Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Vergelijkende discoursanalyse× | Discourseanalyse× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied≠ | Kwalitatief | Kwalitatief onderzoek |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1980s–1990s (established as comparative practice through the 1990s) | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| Grondlegger≠ | Norman Fairclough; Ruth Wodak; Teun A. van Dijk | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| Type≠ | Qualitative comparative research approach | Method |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Longman. ISBN: 978-0582219526 | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| Aliassen≠ | CDA comparative, cross-context discourse analysis, comparative text analysis, multi-site discourse analysis | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| Verwant≠ | 5 | 2 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Comparative discourse analysis examines how language constructs meaning, identity, and power by systematically contrasting texts or speech acts drawn from at least two distinct contexts, groups, time periods, or institutions. By holding analytical categories constant across cases, it reveals how discursive patterns diverge or converge, producing insights that single-context discourse analysis cannot generate. | 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. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|