánico: cruces de géneros, síntesis de formas, Genève, Droz, 2012, « Romanica Gandensia », pp. 119-129.
While out of the scope of the example, the discourse of Chávez very often makes reference to the Independence revolutionary Francisco de Miranda, a radical Enlightenment thinker. About radical Enlightenment and democracy we refer to Israel (Jonathan I.), Democratic Enlightenment. Philosophy, Revolution, and Human Rights. 1750–1790, Oxford and New York, Oxford University Press, 2011, pp. 7-8.
Haut de page