· 2017· Book chapter
The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies
- 779citations
- 2017year
Short summary
This chapter outlines two distinct approaches to discussing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) in relation to media studies: one that privileges the established, capitalized 'CDA' identity and its research tradition, and another that questions this institutionalized identity.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Two primary methods exist for framing discussions on Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and media studies.
- The first method emphasizes the capitalized 'CDA' identity, providing focus and coherence.
- This established 'CDA' approach aligns with a well-known research tradition in the social sciences.
- The second method adopts a more cautious stance regarding the institutionalized identity of CDA.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
There are two ways to set up a discussion of critical discourse analysis and media studies. First, we would privilege something called Critical Discourse Analysis, the capitalized identity embodied in the acronym\n“CDA”.\n This approach has some obvious advantages. It gives an immediate focus and coherence to the discussion. It suggests reflection on a particular research tradition now well-known across the social sciences. The second approach would be wary of an institutionalized CDA identity....
The authors' abstract, as published at the source., 2017 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Literature and Literary Theory
Literature and Literary TheoryArts and Humanities