The workshop was wonderful!
The interview was conducted by means of email, and over several iterations, new questions and replies were generated. She moved from Vienna, Austria, where she had been full professor of Applied Linguistics since Together with her colleagues and Ph.
New Agenda in Critical Discourse Analysis. Racism at the Top. Drava Wodak, Ruth Ruth, could you describe your academic path to discourse analysis? What influences, motivations and perspectives were especially important for your becoming and continuing to be a qualitative researcher?
My PhD thesis publishedaccordingly, was on "The Language Defendants Use at Court", analysing tape-recorded interactions between judge and defendants at court while focusing on the impact of social class and gender on interactive patterns and, on the outcome of the trials.
Our study of the communication in an out-patient clinic even attracted the attention of many medical doctors; we were awarded the Pharmig Prize for this studyand were also able to implement some of our basic research in practical proposals advising how to change traditional communication patterns in doctor-patient interactions.
This research was basically legal research analysis and writing an integrated approach by the so-called "Waldheim Affair" when Waldheim's alleged involvement in crimes of the German Wehrmacht was debated when he stood for election as president of Austria.
From then on, I continued my research focused on the study of discrimination, racism, anti-Semitism, and identity politics, as well as on narratives of the past see more recent publications above.
What would you say is your particular contribution to discourse analysis? My specific contribution is most probably the focus on interdisciplinary and implementing interdisciplinarity; this is also one of the most important characteristics of the "Discourse-Historical Approach" in CDA.
Moreover, in contrast to other CDA scholars and probably because I was trained as a sociolinguistI combine theoretical research strongly with empirical research, the analysis of large data corpora and ethnography.
I have also been very influenced by the teamwork with historians and sociologists. I learnt a lot from such collaborations and by taking their contributions seriously and attempting integrative approaches.
I have applied some of our research in guidelines and seminars with teachers, doctors, lawyers, and so forth. Why "critical" discourse analysis? What is the gain, and what is the risk, in the moment of being "critical"?
What are the most important developments in CDA? Moreover, the analysis of new genres visual, Internet, film, chat rooms, SMS, and so forth; "multimodality".
Is there a tension between the aim of doing critical discourse analysis and developing methodologies which are normative? I believe that any kind of dogmatism is opposed to being critical.
This does not imply, of course, that there are no values, interests, or norms involved in research. In line with my discourse-historical approach, however, context-dependent normativity suggests itself.
I believe that evaluations and judgements require much context knowledge, and that it makes little sense to propose general norms which might not be adequate for specific cultural or situational contexts. This is, of course, a very interesting debate nowadays; we just had a very good workshop on "Interdisciplinarity and Normativity" at Lancaster University in Januaryorganised by Andrew SAYER, and I am convinced that we will continue this debate.
The various schools differ in their theoretical underpinnings. The various schools also differ in the selection of topics for research. What "fights" and challenges had to be faced and won in the development of CDA?
I personally do not like the metaphor of "war and fights" of course, all new paradigms need to be acknowledged in institutions and funding agencies.
This is often accompanied by skepticism and criticism—and also takes time. Specifically, as interdisciplinarity is sometimes perceived as threatening, this was and still is a major challenge. Moreover, so-called "sensitive" topics might be perceived as threatening as well see my experiences at the Austrian Academy above.
Other criticisms focus on "non-objectivity", thus quasi-repeating the Positivismusstreit: The biggest challenge, I believe, is to implement careful and detailed linguistic analysis while also venturing into the domains of macro social theory.
What future challenges do you see for the methodology of discourse analysis? More systematicity and working on bridging of the gap between macro and micro in more transparent ways. It seems that CDA doesn't have its own methodology, but integrates linguistic methods with a critical social standpoint.
What are the problems in methodologically reflecting this standpoint?
It won't be enough to make it explicit ex ante as "part of the context of discovery"because in a BACHELARDian sense, the critical standpoint may become an unconsciousness of the research process. So how is this critical standpoint "controlled" and its reification in the process of empirical research avoided?
Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing: an Integrated Approach. [Joanne Banker Hames; Yvonne Ekern] Home. WorldCat Home About WorldCat Help. Search. Search for Library Items Search for Lists Search for Analysis, and Writing: an Integrated Approach a schema:Book. Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing: An Integrated Approach (2nd Edition) by Joanne Banker Hames, Yvonne Ekern and a great selection of similar Used, . For undergraduate courses in Legal Research and Writing. This text presents a practical, integrated approach to legal research, analysis, and writing. It provides students with all the basic tools they need to do legal research and analyze a problem as well as communicate the results of their.
First, let me just repeat that there is no one CDA approach.Legal Research, Analysis, and Writing: An Integrated Approach (2nd Edition) by Joanne Banker Hames, Yvonne Ekern and a great selection of similar Used, .
LEGAL RESEARCH, ANALYSIS, AND WRITING provides everything you need to learn in order to successfully research and analyze law. "How to write a Case Brief" gives instructions on how to write one of the most important documents in the legal field.
This book presents a practical, integrated approach to legal research, analysis, and writing. It provides readers with all the basic tools they need to research and analyze a problem as well as communicate the results of their research.
An integrated approach— clarifies the interrelationship of legal research, legal writing and legal analysis. Reflects the way research, writing and analysis actually work in practice—as related tools, not isolated topics.
This title is out of print. By integrating the basics of legal research, legal analysis and legal writing, Hames and Ekern’s Legal Research, Analysis and Writing, 2 nd Edition clarifies the interrelationship of legal research, legal analysis and legal writing and allows students to experience the.
A legal research process is a systematic approach to legal research. • A research process also helps you overcome the difficult areas of legal research and writing. You may get stuck in a difficult research area or How, then, is an outline integrated into the research and analysis process? The practical approach suggested here is to.