CRITICAL DISCOURSE, LINGUISTICS AND CINEMA
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32461/2226-3209.1.2018.177289Abstract
Abstract. Few studies examine the relationship between critical discourse, linguistics, and cinema; applying
micro- and macro-linguistic analysis as a method leading to defamiliarization of the natural discourse of a film. This study aims to analyze the nature of critical discourse and linguistics’ attitude toward cinema, based on which it can be concluded that in cinema, signs in form of critical discourse analysis have significant positions and are defined in relation to other signs of that individual discourse. Signs, which are considered to be central points, are defined differently by other discourses after they are recognized for the first time. Therefore, it is possible to find out the competitions occur in determining the meaning. These competitions are detected through methods of rival discourses, which fixed contents into floating signifiers. Considering the critical comparisons in rival discourses, it can be concluded that each group, based on its specific approach, tries to define the central points and breaksdown the structures of those signs in the rival discourses.
Keywords: Discourse, Cinema, Central Signifier, Sign.
References
Afrashi, A. (2005).StructuralAnalysis of Semiotic Layers of Spiritual Cinema. Tehran: Binab Magazine, No. 9
(192-196).
Arnheim, R. (1997). Film Essays and Criticism. University of Wisconsin Press.
Berger, A. A. (2000).Media Analysis Techniques. (P. Ejlali, Trans.).Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance,
Publication Center.
Elsaesser, T. (2004).A Review of Linguistic SemiologicalStudies of Cinema. (F. Sasani, Trans.). Tehran: SooreMehr.
Fairclough, N. (2000). Critical Discourse Analysis. (Motarjeman Group, Trans.). Tehran: Media Research Institute.
Foucault, M. L'Archéologie du Savoir [The Archeology of Knowledge] (A. Sheridan, Trans. 117.
Hawarth, D. R. Discourse Theory, and Political Analysis. (Soltani., Trans.). Political Science 2, 155.
Homayounpour, S. (2004).The Representation of Women in Iranian Cinema before and after Revolution (1979)
(Master’s Thesis). Faculty of Art, Alzahra University.
Hosseini Zadeh, M. A. Discourse Theory, and Political Analysis. Political Science 28, 182.
Jorgensen, M., Phillips, L. (2002). Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. (H. Jalili., Trans.).
Laclau, E. and Chantal, M. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics.
London: Verso.
Manouchehri, A. (2008). Approach and Method in Political Science. 1 st ed. Tehran: SAMT.
Marsh, D., Stoker, G. Theory and Methods in Political Science. (A. M. Haji Yousefi., Trans.), 207.
Moghadami, M. T. (2011). Laclau and Mouffe's Discourse Analysis Theory and Its Criticism. Marefatefarhangi,
(2).
Stam, R. (2004). Film Theory: An Introduction. (Motarjeman Group, Trans.). Tehran: SooreMehr.
Tajik, M. R. Text; Simulacrum and Discourse analysis. Gofteman, 1(1).
Van Dijik, T. (2001).Multidisciplinary CDA: A Plea for Diversity.In R. Wodak, & M. Meyer, eds., Methods of
Discourse Analysis. London: Sage.
Downloads
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
