semiotics, textual analysis and semiology by sir Prof Dr Sohail Ansari

Semiotics

The saturation of images in our society through the media has been the cause of much critical comment within philosophy, politics and sociology. This examination of the image has been ongoing since the early twentieth century, as the consideration of how images are used has developed into a distinct discipline. Images provide a means of communication and representation, the study of these messages is labelled semiology. This subject can perhaps be better described, though far more loosely, as the examination of signs, the way signs are produced, disseminated and consumed.

'A science that studies the life of signs within society is conceivable...I shall call it semiology (it will)...show what constitutes signs, what laws govern them' (Saussure 1974: 16).

The study of signs is particularly important in the consideration of the generation of 'media memories' as it is through the structuring, presence and absence of certain signs that a perception of the past within the public sphere is generated by and through the media (Bignell 2003: 7). Signs situate their audience in particular modes of appreciation and understanding, just as audiences themselves comprehend signs in particular ways. (this act of situation can be through words by the use of vivid language if so then mark it in text)

The study of signs is revealing as the ways in which signs are used, accepted and rejected is indicative of the tastes and desires of wider society.

The origins of semiology are located with the work of the French linguistic Ferdinand de Saussure, his study, Course in General Linguistics (1974), set the agenda for the ways in which signs are examined. Saussure analysed the sign into its two basic components: a sound component which he named the signifier, and a conceptual component, which he called the signified. This conceptual component, the signified, is not a material object, but the thought, the idea of an object, it is what is called to mind when an individual hears or uses the appropriate signifier. Therefore the idea of a cat is called to mind as a signified when the word 'cat' as a signifier is used. (text can be examined for such words those use signifier)

 The signifier therefore constitutes the material aspect of language. In the case of the spoken language a signifier is any meaningful sound which is made, in the case of the written language a signifier is any meaningful mark written down, in the case of the media a signifier is any image which is relayed to the audience. Signifiers and signifieds can be separated in this way by semiologists; in the encounter of signs in everyday life however they constitute a whole: a single sign.

The study of semiotics was also greatly advanced by the American philosopher Charles Pierce, who analysed the notion of signs to reveal underlying components.

'A sign or representamen, is something which stands to somebody for something in some respect or capacity. It addresses somebody, that is, creates in the mind of that person an equivalent sign, or perhaps a more developed sign. That sign which it creates I call the interpretant of the first sign. The sign stands for something, its object. It stands for that object, not in all respects, but in reference to a sort of idea, which I have sometimes called the ground of representamen' (Pierce 1955: 99).

These theories are important because they reveal the way in which signs communicate ideas, attitudes and beliefs to us. In the context of television, film, newspapers and other forms of media, semiology explains the way in which images are used to represent and relay information to the audience. This of course is reliant on the assumption that the audience possesses the necessary knowledge and appreciation, societal conditioning if you will, to decipher these signs (Burn and Parker 2003: 11). Therefore the signs which are viewed in the media by the public can be constructed to form certain meanings, meanings which appear perhaps unconnected to the signs themselves. The philosopher Roland Barthes considered this aspect in his study of the images relayed to the public through the media. Barthes proposed that the use of signs in society was a means of expressing a particular way of normalising the world in line with a bourgeoisie perspective. This normalisation was termed a 'myth', an indication of both the fabricated nature of the message and the seductive power it holds over others.

'Myth does not deny things, on the contrary, its function is to talk about them; simply, it purified them, it makes them innocent, it gives them a natural and eternal justification, it gives them a clarity which is not that of explanation but that of a statement of fact...it is natural and goes without saying: I am reassured' (Barthes 1973: 143).

Signs therefore, as relayed through the media, are able to communicate social and political messages. Barthes for instance considered the image from a magazine cover of a black man in French military uniform giving a salute. Barthes examined how the image communicated to its audience a message of a liberal, understanding France, of inclusiveness and acceptance. Far from the image of a black Frenchman conveying an image of a black Frenchman, the image itself relays a variety of messages to its audience. The image acts to defuse any tensions about inequality in society by emphasising that anyone regardless of ethnicity can be proud of the nation. In a similar way when images are viewed in newspapers, films or television programmes the audience consumes and connects images to aspects of society. Signs therefore are a point of domination as well as definition, as the production, dissemination and consumption of signs in society acts to shape and inform the structure of understanding. With specific reference to the media the manner in which signs are presented to the public, i.e. the camera angle, the lighting, the background are all within the remit of the semiologist (Danesi 1994: 23). The signs relayed through the media are a very important area of study as they can form the basis of public perceptions and understanding. Within a television programme for example, the viewer is exposed to a number of signs which they are required to decipher and recognize (Lacey 1998: 35). The nature of this recognition is based upon the previous scenes in the programme, the manner in which that scene is portrayed and the wider understanding of that scene within society.

Semiology therefore provides the interpreter with a means of accessing how signs are deployed and understood within the media. It enables the interpretation of the underlying meanings within media output and how the audience accepts, rejects or redefines those meanings.

Bibliography

·         Barthes, R. (1973) Mythologies. London. Paladin.

·         Bignell, J. (2003) Media Semiotics: an introduction. Manchester. Manchester University Press.

·         Burn, A. and Parker, R. (2003) Analysing Media Texts. London. Paladin.

·         Danesi, M. (1994) Messages and Meanings: an introduction to semiotics. Toronto. Canadian Scholars Press.

·         Lacey, N. (1998) Image and Representation: key concepts in media studies. Houndmills. Macmillan.

·         Peirce, C.S. (1955) Philosophical Writings of Pierce. Editor by J. Bachler. New York. Dover Publications

·         Saussure, F. de (1974) General Course in Linguistics. New York. Philosophical Library.

A text is something we can make meaning from. Consequently, whenever we produce an interpretation of something’s meaning we regard it as a text.

Texts can consists of:

• Films/Television programmes

• Graffiti

• Clothing

• Magazines

• Furniture, ornament

• Advertisements and so on…

We all know that there are no two exact synonyms in the English language and words always have slightly different meanings and connotations. Therefore we make use of the word text as it usually has particular implications.

We make use of textual analysis all the time whether we are aware of it or not, it is important to us as it enables us to make sense of the world around us.

We do it when we listen to the lyrics of music or when we reading a text on WhatsApp/bbm/Facebook even when we look at What does TA pictures on Instagram.

Another purpose of textual analysis is to describe content, structure and functions of the message and meaning contained in the text.

It also makes us aware of the variety of ways in which it is important to interpret in reality.

Important factors to put into consideration in textual analysis would include:

• Selecting types of text to be studied

• Acquiring appropriate texts

• And determining which particular approach to employ in analysing them

Semiotics

Textual Analysis and Semiotics

TA and Semiotics both significantly relate to one another because; they help us to contrast meaning and interpretation from images. It is also crucial to remember that the way one would textually analyze certain signs, symbols, texts or images is based on the frame of reference. This sis one of the many reasons why many people interpret or construct multiple and different meanings from one text. One should also remember that a text comes in various forms and that they are all around us.

Presentation by: Heather Loeto and Noxolo Mathebula

A sign is any signal that communicates something to us. Signs can be understood in two ways: 1. Sign represents something (the meaning, concept or idea to which it refers) 2. Every sign consist of a signifier and a signified.

Signifier: whatever material form used to convey meaning eg. Letters, images, sounds etc. Signified: the concept that the images, sounds or letters communicate

SENDER MESSAGE RECIEVER

• Communicate through codes and conventions

• Communicate through systems of difference

• Communicate through denotations and connotations

What does T.A entail and it's importance

Connotation and Denotation

Semiology is defined as the science of signs, or the study of signs and sign systems.it suggest that all communication is based on sign systems, which work through certain rules and structures.

Connotation: Remind the viewer of certain feelings, beliefs, or ideas that are attached to the signifier (emotional matters are connected to it). An example of connotations include: colours, clothes, words, body language etc. connotation are something that the viewer or audience perceives in an image.

Denotation: To analyse an image purely on a descriptive level without investigating what it may imply. It attempts to describe an image without comment, evaluation or judgement.

Textual Analysis

What is a Text?

• Scientists and Philosophers focus on using denotations of words in order to communicate the exact meaning that they are trying to convey.

• However, Writers of literature such as Shakespeare focus mainly on the connotations of the word in order to evoke an emotion from the audience.

• They do this through the use of metaphors, irony and satires and metonymy.

• Words may have positive or negative connotations but that all depends upon your social and personal experiences.

• Words carry cultural and emotional association or meanings in addition to their literal meanings or denotations.

• Two words can have same definition while carrying different emotional content.

• One word may be seen as cruel or insulting while the other may seem neutral or positive. (Example)??

science of signs

T.A in Media: Points to Consider

Textual Analysis is known to be a method which communication researchers to describe and interpret the characteristics of a recorded or visual message known as a text.

• It is also a methodology or data gathering process

• When we perform textual analysis on a text, we make an educated guess.

Connotation and Denotation in practice

Semiotics Analysis (signs and signifier)

• Post-structuralism argues that an authors intended meaning is secondary to the meaning that the reader perceives and that a literary text (i.e. poetry or Shakespeare) or any situation where a subject perceives a sign has no single purpose or meaning.
• In other words, when an author (can be a person or group) creates a text they do not determine once and for all how the text will be read.
• This could be due to the differences in the audiences’ frame of references.
• According to Post-Structuralisms the interpretation of meaning of a text is dependent of on a reader’s personal concept of self.
• Furthermore, audiences should also be understood as active participants in the process of meaning making.
• Post-Structuralism also believes that utilizing a variety of perspectives to create a multi-faced interpretation of a text is necessary, even though these interpretations tend to conflict each other.

How Do I Write A Semiotic Analysis Essay? ... Semiotics simply means to the study of symbols or signs that means that you are theorizing about possible understanding of a literary phenomenon or cultural.

Textual Analysis and Semiotics. TA and Semiotics both significantly relate to one another because; they help us to contrast meaning and interpretation from images. ... Sign represents something (the meaning, concept or idea to which it refers) 2. Every sign consist of a signifier and a signified.

‘Critical discourse analysis of King’s speech’ For the Departments of Media Studies by Prof Dr Sohail Ansari

Assignment 41 for practical work in media lab: ‘Critical discourse analysis of King’s speech’ For the Departments of Media Studies by Prof Dr Sohail Ansari

- June 02, 2019

Critical Discourse Analysis of Martin Luther King’s Speech
in Socio-Political Perspective
Muhammad Aslam Sipra

Abstract
The article presents the Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of the first part of King Martin Luther’s speech“When I
Have a Dream” in socio-political context. The study investigates how it lies on the basis of application of Fairclough
version of CDA in the first part of the text. Moreover, it explicates the terms like social, cultural and political
inequalities in the light of text and framework.
Keywords: CDA, Socio-political Perspective, 3D Model, Racial Discrimination, Hegemony, Dominance, Social
inequalities

Introduction
The term discourse has several definitions. In the study of language, discourse often refers to the speech patterns and
usage of language, dialects, and acceptable statements, within a community. It is a subject of study of peoples who live
in secluded areas and share similar speech conventions. Analysis is a process of evaluating the things by breaking them
down into pieces. Discourse Analysis simply refers to the linguistic analysis of connected writing and speech. The
major focus in Discourse Analysis is the use of language in social context. This article presents a Critical Discourse
Analysis of the famous speech by Martin Luther king, Jr. “I Have a Dream” by applying Fairclough 3D Model.
CDA specifically considers how language works within institutional and political discourses as well as specific discourses in order to uncover overt or more often, covert inequalities in social relationships. Language use in speech and writing is seen as a social practice, which ‘implies a dialectical relationship between a particular discursive event and the situation(s), institution(s), and social structure(s) which frame it’ (Fairclough and Wodak, 1997: 258). Thus, in this two-way relationship, discourse is considered to be socially constitutive as well as socially shaped.
Since discourses are so influential, they can help to produce and reproduce unequal power relations between different
ethnicities, social classes, genders, ages, and professional groups. CDA of the selected speech highlights the relationship between language and power. It points out how Martin Luther in front of Washington DC challenges Americans. The persuasive nature of the speech is disclosed through CDA. Martin Luther motivates the audience through language of getting freedom and makes them ready against the racial discrimination.

Research Questions:
1. How does the use of textual/stylistic strategies reflect the view of the Afro-American community in speech?
2. To what extent the ideology of King Martin Luther is reflected through the linguistic choices in the speech?
3. How do the stylistic features represent the broader socio-cultural and political relationship between the white and the black community in America?

These questions are researchable as the focus is on the analysis of the language used in the speech. Researcher analyzed the linguistic choices which are used by the speaker in order to find out the motifs. Language is considered to be the main tool through which one can exert power and show retaliation to the powers exercised in the society by the
dominant groups. This project focuses on how speaker tried to raise voice against the hegemonic attitude of white against the black with the help of language and how he tried to promote his ideology and motifs in the mind of the
socio-politically oppressed blacks. Researcher analyzes the stylistic devices like metaphors used by the speaker in order to represent the perspective of the black. Power relation between the black and the white are analyzed at wider socioeconomic and political perspective that how white exert power on the black by analyzing the speech through CDA.

Literature Review
In this section of the project, researcher has cited 20 references related to the main topic and different variables involved in the research questions. Researcher has tried to knit a strong kind of theoretical basis in this portion to make further grounds clear. Works of different theorists in the broad interdisciplinary field CDA have been elaborated vividly.
Vandijk (1998a) is of the view that CDA is particularly concerned with the analysis of any discourse whether written or spoken from the perspective of discursive practices in a society like hegemony, domination, inequality of basic rights and racial discrimination. Its focus is to examine the exertion of these practices with reference to socio-economic and
political perspective.
Fairclough (1993) says that CDA is a kind of analysis of discourse which brings forth odd relationships among different social and ethnic groups. He focuses text and sequential events and then relates them with broader socio-cultural perspective of the discourse of people which reveals uneven and ideology shaped power relations. He explores how
power is exercised in a society through hegemonic attitude and ideological text of the elite.
Fairclough (1992) explains three stages for the analysis of a discourse. In first stage CDA analyses the personal experience and knowledge of the speaker by keeping in view his beliefs. Secondly, how social relations affect the discourse and thirdly, speaker realizes about the reality and identity. He is of view that linguistic choices in a discourse
like lexical selection and syntactic patterns also reveal the social background and identity of a speaker. He argues that it is the language which shapes discourse and different socio-political views which leads towards the exertion of power
relations. Fairclough (1992) is of the view that people belonging to a specific social setup have different relational and expressive norms which is revealed through their speeches. This shows that there is strong tie between the social and linguistic variables. The prime purpose of CDA is to analyze the text in the light of social theory of language
functioning of ideological and political processes.
According to Brown and Yule (1985) language is not only used for the description of things rather it is also used for doing things as well. CDA analyses the use of the language in a real context and how language reveals their cultural, social and ethnic backgrounds. They are of the view that choice of lexical and syntactic features of a language represent
the broad socio-cultural background of the speakers. Critical discourse analysis focuses on how their language reflects discursive practices in the binary relations.
Halliday’s (1978) view regarding this concept is same that language is considered to be a social act because people communicate in a social setup. Language and society are dependent on each other rather directly linked in terms communication. It is the language (text) which shapes and constructs our identities. Same is the case in our context.
People who are fluent in English are considered socially and culturally dominant because they speak the language of socially and politically dominant people. In this case, linguistic variable seems to become the identity of that particular class.
According to Fairclough (1995b), linguistic analysis of discourse practice in socio-cultural background is known inter textual analysis. Here the linguistic analysis is the analysis of the text at lexical, syntactic, grammatical and vocabulary level. Cohesion, coherence and organization of the text are also included in this analysis. This analysis focuses on the
text by keeping in view all discourse practices.
Fairclough (1992) defines intertextuality as the characteristic of any text in which the text carries the chunks of other texts which become a part of that text. The chunk taken from other text become a complete part of the original one whether it refutes the idea given in the original text or accepts. He divides intertextuality into two types which are
‘manifest intertextuality’ and ‘constitutive intertextuality’. The first type refers to the use of quotations in the texts in order to validate and authenticate the argument. Certain quotes are included in the inverted comas while writing any essay or speech. This type of inclusion of other text is considered as manifest intertextuality. The other is related to
discourse structures which lead to novel text production. Fairclough says that this kind of text can be analyzed by doing its linguistic analysis.
Fairclough (1989) described his approach in the perspective of analysis of text as ‘critical language study’. His main focus was to unfold the discrimination of social relations and discursive practices which exploits the rights of masses with the help of language used in society. He is the view that language is used as a tool for exercising power and
hegemony. Text is the dress of thoughts through which people exert dominance.
Wodak and Fairclough (1995a, 1996) are of the view that language as a practice of creating hegemony, power and dominance is being used in a society. It seems to be a complete reflection of social practices like a mirror. The types of language used among the members of society reveal the social relations like communication of a director of a company
with a clerk or peon would clearly draw line and the linguistic choice of director would reveal his/her hegemonic attitude. Historical perspective of discourse plays vital role in getting the meanings of the text. Every text carries certain historical perspectives and contexts which clarify the meanings in that particular context.
Gee (1990) and Sampson (1980) put an argument that CDA systematically interprets discourses with the help of various approaches by keeping in view socio-political and economic contexts. Here, social semiotics plays significant role in the interpretation of discourse because the analysis would be done on the basis of social factors in that specific context.
Fowler (1996) says the perspective of CDA is to produce the knowledge of exploitation and knowing, conscious rising of the people regarding any discourse in socio-cultural context. He is of the view that analyst should focus the representation critical orientation instead of criticism of discourses. Critique from CDA perspective would represent the
social, economical and political backgrounds of discourses.
Corson (1995) says that critical discourse analysis applies certain techniques like textual and stylistic features to find out the social relations, identities from the linguistic perspective. Discourses whether they reveal the social issues like dominance, hegemony are reflected through text or it is the discourses related to educational systems like schools,
official documents are dealt by the analysis of the text.
According to Blommaert(2005) and Jorgensen(2002) critical discourse analysis is considered to be wider and broader which analyses the relation of language within a society and its impact on the discourses. They are of the view that linguistic and social variables in CDA research are closely knitted to each other because whenever we approach any text
or discourse, we approach it from linguistic perspective and emphasize how choice of language in a particular discourse pertaining the socio-political context tries to analyze the discursive practices.
Chilton (1996) and Lakoff (1995) argue that metaphors play a significant role in Critical discourse analysis. They are of the view that metaphors in a discourse represent an ideology which leads to reality in that particular context according to an individual’s perception. King Martin Luther used some metaphors in his language which reflect his ideology in
that socio-political background.
Van Dijk (1991, 1993), media and politics are closely related as media propagates the thought and ideologies of elite. He describes media discourse as an advocate of elite's policy, hegemony and exploitation. It always favours the ideologies of the dominating class and state. Language used by them unfolds the discriminatory attitude of high towards
the low.
Ruth Wodak(2001) and Meyer (2001) interpret the term ‘Critical’ in CDA as the analysis and understanding of the language embedded in social, political and economic perspective. CDA tries to develop connections between the powers exerted through language with a wider socio-political context. The focus seems to be on text primitively
because it reflects the ideological and identity basis which are constructed and produced through the social relations.
They are of the view that CDA not only traces out the power relations in social practices but it also provides opportunities to challenge and criticize it.
Carroll (2004) is of the view that Critical discourse provides us several dimensions for the analysis of a text or speech as it functions as a theoretical framework (theory) and method (how to use data for the analysis). Critical discourse analysis brings forth both the aspects which sociological and post-modern perspective for the analysis of discourse.
Sociological feature is related to functional aspect of language in the constructions and explanation of social relations. It focuses on the use of linguistic features in discourse and how power and hegemony influence the social relations. CDA analyses the abuse of power and hegemonic attitude by focusing through the lens of language. The later analyses the
context and dimensions of discourse.

4. Research Methodology

Speech of King Martin Luther is analysed by applying Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). It

analyses whether lexical
representation, syntactic organization and coherent speech in a particular socio-cultural context having an ideology
influences the cognition of audience. Researcher’s contribution is the analysis of the textual/stylistic strategies and
interpretation of relational, expressive and representative values in the speech with special focus on wider sociopolitical and economic perspectives.
This research adds to the previous knowledge by focusing and analyzing the speech on the basis of linguistic choices,
discursive practices and socio-cultural perspective. It also analyzes as to how certain linguistic structures help the
speaker to propagate his/her ideologies effectively and makes others accept heartily.
The data is collected from the historical speech of King Martin Luther delivered on August 28, 1963. The title of this
spell bounding speech was ‘When I Have Dreams’ which reflects the aspirations and demands of all blacks residing in
that part of the world. Researcher delimited only first part of the speech which consists of 31 sentences. Fairclough’s
model has been applied in order to this part of speech. A quarter of million people, gathered in Washington DC from all
racial backgrounds to support the American blacks for the equality of rights.
Researcher selected the 3D model and framework proposed by Norman Fairclough(1992). He has introduced three
aspects in his model for the critical analysis of any discourse or text. This model consists of text, socio-cultural practices
and discursive practices in a society. Text is analyzable as socio-economic and political factors influence the discursive
practices in the society. Fairclough (1989) described the objective of this approach as a contribution to the general rising
of consciousness of exploitative social relations, through focusing upon language.
Researcher has taken Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) as theoretical framework of this project. CDA analyses the
discourses critically and reveals the social practices like dominance, hegemony, exploitation victimization of the
oppressed ones. CDA is an interdisciplinary field which brings social sciences and linguistics at the same platform. Its
topics of discussion are linked with ethnicity, hegemonic attitude of high towards low, gender discrimination,
dominance, ideology, discursive practices and gender. The parameter of analysis is only language and reveals how
discourse manifests discursive practices in a social setup. The topic of this article clearly represents the issues which
CDA deals on the primary basis. The topic carries variables like social, cultural, political inequality and ideology which
are the core issues discussed by CDA. This theoretical framework provides a complete base and standing for the
analysis of above-mentioned variables in the speech of King Martin Luther.

Ethical considerations are dealt very carefully while conducting this research. As this research is
purely qualitative in its nature, there is no interaction with human subjects. There are no
interviews in this research which could lead towards ethical issues.
Researcher has taken CDA as method for this project. The nature of the research is purely qualitative as the speech is
analyzed on the basis of Fairclough’s 3D Model. CDA has also been taken as methodology at broader spectrum for the
analysis. First part of the speech ‘I Have a Dream’ has been analyzed on the theoretical base which is CDA. It has been
used as tool to investigate the hegemonic attitude and discursive practices of the white against the black.

 Discussion and Analysis
Researcher has collected data from the speech of Martin Luther King ‘When I Have Dream’. First 31 lines containing 648 words have been analyzed and interpreted by applying Fairclough’s 3D model which talks about expressive, relational and ideational values. It critically analyses the whole text on the basis of three aspects in a broader macro and
micro level; which are related to the analysis of linguistic choices (text), discourse practices in the back scene of that particular text and socio- cultural practices keeping in view particularly social, economic and political factors.
Researcher has applied CDA as a theoretical framework of this research as it focuses the text which reveals social inequality, racial discrimination or other discursive practices by looking at the text from socio-cultural perspective. It is critical and explanatory in its nature. This approach of Fairclough systematically throws light on all aspects like at first
it gives the description of linguistic features used in that particular text. Secondly, it tries to interpret the relation of that particular text with the interaction and thirdly it explains the link of interaction with the broader socio-political variables.

Text Analysis
Text is one of the main pillars and central to the analysis on Fairclough model. Analysis of text is strongly linked with the analysis of language used by people in real setting. This approach in the beginning was named as ‘Critical Language Study’ as the special focus was to raise consciousness of socially exploitative relation with special focus on language.
Text analysis involves the analysis of lexical choices, cohesion, coherence and different stylistic features which focuses on the particular theme and broader socio-political perspective of the speaker. This leads to the analysis above syntactic
level.
This analysis can be divided into two sections. In the first section, there is analysis within the clauses or sentences that highlights the Theme, Rheme, Given and New Information. In the second section, there is analysis of relationship of the sentences or clauses with each other by focusing on the four types of thematic progression. Informative Structure is developed through a series of Theme, Rheme, Given and New Information. This creates an organization in the sentences of the speech. They lend cohesion and coherence to the speech. We make sentences grammatically and thematically correct by following the informative and thematic structure. This cohesion heightens the impact of the message and feelings by the speakers. This gives a power to the speaker to have a deep impact on the audience. It
creates a logical sequence within the sentences. The sequence of given and new information also help in making the speech effective. They serve as a bridge between the speakers and the audience. Moreover, Mark and Unmark and Multiple Themes function as a magnet to hold the whole discourse together. In the speech coherence is developed
through Given and New information. Audience gets from the speech only one theme through the related sentences that show cohesion and coherence.
Thematic Progression of the speech is developed through Constant Theme Pattern. The selected part of the speech is well knitted, well thought and well organized. It has been created with the help of chain of related ideas and appropriate words focusing on the main idea. This technique keeps the feeling of the audience intact. It encourages to get united and
free them from the long slavery. Only Constant Theme Pattern is followed in this speech the rest of the three patterns are not used in the speech. Constant Theme Pattern aims at maintaining the emotional impact on the audience by focusing on the main idea or theme.
Throughout the speech, Dr. King repeats words and sentence. This is a very outstanding feature in this speech called repetition. The term repetition is restricted to mean the case of exact copying of a certain previous unit in a text such as a word, phrase or even a sentence (Leech, 1969). If we study the selected part of the speech more carefully, it is easy for
us to find many other examples of repetition used:

….. “One hundred years later, the life of the Negros still sadly crippled by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination”. (Luther King, 1963)
……“One hundred years later, the Negro lives on a lonely island of poverty in the midst of a vast ocean of material prosperity”. (Luther King, 1963)
Here the phrase “one hundred years later” has been repeated four times, clearly indicating that there has been a long time these African-Americans aspiring for the freedom and equal rights without any discrimination based on color and creed.
Parallelism is another syntactic over-regularity. It refers to the exact repetition in equivalent positions but it is different from the common repetition. To put it simply, parallelism means the balancing of sentence elements that are grammatically equal. In his speech, Martin Luther King uses parallelism to create a strong rhythm to help the audience
line up his ideas. Here are few examples:
…by the manacles of segregation and the chains of discrimination… (Par.2, two parallel noun phrases)
Martin Luther King used the noun freedom 20 times in this speech which reflects that Freedom and inequality are the major themes of the speech keeping in view socio-political background of the speech. Other pronouns like ‘We’, ‘Ours’and ‘You’ have been used 30, 17 and 08 times in speech respectively which indicate the intimacy between the speaker
and the audience. Other lexemes like nation, America and justice have also been used several times which indicate that King’s speech conveyed the message of justice, equality and unity as one nation.
Metaphor is a stylistic device which is used to associate the abstract ideas with the concrete images. King used metaphorical language in his speech which connects with the concrete images and here in this speech certain contrastive concrete metaphors have been used to enhance the beauty of the speech. For example, to contrast segregation with racial justice, King has contrasted the metaphors of dark and desolate valley (of segregation) and
sunlit path (of racial justice). Intertextuality is again one of the important features found in the speech of the king. It refers to the text taken from some other source in order to validate one’s perspective. It can be explicit as well as implicit in its nature. The reference given by Martin Luther; “Five score years ago…”[Paragraph 2] refers to
Lincoln’s famous Gettysburg Address which began “Four score and seven years ago…” This refers to the point that King was speaking in front of the Lincoln Memorial.

Analyzing Context
This spell bounding speech of Martin Luther King carries a complete contextual background with it. The blacks were deprived of their rights and racial discrimination was at its peak. He fought for the rights of Afro-American people and launched ‘Civil Rights Movement’ which became the basis of this memorable speech. His struggle for the oppressed blacks turned to be mass movement against the cruel and discriminatory attitude of the Whites. His prime
motifs were to get equal rights and to get rid of the discriminatory attitude of Whites towards the Blacks. Negroes were considered socially, economically and politically inferior as compared to the other race living in America. He wanted to have equality for the Negroes on all grounds so that they could work for the progress of nation ultimately.
Negroes were considered politically and socially inferior and this speech refers to exploitations of the whites. Luther King tried to make people aware of their rights and that of discriminatory and hegemonic attitude of the whites.

Analysis of Discourse Practices and Socio-Political Aspect of Speech
According to Fairclough (1992) model these two aspects which are discourse practices and socio-political and cultural perspective are of vital importance. Discourse practices refer to execution of social practices through discourse.
Discourse is always socially constituted and vice versa. On the other hand socio-cultural and political aspects are also important because they provide a complete overview of the circumstances in which discourses are being constructed.
The analysis of discourse practices and socio-political aspects can be divided into three major areas which are Genre, Discoursal analysis and style. Researcher discusses each major area with reference to speech and how they are linked with each other in this particular speech.
Analysis of Genre refers to the analysis of text which relates to the lexical choices used in this speech with broader socio-cultural context. It also refers to the particular identification of patterns in the speech. In the first paragraph flames of withering injustice refers to the harsh and cruel attitude of the white. The words flame means the fire and
withering refers to the gloomy and desolate picture of the blacks. Their faces have been withered due to continuous chain of slavery in their neck. The word vast ocean refers to the great economy and wealth of the America. Here, king is of the view that these Negroes are deprived of being an independent individual and they are economically and politically crippled even living in such prosperous and developed state. He used the word nation many a times which indicate that his stance was that the blacks and the whites are one nation without any discrimination.
Style of the speaker carries importance in the critical analysis of any discourse. Expressive and relational values are closely linked with this speech analysis. Expressive value indicates the expression of personal experiences of the speaker. The speaker himself was a Negro and he experienced the same deprivation and indifferent attitude of the
white. His involvement and enthusiasm show that his words are expressions of all Negroes. Relational value throws light upon the relation among the speaker and audience. He was evoking audience because he was a part of those who were sufferer and oppressed. He used pronoun ‘We’ and ‘Ours’ several times in the speech which ultimately indicate
that the speaker considers himself of being a member of that group. Speaker with the help of these lexical choices gets involve in the sentiments of the oppressed ones.
Representational value is of significant importance as it makes the worldview of the audience. It indicates the subject matter of the discussion and particular socio-political background of the speech. Here, the question arises that why is this speech different from others? It differs because of its social and political context as it revolves around one major
idea which is social, political and economical inequality in the rights of the blacks. King criticized the American authorities for being not fulfilling the promise which they mentioned in the constitution. Negroes were not given liberty, equal rights and economic equality which were being mentioned in the constitution.

6. Conclusion and Recommendation
The limitations of the study are linked with the data for the analysis on the interpretative paradigms of the research.
Only first part of the just one speech is analyzed as it becomes very difficult to handle the whole speech rather all speeches of King Luther. The analysis of the chunk of the speech could not be perfectly analyzed and interpreted.
It can be concluded that in this speech certain textual and stylistic devices have been used very frequently in order to achieve some specific purpose. It carries all those prerequisites which a speech must have to propagate the ideology in a sophisticated manner. It seems to be syntactically well-organized with frequent repetitions emphasizing the main theme which is inequality of socio-cultural rights and racial discrimination on the basis of color and creed. The choice of the lexemes is not well ordered according to situation but also recapitulating background and indicating the relational and expressive values of the speaker. Luther king very impressively and successfully with the help of metaphors and other devices identifies the relationship between the powerful and oppressed. He very persuasively
succeeds in achieving the strength and support of the powerless without creating any conflict with the powerful. His speech very peacefully sheds light on the institutionalized social inequalities. There are certain other factors like social cognition in this speech which can be pointed out in further research. There are other approaches in CDA which can be applied on this speech by keeping in view same patterns. The models proposed by VanDijk and Wodak can also be applied to carry out qualitative nature of research.

Exercise:

Read Genre analysis today by Vijay K. BHATIA and then analyze this critical discourse analysis of Martin Luther King’s speech in the light of it.

Read research questions and analyze how well they are examined.
Whole article is about the analysis of speech but speech itself in the real sense of a word is not the part of an article. What do you think?
Read the literature review section of an article and tell how well it is connected to the analysis of speech.  

practical steps of doing discourse analysis

Getting technical: discourse analysis in ten steps

So you have formulated a research question, have collected source material, and are now ready to roll up your sleeves and dig into your sources. But how do you make sure that you have covered all your bases and that you will later be able to make a good case for yourself and your work? Here are ten work stepsthat will help you conduct a systematic and professional discourse analysis.

1) Establish the context

Before you start chiselling away at your source material, jot down where the material comes from and how it fits into the big picture. You should ask yourself what the social and historical context is in which each of your sources was produced. Write down what language your source is written in, what country and place it is from, who wrote it (and when), and who published it (and when). Also try to have a record of when and how you got your hands on your sources, and to explain where others might find copies. Finally, find out whether your sources are responses to any major event, whether they tie into broader debates, and how they were received at the time of publication.

2) Explore the production process

You have already recorded who wrote and published your sources, but you still need to do a more thorough background check. Try to find additional information on the producer of your source material, as well as their institutional and personal background. For example, if you are analysing news articles, take a look at the kind of newspaper that the articles are from (Jäger 2004: 175): Who are the author and the editorial staff, what is the general political position of the paper, and what is its affiliation with other organizations? Are any of the people who are involved in the production process known for their journalistic style or their political views? Is there any information on the production expenditures and general finances of the paper? Do you know who the general target audience of the paper is? In many cases, media outlets themselves provide some of this information online, for instance in the “about” sections of their websites. In other cases, you will find such information in the secondary academic literature. Don’t hesitate to write the editors an email or call them up: personal interviews can be a great way to explore production backgrounds.

Once you have established the institutional background, take notes on the medium and the genre you are working with. Some scholars go as far to argue that “the medium is the message” (McLuhan 1964/2001), or in other words that the medium in which information is presented is the crucial element that shapes meaning. While I am skeptical of such extreme technological determinism, I do agree that the medium matters: reading an article online is not the same as reading it in a printed newspaper, or in a hardcover collection of essays. Make sure to identify the different media types in which your source appeared, and to also be clear about the version that you yourself are analysing.

For instance, the layout of a newspaper article and its position on the page will be different in a print edition than in an online edition. The latter will also offer comments, links, multi-media content, etc. All of these factors frame the meaning of the actual text and should be considered in an analysis. This may also mean that you should think about the technical quality and readability of your source, for instance by looking at paper quality (or resolution for online sources), type set, etc. You should also take notes on the length of your source (number of pages and/or words) and any additional features of the medium that might contribute to or shape meaning (such as images).

Finally, ask yourself what genre your source belongs to. Are you analysing an editorial comment, and op-ed, a reader’s letter, a commentary, a news item, a report, an interview, or something else? Establishing this background information will later help you assess what genre-specific mechanism your source deploys (or ignores) to get its message across.

3) Prepare your material for analysis

In order to analyse the actual text, it is wise to prepare it in a way that will allow you to work with the source, home in on specific details, and make precise references later. If you are working with a hard copy I would recommend making a number of additional copies of your source material, so that you can write on these versions and mark important features. If you haven’t already, try to digitize your source or get a digital copy. Then add references that others can use to follow your work later: add numbers for lines, headers, paragraphs, figures, or any other features that will help you keep your bearings.

4) Code your material

When you code data, it means that you are assigning attributes to specific units of analysis, such as paragraphs, sentences, or individual words. Think of how many of us tag online information like pictures, links, or articles. Coding is simply an academic version of this tagging process.

For instance, you might be analysing a presidential speech to see what globalization discourse it draws from. It makes sense to mark all statements in the speech that deal with globalization and its related themes (or discourse strands). Before you start with this process, you need to come up with your coding categories. The first step is to outline a few such categories theoretically: based on the kind of question you are asking, and your knowledge of the subject matter, you will already have a few key themes in mind that you expect to find, for instance “trade”, “migration”, “transportation”, “communication”, and so on. A thorough review of the secondary literature on your topic will likely offer inspiration. Write down your first considerations, and also write down topics that you think might be related to these key themes. These are your starting categories.

You then go over the text to see if it contains any of these themes. Take notes on the ones that are not included, since you may have to delete these categories later. Other categories might be too broad, so try breaking them down into sub-categories. Also, the text may include interesting themes that you did not expect to find, so jot down any such additional discourse strands. At the end of this first review, revise your list of coding categories to reflect your findings. If you are working with several documents, repeat the process for each of them, until you have your final list of coding categories. This is what Mayring (2002: 120) calls evolutionary coding, since your categories evolve from theoretical considerations into a full-fledged operational list based on empirical data.

How the actual coding process works will depend on the tools you use. You can code paper-based sources by highlighting text sections in different colours, or by jotting down specific symbols. If you are working with a computer, you can similarly highlight text sections in a word processor. In either case, the risk is that you will not be able to represent multiple categories adequately, for instance when a statement ties into three or four discourse strands at once. You could mark individual words, but this might not be ideal if you want to see how the discourse works within the larger sentence structure, and how discourse strands overlap.

A real alternative is using other types of software. If you have access to professional research programmes like NVivo, then the software already has built-in coding mechanisms that you can customize and use. There is also open-source software available, for instance the Mac programme TAMS, but I have not tested their functionality. However, even if you only have regular office tools at your disposal, such as Microsoft’s Office or a Mac equivalent, there are at least two ways in which you can code material.

The first is to copy your text into an Excel table. Place the text in one column and use the next column to add the coding categories. You’ll of course have to decide where the line-breaks should be. A sensible approach is to place each sentence of your original text on a new line, but you could also choose smaller units of text.

Another tool that provides coding assistance is Microsoft OneNote 2010, or the Mac equivalent Growly Notes. In OneNote, you can right click anywhere in the text and select “tag” to assign a category to any sentence. You can also customize your tags, create new ones, and easily search and monitor your coding categories and activities. The downside is that you can only tag full sentences, not single words or phrases, but depending on your intentions, this may not be a crucial drawback.

5) Examine the structure of the text

Now that you have prepared your materials and have coded the discourse strands, it is time to look at the structural features of the texts. Are there sections that overwhelmingly deal with one discourse? Are there ways in which different discourse strands overlap in the text? See if you can identify how the argument is structured: does the text go through several issues one by one? Does it first make a counter-factual case, only to then refute that case and make the main argument? You should at this point also consider how the headers and other layout features guide the argument, and what role the introduction and conclusionplay in the overall scheme of things.

6) Collect and examine discursive statements

Once you have a good idea of the macro-features of your text, you can zoom in on the individual statements, or discourse fragments. A good way to do this is to collect all statements with a specific code, and to examine what they have to say on the respective discourse strand. This collection of statements will allow you to map out what “truths” the text establishes on each major topic.

7) Identify cultural references

You have already established what the context of your source material is. Now think about how the context informs the argument. Does your material contain references to other sources, or imply knowledge of another subject matter? What meaning does the text attribute to such other sources? Exploring these questions will help you figure out what function intertextuality serves in light of the overall argument.

8) Identify linguistic and rhetorical mechanisms

The next step in your analysis is likely going to be the most laborious, but also the most enlightening when it comes to exploring how a discourse works in detail. You will need to identify how the various statements function at the level of language. In order to do this, you may have to use additional copies of your text for each work-step, or you may need to create separate coding categories for your digital files. Here are some of the things you should be on the lookout for:

·         Word groups: does the text deploy words that have a common contextual background? For instance, the vocabulary may be drawn directly from military language, or business language, or highly colloquial youth language. Take a closer look at nouns, verbs, and adjectives in your text and see if you find any common features. Such regularities can shed light on the sort of logic that the text implies. For example, talking about a natural disaster in the language of war creates a very different reasoning than talking about the same event in religious terms.

·         Grammar features: check who or what the subjects and objects in the various statements are. Are there any regularities, for instance frequently used pronouns like “we” and “they”? If so, can you identify who the protagonists and antagonists are? A look at adjectives and adverbs might tell you more about judgements that the text passes on these groups. Also, take a closer look at the main and auxiliary verbs that the text uses, and check what tense they appear in. Particularly interesting are active versus passive phrases – does the text delete actors from its arguments by using passive phrases? A statement like “we are under economic pressure” is very different from “X puts us under economic pressure”… particularly if “X” is self-inflicted. Passive phrases and impersonal chains of nouns are a common way to obscure relationships behind the text and shirk responsibility. Make such strategies visible through your analysis.

·         Rhetorical and literary figures: see if you can identify and mark any of the following five elements in your text: allegories, metaphors, similes, idioms, and proverbs. Take a look at how they are deployed in the service of the overall argument. Inviting the reader to entertain certain associations, for instance in the form of an allegory, helps construct certain kinds of categories and relations, which in turn shape the argument. For instance, if I use a simile that equates the state with a parent, and the citizens with children, then I am not only significantly simplifying what is actually a very complex relationship, I am also conjuring up categories and relationships that legitimize certain kinds of politics, for instance strict government intervention in the social sphere. Once you have checked for the five elements listed above, follow up by examining additional rhetorical figures to see how these frame the meaning of specific statements. Things to look for include parallelisms, hyperboles, tri-colons, synecdoches, rhetorical questions, and anaphora, to name only the most common.

·         Direct and indirect speech: does the text include quotes? If so, are they paraphrased or are they cited as direct speech? In either case, you should track down the original phrases to see what their context was, and what function they now play in your source material.

·         Modalities: see if the text includes any statements on what “should” or “could” be. Such phrases may create a sense of urgency, serve as a call to action, or imply hypothetical scenarios.

·         Evidentialities: lastly, are there any phrases in the text that suggest factuality? Sample phrases might include “of course”, “obviously”, or “as everyone knows”. A related question then is what kinds of “facts” the text actually presents in support of its argument. Does the text report factuality, actively demonstrate it, or merely suggested it as self-evident? One of the strongest features of discourse is how it “naturalizes” certain statements as “common sense” or “fact”, even if the statements are actually controversial (and in discourse theory, all statements are controversial). Be on the look-out for such discursive moves.

9) Interpret the data

You now have all the elements of your analysis together, but the most important question still remains: what does it all mean? In your interpretation, you need to tie all of your results together in order to explain that the discourse is about, and how it works. This means combing your knowledge of structural features and individual statements, and then placing those findings into the broader context that you established at the beginning. Throughout this process, keep the following questions in mind: who created the material you are analysing? What is their position on the topic you examined? How do their arguments draw from and in turn contribute to commonly accepted knowledge of the topic at the time and in the place that this argument was made? And maybe most importantly: who might benefit from the discourse that your sources construct?

10) Present your findings

Once you have the answer to your original question, it is time to get your results across to your target audience. If you have conducted a good analysis, then you now have a huge amount of notes from which you can build your presentation, paper, or thesis. Make sure to stress the relevance, and to move through your analysis based on the issues that you want to present. Always ask yourself: what is interesting about my findings, and why should anyone care? A talk or a paper that simply lists one discourse feature after another is tedious to follow, so try to focus on making a compelling case. You can then add evidencefrom your work as needed, for instance by adding original and translated examples to illustrate your point. For some academic papers, particularly graduation theses, you may want to compile the full account of your data analysis in an appendix or some other separate file so that your assessors can check your work.

Mind the limitations:

Discourse analysis offers a powerful toolbox for analysing political communication, but it also has its pitfalls. Aside from being very work-intensive, the idea that you only need to follow a certain number of steps to get your results can be misleading. A methodology is always only as good as your question. If your question does not lend itself to this sort of analysis, or if many of the steps I list above do not apply to you, then come up with an approach that suits your project. Don’t be a methodologist: someone who jumps at a set of methods and applies them to everything in a blind fit of activism. Always remain critical of your own work.

This means being mindful of the shortcomings in your approach, so that you do not end up making claims that your material does not support. A common mistake is to claim that a discourse analysis shows what people think or believe (or worse: what entire societies think or believe). Discourse analysis is a form of content analysis. It is not a tool to analyse the impact of media on audience members. No amount of discourse analysis can provide adequate evidence on what goes on in people’s heads.

What we can learn from a discourse analysis is how specific actors construct an argument, and how this argument fits into wider social practices. More importantly, we can demonstrate with confidence what kind of statements actors try to establish as self-evident and true. We can show with precision what rhetorical methods they picked to communicate those truths in ways they thought would be effective, plausible, or even natural. And we can reveal how their statements and the frameworks of meaning they draw from proliferate through communication practices.

REFERENCES:

Chilton, Paul (2004). Analyzing Political Discourse – Theory and Practice. London: Arnold.

Fairclough, Norman (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

Jäger, Siegfried (2004). Kritische Diskursanalyse. Eine Einführung. (Discourse Analysis. An Introduction).4th ed., Münster: UNRAST-Verlag.

Mayring, Philipp (2002). Einführung in die Qualitative Sozialforschung – Eine Anleitung zu qualitativem Denken (Introduction to Qualitative Social Science Research – Instruction Manual to Qualitative Thinking).5th ed., Basel: Beltz Verlag.

McLuhan, Marshall (1964/2001). Understanding Media. New York: Routledge Classics.