Logo image
Back
Halliday and Lemke: A comparison of contextual potentials for two metafunctional systems
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Halliday and Lemke: A comparison of contextual potentials for two metafunctional systems

Philip Graham
Critical Discourse Studies, Vol.13(5), pp.548-567
2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2016.1213177
url
https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2016.1213177View
Published Version

Abstract

critical discourse analysis semiotics metafunctions Halliday Lemke
I compare M.A.K. Halliday's metafunctional system with Jay Lemke's for the purposes of doing Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA). The differences I foreground turn specifically on notions of context and the distinction that Kenneth Burke makes between scientistic and dramatistic approaches to the analysis of meaning. I use a corpus of political and journalistic texts on 'austerity' discourses, and two examples from creative arts research projects, to demonstrate differences in the contextual potentials of the two systems that have implications for critical analysis. The analysis highlights differences in what Burke describes as analytic range and circumference, and differences in directionality between the two systems. Halliday's metafunctions provide a gateway into deeper and more detailed analysis of language, directing analysis into aspects of the text below the level of the clause. Lemke's is an action focused, two-way semiotic interface between cultural groups and the meanings they make, whether by means of language alone or by multimodal means, and demands that analysis begin with culture.

Details

Metrics

301 Record Views
8 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Web Of Science research areas
Communication
Logo image