A modern history of written discourse analysis

Robert B. Kaplan, William P Grabe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The term discourse analysis has been used interchangeably in two separate contexts - spoken discourse (i.e., multiple-source dialogic) and written discourse (i.e., single-source monologic). Such a distinction, however, oversimplifies the situation; while there are obvious overlaps between the two, to some extent each has evolved in its own direction. Written discourse analysis, the subject of our discussion, is obviously closely connected with work in literacy, but it implicates a great heterogeneity of topics and approaches, including at least some from psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Discourse analysis, in the sense in which we are using it, emerged in the early 1970s. A modern history of written discourse analysis is perhaps best covered within a 40-50-year time span. In the course of that time, a number of new and emerging disciplines and research fields have contributed to systematic analyses of the linguistic features and patterns occurring in written texts. At the same time, other continuing disciplines have provided contributions that have been important and are ongoing. It should be fairly evident that any attempt to cover such a broad spectrum of views and disciplines would not be appropriate in a single article. We therefore intend to limit the scope of this paper to analyses of written discourse that explore the actual structuring of the text via some consistent framework. Our goal is to highlight and describe historically the various efforts to find the structures and linguistic patterns in texts that contribute to how they are understood, interpreted, and used. It seems to us that, in order to comprehend what has happened in the context of L2 writing research, it is necessary to understand the extensive work that has been done in discourse analysis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)191-223
Number of pages33
JournalJournal of Second Language Writing
Volume11
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 2002

Fingerprint

discourse analysis
history
discourse
linguistics
psycholinguistics
sociolinguistics
field research
literacy
Written Discourse
Discourse Analysis
Modern History
time

Keywords

  • Cognitive models
  • Composition studies
  • Contrastive rhetoric
  • Discourse analysis
  • English studies
  • Hermeneutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Education
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

A modern history of written discourse analysis. / Kaplan, Robert B.; Grabe, William P.

In: Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol. 11, No. 3, 08.2002, p. 191-223.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ca2d6c2c5e044a84a859062ae7e26c3c,
title = "A modern history of written discourse analysis",
abstract = "The term discourse analysis has been used interchangeably in two separate contexts - spoken discourse (i.e., multiple-source dialogic) and written discourse (i.e., single-source monologic). Such a distinction, however, oversimplifies the situation; while there are obvious overlaps between the two, to some extent each has evolved in its own direction. Written discourse analysis, the subject of our discussion, is obviously closely connected with work in literacy, but it implicates a great heterogeneity of topics and approaches, including at least some from psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Discourse analysis, in the sense in which we are using it, emerged in the early 1970s. A modern history of written discourse analysis is perhaps best covered within a 40-50-year time span. In the course of that time, a number of new and emerging disciplines and research fields have contributed to systematic analyses of the linguistic features and patterns occurring in written texts. At the same time, other continuing disciplines have provided contributions that have been important and are ongoing. It should be fairly evident that any attempt to cover such a broad spectrum of views and disciplines would not be appropriate in a single article. We therefore intend to limit the scope of this paper to analyses of written discourse that explore the actual structuring of the text via some consistent framework. Our goal is to highlight and describe historically the various efforts to find the structures and linguistic patterns in texts that contribute to how they are understood, interpreted, and used. It seems to us that, in order to comprehend what has happened in the context of L2 writing research, it is necessary to understand the extensive work that has been done in discourse analysis.",
keywords = "Cognitive models, Composition studies, Contrastive rhetoric, Discourse analysis, English studies, Hermeneutics",
author = "Kaplan, {Robert B.} and Grabe, {William P}",
year = "2002",
month = "8",
doi = "10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00085-1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "11",
pages = "191--223",
journal = "Journal of Second Language Writing",
issn = "1060-3743",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A modern history of written discourse analysis

AU - Kaplan, Robert B.

AU - Grabe, William P

PY - 2002/8

Y1 - 2002/8

N2 - The term discourse analysis has been used interchangeably in two separate contexts - spoken discourse (i.e., multiple-source dialogic) and written discourse (i.e., single-source monologic). Such a distinction, however, oversimplifies the situation; while there are obvious overlaps between the two, to some extent each has evolved in its own direction. Written discourse analysis, the subject of our discussion, is obviously closely connected with work in literacy, but it implicates a great heterogeneity of topics and approaches, including at least some from psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Discourse analysis, in the sense in which we are using it, emerged in the early 1970s. A modern history of written discourse analysis is perhaps best covered within a 40-50-year time span. In the course of that time, a number of new and emerging disciplines and research fields have contributed to systematic analyses of the linguistic features and patterns occurring in written texts. At the same time, other continuing disciplines have provided contributions that have been important and are ongoing. It should be fairly evident that any attempt to cover such a broad spectrum of views and disciplines would not be appropriate in a single article. We therefore intend to limit the scope of this paper to analyses of written discourse that explore the actual structuring of the text via some consistent framework. Our goal is to highlight and describe historically the various efforts to find the structures and linguistic patterns in texts that contribute to how they are understood, interpreted, and used. It seems to us that, in order to comprehend what has happened in the context of L2 writing research, it is necessary to understand the extensive work that has been done in discourse analysis.

AB - The term discourse analysis has been used interchangeably in two separate contexts - spoken discourse (i.e., multiple-source dialogic) and written discourse (i.e., single-source monologic). Such a distinction, however, oversimplifies the situation; while there are obvious overlaps between the two, to some extent each has evolved in its own direction. Written discourse analysis, the subject of our discussion, is obviously closely connected with work in literacy, but it implicates a great heterogeneity of topics and approaches, including at least some from psycholinguistics and sociolinguistics. Discourse analysis, in the sense in which we are using it, emerged in the early 1970s. A modern history of written discourse analysis is perhaps best covered within a 40-50-year time span. In the course of that time, a number of new and emerging disciplines and research fields have contributed to systematic analyses of the linguistic features and patterns occurring in written texts. At the same time, other continuing disciplines have provided contributions that have been important and are ongoing. It should be fairly evident that any attempt to cover such a broad spectrum of views and disciplines would not be appropriate in a single article. We therefore intend to limit the scope of this paper to analyses of written discourse that explore the actual structuring of the text via some consistent framework. Our goal is to highlight and describe historically the various efforts to find the structures and linguistic patterns in texts that contribute to how they are understood, interpreted, and used. It seems to us that, in order to comprehend what has happened in the context of L2 writing research, it is necessary to understand the extensive work that has been done in discourse analysis.

KW - Cognitive models

KW - Composition studies

KW - Contrastive rhetoric

KW - Discourse analysis

KW - English studies

KW - Hermeneutics

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0346165058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0346165058&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00085-1

DO - 10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00085-1

M3 - Article

VL - 11

SP - 191

EP - 223

JO - Journal of Second Language Writing

JF - Journal of Second Language Writing

SN - 1060-3743

IS - 3

ER -