Abstract
Discourse analysis, as Murcia and Olshtain (2000) assume, is a vast study of language in use that extends beyond sentence level, and it involves a more cognitive and social perspective on language use and communication exchanges. Holding a wide range of phenomena about language with society, culture and thought, discourse analysis contains various approaches: speech act, pragmatics, conversation analysis, variation analysis, and critical discourse analysis . Each approach works in its different domain to discourse. For one dimension, it shares the same assumptions or general problems in discourse analysis with the other approaches: for instance, the explanation on how we organize language into units beyond sentence boundaries, or how language is used to convey information about the world, ourselves and human relationships (Schiffrin 1994: viii). For other dimensions, each approach holds its distinctive characteristics contributing to the vastness of discourse analysis. This paper will mainly discuss two approaches to discourse analysis- conversation analysis and speech act theory - and will attempt to point out some similarities as well as contrasting features between the two approaches, followed by a short reflection on their strengths and weaknesses in the essence of each approach. The organizational and discourse features in the exchanges among three teachers at the College of Finance and Customs in Vietnam will be analysed in terms of conversation analysis and speech act theory.
Highlights
To begin with, brief definition of the two approaches will be stated as starting point for the whole discussion
Conversation analysis approach to discourse analysis grew from the work of Harvey Sacks, Gail Jefferson and Emanuel Schegloff in the early 1960s
Two philosophers of language- John Austin and John Searle developed Speech Act Theory in the 1950s and 1960s. This approach to discourse looks at how meaning and actions or functions are performed through language (Schiffrin 1994)
Summary
Brief definition of the two approaches will be stated as starting point for the whole discussion. The approach looks at the analysis of natural conversations in order to discover what the linguistic characteristics of conversations are, and how conversations are used in ordinary life (Longman dictionary of Language teaching and Applied linguistics 1992). It emphasizes on the basic forms of everyday spoken interactions in which people exchange information and maintain social relations such as casual conversations, narratives, interviews, interactions at workplace or in classroom, service encounters and so forth ( Paltrige 2000:83). According to Paltridge, “Critical discourse analysis explores the connection between the use of language and the social and political contexts in which it occurs.”
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
