Selasa, 07 Januari 2020

Journal Review II


Title                 : Discourse Analysis In Social Media
Author             : Delia Oprea
International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on the Dialogue between Sciences & Arts, Religion & Education.
Publication      : 2019
Abstract          :
Texts, language, communication should always be considered in their social context. Texts do not merely passively report upon the world, but they imbue it with meaning, shape perspectives and call the world into being. The relationship between text and ideology, and between the author and reader, appears to have changed because of the opportunities of public communication that have been extended by social media applications such as Twitter, Facebook, and blogs. Is also clear that new methods are required for data collection, as content takes new forms, and forms of design, images, and data has to be integrated with language much more in online than in offline. We use the term social media to refer to “Internet-based applications that build on the ideological and technological foundations of Web 2.0”, where Web 2.0 means that “content and applications are no longer created and published by individuals, but instead are continuously modified by all users in a participatory and collaborative fashion” (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The aim of our research is to take into discussion different ways of approaching discourse analysis in this new online environment. Despite the large variety of platforms, some characteristics are common to many of them. Even if processes and structures of the public are subjects to change, the forms of discourse may be one of common points. Whilst the perspective on the system is one important aspect, another aspect is the perspective on the users who create the content.
Goals               :
To seek out new models that are required to address how the technologies themselves come to shape the nature of content and discourse.
Problems         :
“My definition of discourse genre shall be minimalist: an array of collective, pre-, extra- and intradiscursive frames, built by the elaboration-interpretation of statements” (Paveau, 2013 :7-30). Therefore, Paveau does not separate the intralinguistic manifestations from the extralinguistic constraints, as the French researcher sees an online “continuum” between the linguistic material, as the intralinguistic manifestation and the extra discursive that considers the discursive context, instead of a distinction or opposition between the two dimensions. Paveau’s viewpoint is an integrative, non-dualist or post-dualist one. Thus, the Internet is viewed as a technolinguistic ecosystem. Taking the same direction proposed by the French researcher, we attempt at distinguishing a series a discourse technolinguistic features that must be considered when they intersect the online environment
Theories           :
Discourse can be considered as an 'active relation to reality' (Fairclough, 1992, p. 41). Fairclough (2003, p.26) has delineated three features of discourse that describe its operation within social life, as 'part of the action.' These are: (a) genres (ways of acting), (b) discourses (ways of representing), (c) styles (ways of being). Discourses can be analysed by taking into consideration three steps: production, form and reception.
Consequently, Paveau (2012/2015) proposes the analysis of various aspects of the so-called “sensitivities” of online native discourses, because they require epistemological precautions and undoubtedly entail the preservation of data integrity/wholeness, impose the analysis of the subtle way in which producers and receptors (we might add) perceive the dimension of discourses in terms of public and private.
Methods          :
The working corpora in the case of online discourse analysis consider the positioning of the one analysing them against the analysed object. The way the researcher positions him-/herself against his/her study object may differ. Departing from the exterior observation, participative objectivation, even immersion, the analysing eye should nevertheless practise that discursive form, at least in what concerns the online environment. Let us explain our position: an entirely exterior analysis could not foresee, prevent or even control the interpretation of the techno-language, as long as it does not know it. Because techno-language no longer offers itself to the specialist as it did on paper, but it is written and rewritten along with the presentation, presence and “passage” through the online.
Findings          :
When it comes to social media and online environment discursive analysis in general, the working corpora wholeness is an extremely important criterion to consider. A complete perspective cannot be spoken of as long as the language composed of written and spoken words (videos, lives) is simply “extracted” from the environment it was formulated in order to finds meanings. Four techno-discursive features are worth considering, according to Marie-Anne Paveau (2012) when the analysis object is the online discourse, for instance the blog, social media, commercial, administrative or institutional websites discourse: (1) delinearization , (2) development or extension, (3) technogenericity and (4) plurisemiotics.  
Conclusion      :
In the social networks, more than in any other discursive environments, there is no statement by itself that might be extracted and analysed by itself. From this perspective, the decontextualized statement could be a theoretical and methodological nonsense, because it does not correspond to the reality of a statement produced or interpreted within the reality of the sociodigital exchanges.
References         :

Tidak ada komentar:

Posting Komentar