Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Field-based Discourse Analysis× | Discourseanalyse× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied≠ | Kwalitatief | Kwalitatief onderzoek |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1980s–1990s | 1989 (Fairclough); 1987 (Potter & Wetherell) |
| Grondlegger≠ | Synthesised from Pierre Bourdieu's field theory and discourse analysis; systematised by researchers including John Frow | Norman Fairclough; Jonathan Potter and Margaret Wetherell |
| Type≠ | Qualitative analytical framework | Method |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Harvard University Press. ISBN: 978-0674510302 | Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman. link ↗ |
| Aliassen≠ | field discourse analysis, Bourdieusian discourse analysis, sociological discourse analysis, FDA | DA, Critical Discourse Analysis, Discursive Analysis |
| Verwant≠ | 6 | 2 |
| Samenvatting≠ | Field-based discourse analysis integrates Pierre Bourdieu's sociological concept of the field — a structured social space of positions, capital, and struggle — with the close textual methods of discourse analysis. Rather than treating language as a neutral medium, it examines how discourse is produced, circulated, and received within specific social fields (education, law, journalism, science, etc.), and how discursive choices reflect and reproduce the distribution of power and capital within those fields. | 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 ↗ |
|
|