Theories On Discourse Ideology English Language Essay

Theories On treat political orientation English delivery EssayINTRODUCTIONLanguage, that makes us the Crown of Creatures, em military groups us with an expressive medium which we exploit to communicate, understand, interpret, negate, acknow guidege, appreciate, influence, persuade, dominate, control, and so forth Metaphoric on the wholey speaking, style helps us to c arss and comfort our feelings, excite and thrill our spirit, rattle our nerves, kill our desire, and so on. Language is a variegated phenomenon. It can emotionally move and affect us as officefully as physical body processs. This is the source of language.1.1 What is Discourse?The term hold forth has been derived from French worddiscours pisseding talk. In linguistics, discourse is a sequence of utterances. Grammarians define discourse as large pieces of speech and writing stretches of language longer than a sentence.Language is used to mean well-nighthing and to dosomething, and this meaning and doingis determi ned by the context of its usage. As discourse is dialogic in nature, the things which make it different from ordinary language use atomic number 18 context, creation, answer and interpretation. It should non be confused with either of the Chomskys or Saussures categories. It is neitherperformance or parolewhich is concerned with language in its actual utterances, norcompetence or languewhere language is a code system and a system of communicative conventions. Although it contains both(prenominal) the elements, it goes beyond the distinction ofperformance or paroleandcompetence or langueit is the study of language use. If language is speech act and br former(a)wisely behavior, discourse is a form of neighborly practice.Foucault defines discourse as paths of constituting knowledge, together with the tender practices, forms of subjectivity and power relations which inhere in such knowledges and relations between them. Discourses are more than ways of thinking and producing meani ng. They constitute the nature of the body, unconscious(p) and conscious mind and emotional life of the subjects they seek to govern. (Weedon, 1987) a form of power that circulates in the hearty field and can attach to strategies of subordination as well as those of resistance. (Diamond Quinby, 1988)In other words, discourse is a string of utterances concerned with the takings of meaning. Discourse is a socially readyd way of speaking. accord to Foucault, discourse constructs the topic. It governs what can and cannot be said to the highest degree the topic.Apart from governing the topic, it is also used to influence passel to change ideas into practice (be it personal or others ideas), and to regulate the conduct of others. As discourse is concerned with the production of meaning, the utterances have a relation to super C sense assumptions. Cultural hegemony is beared through vernacular sense assumptions which become universal ideologies through language or in other word s discourse.Language exerts hidden power, corresponding a moon on the tides. (Rita Mae Brown,Starting from Scratch, 1998)1.2 What is political orientation?Ideologies are those ideas, values, attitudes, and (general or cultural) ways of thinking that shape our article of faith systems and mind sets most what is /isnt correct, and how it must be. Ideologies, be they religious or governmental or social, maintain power structures and social hierarchies and watch dominant and prevalent in the society through rhetorical discourse or hidden power in discourse.The main purpose of political orientation is not lonesome(prenominal) to change the outliveing structures, moreover also to maintain already existing set of ideals. Ideas, beliefs, and attitudes which maintain status quo become dominant or prevalent ideologies of the society. These ideologies are so powerful that they ignore and sideline those ideas which are against its very existence through a normative thought process and politics of the language.Ideologies when become shared experiences start making sense. People start making sense of their lives while observing them. In other words, they are no more false beliefs and ideas, rather a true and lived experience.THEORIES ON DISCOURSE IDEOLOGYThe social theory has contributed in some(prenominal) ways to explore the role of language in exercising, maintaining and changing power. Firstly, the work in the theory of political orientation talks about political theory as a mechanism of power without using coercive means and language as a locus of political theory which is significant in exercising power. Secondly, Michel Foucaults work ascribes rally role to discourse in the development of power structures of forms. Thirdly, Jurgen Habermas theory of communicative action which challenges Marxist focus on economics or alienated labor- is considered as the sole determining factor of oppression. He argues that key to liberation is rather to be found in l anguage and communication between people.2.1 Marx and ideologyKarl Max, a social thinker of 19thcentury, talked of ideology in terms of an instrument of social production. He gave economic base and superstructure model of society, where base denotes the relation of production and superstructure denotes the dominant ideology. Base shapes the superstructure of any society, while the superstructure maintains and legitimates the base.According to Marx, bourgeoisie create and reinforce particular ways of thinking, in other words, particular ideology which in turn reinforce the structure of the society, thus maintaining status quo and existing hierarchies of status and power.Fig. 1 Marxs Base Superstructure Model of SocietyAccording to Karl Marx, social ideologies not only causestatus quo or hegemonyin the society, but also a conditioning where false consciousness created by the ruling class is on the noseified. This conditioning makes us think that the way our society operates is for t he best, and lower class justifies its own lower position in society. Michel Foucault in The Order of DiscourseIn The Order of Discourse,Foucault argues that the discourse is controlled by genuine functions, actions and rules. In particular, certain topics are prohibited and who speaks is limited. Reason is valued and madness is ignored. It is also controlled by what we choose to comment on and by the exit to truth.The highest truth no longer resided in what discourse was or did, but in what is said a day came when truth was displaced by from the ritualized, efficacious, and just act of enunciation, towards the utterance itself, its meaning, its form, its object, its relation to its reference. (1462)In every society, the production of discourse is at once controlled, selected, organized and redistributed by a certain event of procedures whose role is to ward off its powers and dangers, to gain mastery over its chance events, to evade its ponderous, formidable materiality (p.210). Foucault also talks about procedures of exclusion and procedures of inclusion. He states that prohibition of including or discussing certain topics very soon reveal discourses link with desire and with power (p.211).At another place he says that discourse is not simply that which translates struggles or systems of domination, but is the thing for which and by which there is struggle discourse is the power which is to be seized (p.211).In Weedons (1987) in interpretation of Foucault isA energetic of control between discourses and the subjects, constituted by discourses, who are their agents. Power is exercised within discourses in the ways in which they constitute and govern individualistic subjects.Foucaults focus is upon questions of how some discourses have shaped and created meaning systems that have gained the status and currency of truth, and dominate how we define and organize both ourselves and our social world, whilst other alternative discourses are marginalised and subju gated, to that extent potentially offer sites where hegemonic practices can be contested, challenged and resisted.Foucault developed the concept of the tangential field as part of his attempt to understand the relationship between language, social institutions, subjectivity and power. Discursive fields, such as the law or the family, contain a number of competing and contradictory discourses with varying degrees of power to acquaint meaning to and organize social institutions and processes. They also offer a range of modes of subjectivity (Weedon, 1987). It follows then that,if relations of power are dispersed and fragmented throughout the social field, so must resistance to power be (Diamond Quinby, 1988).Foucault argues though, inThe Order of Discourse, that the pull up stakes to truth is the major system of exclusion that forges discourse and which tends to exert a come apart of pressure and something like a power of constraint on other discourses, and goes on further to as k the question what is at stake in the will to truth, in the will to utter this true discourse, if not desire and power? (1970, cited in Shapiro 1984, p. 113-4).Thus, there are both discourses that constrain the production of knowledge, dissent and dissimilitude and some that enable new knowledges and difference(s). The questions that arise within this good example, are to do with how some discourses maintain their authority, how some voices get heard whilst others are silenced, who benefits and how that is, questions addressing issues of power/ dominance/ disempowerment.2.3 Louis Althussers view of IdeologyLouis Althusser builds on the work of Jacques Lacan to understand the way ideology functions in society. He thus moves away from the earlier Marxist understanding of ideology. In the earlier model, ideology was believed to create what was termed false consciousness, a false understanding of the way the world functioned (for example, the suppression of the fact that the produc ts we purchase on the open mart are, in fact, the result of the exploitation of laborers).Althusser revised Marxs view of ideology, which he described asthought as an imaginary construction whose status is exactly like the theoretical status of the dream among writers before Freud.He saw compassionate individuals being constituted assubjectsthroughideology. Consciousness and agency are experienced, but are the products of ideology speaking through the subject. Above all, ideology is an imaginary construction that represents the real world. However, it is so real to us that we never question it.Althusser posits a series of hypotheses that he explores to clarify his understanding of ideologyIdeology represents the imaginary relationship of individuals to their real conditions of existence (Lenin109).The traditional way of thinking of ideology led Marxists to show how ideologies are false by pointing to the real world hidden by ideology (for example, the real economic base for ideolog y). According to Althusser, by contrast, ideology does not reflect the real world but represents the imaginaryrelationship of individuals to the real world the thing ideology (mis)represents is itself already at one terminate from the real. In this, Althusser follows the Lacanian understanding of theimaginary order, which is itself at one step removed from the LacanianReal. In other words, we are perpetually within ideology because of our reliance on language to establish our reality different ideologies are but different representations of our social andimaginaryreality not a representation of theRealitself.Ideology has a material existence (Lenin112).Althusser contends that ideology has a material existence because an ideology always exists in an apparatus, and its practice, or practices (Lenin112). Ideology always manifests itself through actions, which are inserted into practices (Lenin114), for example, rituals, conventional behavior, and so on. It is our performance of our r elation to others and to social institutions that continually instantiates us as subjects.Judith Butlers understanding of performativitycould be said to be strongly influenced by this way of thinking about ideology.all ideology hails or interpellates concrete individuals as concrete subjects (Lenin115).According to Althusser, the main purpose of ideology is in constituting concrete individuals as subjects (Lenin116). So pervasive is ideology in its constitution of subjects that it forms our very reality and thus appears to us as true or obvious. Althusser gives the example of the hello on a street the rituals of ideological recognition guarantee for us that we are indeed concrete, individual, distinguishable and (naturally) irreplaceable subjects (Lenin117). Through interpellation, individuals are turned into subjects (which are always ideological).Althussers example is the hail from a police officer Hey, you there (Lenin118) Assuming that the theoretical scene I have imagined tak es place in the street, the hailed individual will turn round. By this mere one-hundred-and-eighty-degree physical conversion, he becomes asubject (Lenin118). The very fact that we do not recognize this interaction as ideological speaks to the power of ideologywhat thus seems to take place outside ideology (to be precise, in the street), in reality takes place in ideology . That is why those who are in ideology believe themselves by definition outside ideology one of the effects of ideology is the practicaldenegationof the ideological character of ideology by ideology ideology never says, I am ideological. (Lenin118)individuals are always-already subjects (Lenin119).Although he presents his example of interpellation in a temporal form (I am interpellated and thus I become a subject, I enter ideology), Althusser makes it clear that the becoming-subject happens even before we are born. This proposition might seem paradoxical (Lenin119), Althusser admits nevertheless, That an individua l is always-already a subject, even before he is born, is the plain reality, accessible to everyone and not a paradox at all (Lenin119). Even before the child is born, it is certain in advance that it will bear its Fathers Name, and will therefore have an identity and be irreplaceable. Before its birth, the child is therefore always-already a subject, appointed as a subject in and by the specific familial ideological configuration in which it is expected once it has been conceived (Lenin119). Althusser thus once again invokes Lacans ideas, in this case Lacans understanding of the Name-of-the-Father.Most subjects accept their ideological self-constitution as reality or nature and thus rarely run afoul of the repressive domain apparatus, which is designed to punish anyone who rejects the dominant ideology.Hegemonyis thus reliant less on such repressive enunciate apparatuses as the police than it is on those Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) by which ideology is inculcated in all subjects. (See the next module for an explanation of ISAs.) As Althusser puts it, the individualis interpellated as a (free) subject in order that he shall submit freely to the commandments of the Subject, i.e. in order that he shall (freely) accept his subjection, i.e. in order that he shall make the gestures and actions of his subjection all by himself (Lenin123).Louis Althussers ISAAlthusser proposed a mercenary(a) conception of ideology, which made use of a special type of discourse the lacunar discourse. A number of propositions, which are never untrue, suggest a number of other propositions, which are true. In this way, the essence of the lacunar discourse is what is not told (but is suggested).For Althusser, beliefs and ideas are the products of social practices, not the reverse. What is ultimately important for Althusser are not the subjective beliefs held in the minds of human individuals, but rather the material institutions, rituals and discourses that produce these bel iefs.Althusser identified theIdeological State Apparatus(ISA) as the method by which organizations propagate ideology primarily. Violence or threat of violence is secondary. ISAs for Althusser were religious, educational, family, cultural institutions. This is in contrast to theRepressive State Apparatus(RSA), by which compliance can be forced and includes the army, police, government, prisons. Force or threat of force is primary, while ideology is secondary. For example, arrest imprisonment, corporal punishment, etc.2.4 Discourse as Social PracticeSocial relations of power and domination are sustained through ideology. To Fairclough, ideologies construct realities which give meaning to discursive practices. Through power relations implicit in orders of discourse, discourse becomes invested ideologically. Hence the discursive practices, loaded with ideologies not only produce, but also reproduce or transform social identities, social relations and systems of knowledge and belief.2.4 .1 Fairclough and IdeologyThere are two ways of exercising power through coercion and through consent. According to Fairclough, Ideology is the key mechanism of rule by consent, and discourse is a favored vehicle of ideology. It functions to establish, sustain or change domination or power relations in the society. For Fairclough, ideologies are constructions of reality which are built into motley dimensions of the forms and meanings of discursive practices. Through power relations implicit in orders of discourse, discourse becomes invested ideologically. Through being ideologically invested, discourse is a mode of producing, reproducing or transforming social identities, social relations, and systems of knowledge and belief.Fairclough (1992) makes three claims about ideology, based in part on the French Marxist philosopher, AlthusserIdeology has a material basis in the social practices of institutions. As a form of social practice, discourse practices are material forms of ideolog y.Ideology interpellates subjects. It works by constituting people as subjects within the framework of ideology. Patriarchal ideology interpellates individuals as more powerful men or less powerful women. Racist ideology interpellates groups as ourselves and the Other (see Hall 1997 The Spectacle of the Other).Ideology operates through powerful ideological state apparatuses. Althusser contrasts what he terms the repressive agencies of the police, the military, prisons and the courts, with the ideological state apparatuses of the mass media, education and popular culture. In Faircloughs theory, all of these give rise to institutional and societal orders of discourse (the societal order of discourse is a condensation of the institutional orders of discourse).2.4.2 Fairclough and DiscourseDiscourse involves two kinds of social conditionssocial conditions of production and social conditions of interpretation.These social conditions are naturalized through the ideological functioning of the practices of dominant class. Fairclough describes underlying conventions of discourse which in fact determines discourse in terms of what Foucault refers to as orders of discourse. To Fairclough, these orders of discourse embody particular ideologies.Fairclough refers to the three dimensions of discourse. They are discursive practice (discourse practice), social practice (socio-cultural practice), and text.Social practiceincludes discourse which not only reflects reality, but also effect social structures which runaway active role in social change. Different subject positions determine different discoursal rights and obligations of individuals.Discourse practicerefers to the production and reception of messages. Participants indulged in discourse construct their social identities and relations by knowing how to act in certain situations. For this participants draw on what Fairclough refers to as members resources (MR). This include internalized knowledge of social structure a nd social practices knowledge about production and interpretation of discourse types and detailed knowledge of particular linguistics and textual structuring devices. textual matteris the record of a communicative event. It can be written, spoken or visual. While analyzing text in terms of ideologies embedded in it, two things are very important firstly, representation of ideological facts and beliefs and construction of participant identities (writer and reader), and secondly, textual function which frames the message.3.How Ideologies are Embedded in LanguageLanguage produces, maintains and changes social relations of power. It also contributes to the domination of some people by others. Power is exercised through language in conversations and other forms of text or talk. When people interact linguistically, the conventional talk embodies common sense assumptions where power structures are treated as legitimized. According to Fairclough, these assumptions are ideologies which are c losely linked to power and language. Power relations determine the conventional ideological assumptions, which in turn legitimize existing social relations and unequal power.Language, a social behavior, relies on common sense assumptions.The exercise of power in modern society is increasingly achieved through ideology, and more particularly through the ideological working of the language. (Fairclough, 1989) still he says, Ideology is the prime means of manufacturing consent.3.1 Memory ResourcesIdeological assumptions are mere common senseassumptions, and contribute to sustain existing power relations. To Fairclough, these common sense assumptions are memory resources (MR). when sender encodes a message, the receiver not only decodes it, but also interpret it by comparing and contrasting features of utterances with representations stored in long term memory. Fairclough refers to these prototypes as member resources grammatical forms, structures, shapes of words, sequence of events, s ystems of meaning, sounds, etc. Interaction between interpreted utterance and MR results in comprehension.According to Fairclough, understanding how language, power, and ideology are interrelated requires attention to the processes of production and comprehension because MR/ representations/ prototypes are socially determined and ideologically shaped. They are so automatic, natural, legitimate and common sense assumptions that they remain in disguise.The sociologist Harold Garfinkel, describes the familiar common sense world of everyday life as a world which is built entirely upon assumptions and expectations which control both the action of members of society and their interpretation of the action of others. Such assumptions and expectations are implicit, back grounded, taken for granted, not things that people are consciously aware of and rarely explicit. Effectiveness of ideology depends to a considerable degree on it being merged with this common sense background to discourse an d other forms of social action.3.2 Language Ideologies in TextLanguage ideologies are not just ways of explaining language and language use for economic reasons, but are the language ideas of the dominant groups in society. They whitethorn equally be inter-changed with discourses about language. Ideologies are not untrue indeed, like stereotypes, there may be a degree of truth in them.Ideology is to study its effects on discourse forms and meanings and how discursive structures may in turn contribute to the formation and transformation of ideologies. However, ideologies are also at play when language users engage in the ongoing construction of context as subjective, as well as group sensitive, interpretations of social situations.While talking about ideologies embedded in text, we can say that this genre of discourse is a level of language use which is super-ordinate to sentences and texts. Text is not something having a beginning and an end. It involves re-sentencing of meanings. Text are created by speakers and writers who share societys beliefs concerning what is right and what is wrong or about the way things should be for the best in society. When they want to maintain their belief systems or ideologies, they take the help of language. These ideologies remain implicit in the text as they seem natural or common sense. The ideologically loaded language of the text grants it the ideological power. Such langue has judgmental value and meaning as well. Many ideologically loaded words have their judgemental value because their meaning is rational. They exist as binary pairs master/mistress, housewife/working mother, middle class/working class, freedom fighter/terrorist, hero/coward, etc. Some linguists maintain that all language all meaning is an ideological construct.Following are few texts which are all related to social problems for one and social beliefs for the other. In other words, they contain social ideologies which are neutralized in the society.C ONCLUSIONLong-range social changes are driven by changes in ideology. But at a local level, change in actual discourse practices can be cumulative in effect. Both discourse and ideology are based on the relationship between power and knowledge.We tend to think of knowledge as empowering ourselves (Sarup, 1993).Besides this, knowledge is the ability to exercise power over others. So, power is both positive (productive in creating identities), and negative (destroy identities). In productive power, one is not reduced to one dimension as in ideologies and power is not held by one person or group for good. Rather, it exists as a circuit, something which is exercised by everyone in different situations. As where there is power there is always resistance, power can be challenged.We might not say certain things in certain situations, but by breaking the rules, we can re-define the limits of discourse. Hence, redefining the limits of discourse is somethingproductive about power.