Discourse Analysis: varieties and methods

This paper presents and analyses six key approaches to discourse analysis, including political discourse theory, rhetorical political analysis, the discourse historical approach in critical discourse analysis, interpretive policy analysis, discursive psychology and Q methodology. It highlights differences and similarities between the approaches along three distinctive dimensions, namely, ontology, focus and purpose. Our analysis reveals the difficulty of arriving at a fundamental matrix of dimensions which would satisfactorily allow one to organize all approaches in a coherent theoretical framework. However, it does not preclude various theoretical articulations between the different approaches, provided one takes a problem-driven approach to social science as one?s starting-point

After the Great Recession: Law and Economics\u27 Topics of Invention and Arrangement and Tropes of Style

AFTER THE GREAT RECESSION: LAW AND ECONOMICS’ TOPICS OF INVENTION AND ARRANGEMENT AND TROPES OF STYLE by Michael D. Murray Abstract The Great Recession of 2008 and onward has drawn attention to the American economic and financial system, and has cast a critical spotlight on the theories, policies, and assumptions of the modern, neoclassical school of law and economics—often labeled the Chicago School —because this school of legal economic thought has had great influence on the American economy and financial system. The Chicago School\u27s positions on deregulation and the limitation or elimination of oversight and government restraints on stock markets, derivative markets, and other financial practices are the result of decades of neoclassical economic assumptions regarding the efficiency of unregulated markets, the near-religious-like devotion to a hyper-simplified conception of rationality and self-interest with regard to the persons and institutions participating in the financial system, and a conception of laws and government policies as incentives and costs in a manner that excludes the actual conditions and complications of reality. This Article joins the critical conversation on the Great Recession and the role of law and economics in this crisis by examining neoclassical and contemporary law and economics from the perspective of legal rhetoric. Law and economics has developed into a school of contemporary legal rhetoric that provides topics of invention and arrangement and tropes of style to test and improve general legal discourse in areas beyond the economic analysis of law. The rhetorical canons of law and economics—mathematical and scientific methods of analysis and demonstration; the characterization of legal phenomena as incentives and costs; the rhetorical economic concept of efficiency; and rational choice theory as corrected by modern behavioral social sciences, cognitive studies, and brain science—make law and economics a persuasive method of legal analysis and a powerful school of contemporary legal rhetoric, if used in the right hands. My Article is the first to examine the prescriptive implications of the rhetoric of law and economics for general legal discourse as opposed to examining the benefits and limitations of the economic analysis of law itself. This Article advances the conversation in two areas: first, as to the study and understanding of the persuasiveness of law and economics, particularly because that persuasiveness has played a role in influencing American economic and financial policy leading up to the Great Recession; and second, as to the study and understanding of the use of economic topics of invention and arrangement and tropes of style in general legal discourse when evaluated in comparison to the other schools of classical and contemporary legal rhetoric. I examine each of the rhetorical canons of law and economics and explain how each can be used to create meaning, inspire imagination, and improve the persuasiveness of legal discourse in every area of law. My conclusion is that the rhetorical canons of law and economics can be used to create meaning and inspire imagination in legal discourse beyond the economic analysis of law, but the canons are tools that only are as good as the user, and can be corrupted in ways that helped to bring about the current economic crisis

Self-reflexive videogames: observations and corollaries on virtual worlds as philosophical artifacts

Self-reflexive videogames are videogames designed to materialize critical and/or satirical perspectives on the ways in which videogames themselves are designed, played, sold, manipulated, experienced, and understood as social objects. This essay focuses on the use of virtual worlds as mediators, and in particular on the use of videogames to guide and encourage reflections on technical, interactive, and thematic conventions in videogame design and development. Structurally, it is composed of two interconnected parts: 1) In the first part of this essay, I will discuss NECESSARY EVIL (Gualeni et al., 2013), an experimental videogame that I designed as a self-reflexive virtual artifact. With the objective of clarifying the philosophical aspirations of self-reflexive videogames – and in order to understand how those aspirations can be practically pursued – I will dissect and examine the design decisions that contributed to the qualities of NECESSARY EVIL as an example of “playable philosophy”. 2) Taking off from the perspectives on self-reflexive videogames offered in the first part of the essay, the second half will focus on virtual worlds as viable mediators of philosophical thought more in general. In this section, I will argue that, both through the practice of game design and through the interactive experiences of virtual worlds, twenty-first century philosophers have the possibility to challenge the often-unquestioned understanding of written discourse as the only context in which philosophical thought can emerge and be developed

Whence brand evaluations ? Investigating the relevance of personal and extrapersonal associations in brand attitudes

A recent conceptualization of the structure of attitudes proposes that people may hold associations that contribute to their personal attitudes about an object (personal associations) but also highly salient associations that do not contribute to their attitudes toward the object (extrapersonal associations; Olson and Fazio 2004). We conducted three studies with brands in the automobile industry to investigate the applicability of this new association typology to consumer attitude domains. Study 1 suggests the presence of extrapersonal associations for all brands investigated, by showing that some highly salient brand associations indeed contribute to brand attitudes but other similarly salient associations do not. Experimental data in Study 2 indicate that an individual difference, consumer expertise with the category, impacts the accessibility of personal associations in a brand evaluation context. Study 3 further strengthens the validity of the new typology by showing that it can meaningfully explain the different types of associations made accessible by persuasive messages. Taken together, our three studies provide strong support for Olson and Fazio’s (2004) framework and highlight its value for a better understanding of the nature of the brand associations that shape consumer brand attitudes. 2personal association; extrapersonal associations; attitudes; brand

The External Relations of the European Union towards the United States: How Relevant is the European Union in Constraining or Replacing U.S. Hegemony?, Jean Monnet/Robert Schuman Paper Series, Vol. 1 No. 3, September 2002

(From the introduction). The study object of this paper is the external relations of the European Union towards the United States. The core question of this essay is not the U.S. hegemony by itself; in fact, both parties agree on a myriad of issues, share common values, and keep intensive and active economic and political exchanges. The 1950s and 1960s were witness to the shining power of the United States and Europe was willing to receive U.S. aid through the Marshall Plan. The problem arises when U.S. policies affect Europe and the EU is not able to provide concrete actions to reverse them. At this point, one inquiry is the focus of the analysis: How relevant is the EU in constraining or replacing U.S. hegemony? A simple answer is insufficient to shed light on this question. Most scholars underline the shortcomings of the EU and the influence of the United States in determining EU external relations. However, the EU in 2002 is quite different from the European Community at the beginning of the 1990s. Although reactive to international and regional, political and economic stimuli, the EU has forged informal and formal practices to provide coordinated positions. Depending on the specific area, the EU’s performance is more or less successful. Whereas in economic issues the EU has been able to respond to the U.S. in trade disputes, in political and security affairs the panorama is mostly discouraging. Accordingly, the hypothesis of this paper is: The more the EU is able to encapsulate the interests of the fifteen member states in a common front, the greater are the opportunities for more beneficial agreements with the United States, and to constrain or replace the actions or inactions of U.S. hegemony. In order to support this proposition, four areas of the transatlantic relationship are examined in this paper. The first part focuses on the current theoretical debate on the transatlantic relationship. Secondly, the paper analyzes the different natures of both foreign policies, emphasizing the problems associated with the European (intergovernmental and supranational) model to design its external relations. The third section describes the relative balance between the US and the EU on economic terms, and considers the benefits of having international institutions to regulate trade practices. Finally, the imbalance in security affairs is depicted, highlighting the new institutional developments in Europe to participate in regional crises with or without (but not against) the United States

Towards a framework for computational persuasion with applications in behaviour change

Persuasion is an activity that involves one party trying to induce another party to believe something or to do something. It is an important and multifaceted human facility. Obviously, sales and marketing is heavily dependent on persuasion. But many other activities involve persuasion such as a doctor persuading a patient to drink less alcohol, a road safety expert persuading drivers to not text while driving, or an online safety expert persuading users of social media sites to not reveal too much personal information online. As computing becomes involved in every sphere of life, so too is persuasion a target for applying computer-based solutions. An automated persuasion system (APS) is a system that can engage in a dialogue with a user (the persuadee) in order to persuade the persuadee to do (or not do) some action or to believe (or not believe) something. To do this, an APS aims to use convincing arguments in order to persuade the persuadee. Computational persuasion is the study of formal models of dialogues involving arguments and counterarguments, of user models, and strategies, for APSs. A promising application area for computational persuasion is in behaviour change. Within healthcare organizations, government agencies, and non-governmental agencies, there is much interest in changing behaviour of particular groups of people away from actions that are harmful to themselves and/or to others around them

Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse

The goal of argumentation mining, an evolving research field in computational linguistics, is to design methods capable of analyzing people's argumentation. In this article, we go beyond the state of the art in several ways. (i) We deal with actual Web data and take up the challenges given by the variety of registers, multiple domains, and unrestricted noisy user-generated Web discourse. (ii) We bridge the gap between normative argumentation theories and argumentation phenomena encountered in actual data by adapting an argumentation model tested in an extensive annotation study. (iii) We create a new gold standard corpus (90k tokens in 340 documents) and experiment with several machine learning methods to identify argument components. We offer the data, source codes, and annotation guidelines to the community under free licenses. Our findings show that argumentation mining in user-generated Web discourse is a feasible but challenging task.Comment: Cite as: Habernal, I. & Gurevych, I. (2017). Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse. Computational Linguistics 43(1), pp. 125-17