Methoden vergleichen
Prüfen Sie die ausgewählten Methoden nebeneinander; abweichende Zeilen sind hervorgehoben.
| Diskursanalyse× | Kritische Diskursanalyse× | |
|---|---|---|
| Fachgebiet≠ | Qualitative Forschung | Qualitativ |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Entstehungsjahr≠ | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) | Late 1970s–1990s (systematised ~1979–1995) |
| Urheber≠ | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell | Norman Fairclough; Teun A. van Dijk; Ruth Wodak |
| Typ≠ | Method | Qualitative research method |
| Wegweisende Quelle≠ | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ | Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Polity Press. link ↗ |
| Aliasnamen≠ | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis | CDA, Critical Linguistics, Discourse-Historical Approach, Dialectical-Relational Analysis |
| Verwandt≠ | 2 | 6 |
| Zusammenfassung≠ | Discourse analysis is a qualitative research methodology that examines how language, communication, and power shape meaning, identity, and social reality. Developed across linguistics, sociology, and psychology (particularly by Norman Fairclough and Jonathan Potter), discourse analysis goes beyond content to analyze language use as a social practice that constitutes and reflects power relations, ideologies, and social structures. | Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a qualitative method that examines how language in texts and talk constructs, sustains, and challenges relations of power, ideology, and social inequality. Drawing on linguistics, social theory, and critical philosophy, CDA treats discourse not merely as communication but as social practice — a site where dominance is reproduced and where resistance can be articulated. Developed in the late twentieth century by Norman Fairclough, Teun van Dijk, and Ruth Wodak, among others, CDA is applied to political speeches, media texts, policy documents, educational materials, and institutional interactions. |
| ScholarGateDatensatz ↗ |
|
|