Critical Analysis of the Influence on Power and Coordination of the Concepts of Religion and Discourse
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26577//EJRS.2022.v32.i4.r8Keywords:
Religion, Power, Discourse Analysis, Coordination, Religious DiscourseAbstract
The article analyzes the critical discourse analysis as one of the paradigms in the discursive study of religion. Critical discourse analysis examines discursive and critical views on religion together, and is able to show the features and priorities of these areas, which are not among the main trends in modern science. The issue of discourse analysis is raised and discussed in the context of logic, semiotics, philosophy of language, analysis of relations, consensus, the legitimacy of ethical and moral values. The article represents and describes the importance of discourse in the understanding of religion as a concept and accepting the role of religion in everyday social relations through the critical discourse analysis and the discursive study of religion. It also provides guidelines for the analysis of discursive structures and analyzes the processes of revival and change in the field of religion. The concept of discourse is considered separately and its different meanings are shown. It analyzes how the process of critical analysis is carried out in the context of discursive research, and analyzes the main directions of practical critical discourse analysis. The problem of analysis of a discursive event arises in the context of non-linguistic conditions of occurrence of discourse (economic, political, etc.). It has been established that the meaning of discourse since the foundation of discursive analysis includes not only written or oral expression, but also non-linguistic semiotic processes. It has been shown that for each discursive sphere, epistemic beings differ both in terms of axiological value and in terms of subjective regulation.
Keywords: religion, power, discourse analysis, coordination, religious discourse.
References
Карасик В.И.(2000) Структура институционального дискурса. Проблемы речевой коммуникации / В.И. Карасик. Саратов: Изд-во Саратов. ун-та, 236 c.
Макаров М.Л. (2003) Основы теории дискурса / М.Л. Макаров. М.: ИТДГК «Гнозис», 2003, 280 c.
Усманова А.Р. (2001) Дискурсия, дискурс / А.Р. Усманова // Постмодернизм. Энциклопедия. Минск: Интерпрессервис; Книжный Дом, 240 c.
Фуко М. (1996) Воля к истине: по ту сторону знания, власти и сексуальности / М. Фуко. – М.: Касталь, 448.
References
Barker E. (2011) The cult as a social problem. In: Hjelm T. (ed.) Religion and Social Problems. - NY: Routledge. - 198-212.
Berger P.L. (1973) The Social Reality of Religion. - London: Penguin. - 231.
Chouliaraki L. and Fairclough N. (1999) Discourse in Late Modernity. - Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. - 176.
Engler S. (2006) Discourse. In: von Stuckrad K (ed.) The Brill Dictionary of Religion. - Leiden: Brill. - 516–519.
Fairclough N. (1992) Discourse and Social Change. - Cambridge: Polity Press. - 259.
Fairclough N. (1995) Critical Discourse Analysis. - London: Longman. - 265.
Foucault, M. (1996). Volia k istine: po tu storonu znaniia, vlasti i seksualnosti [The Will to Truth: Beyond Knowledge, Power and Sexuality]. – Moscow: Kastal. - 448. (in Russian)
Gill S.D. (1982). Beyond «the primitive»: The religions of nonliterate peoples / S.D. Gill. Prentice-Hall, 156 p.
Hamilton M. (2001) The Sociology of Religion. Second Edition. London: Routledge. - 320.
Jasinski J. (2001) Sourcebook on Rhetoric: Key Concepts in Contemporary Rhetorical Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. - 675.
Karasik, V.I. (2000). Struktura institutsionalnogo diskursa. Problemy rechevoi kommunikatsii [The structure of institutional discourse. Problems of speech communication]. Saratov: Izd-vo Saratov. un-ta. – 236. (in Russian)
Locke T. (2004) Critical Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum. - 104.
Luke A. (1995) Text and discourse in education: an introduction to critical discourse analysis // Review of Research in Education, №21, 3–48.
Makarov, M.L. (2003). Osnovy teorii diskursa [The basics of discourse theory]. M.: ITDGK «Gnozis». - 280. (in Russian)
Phillips L. and Jørgensen M.W. (2002) Discourse Analysis as Theory and Method. London: SAGE. – 230.
Potter J. and Wetherell M. (1987) Discourse and Social Psychology: Beyond Attitudes and Behaviour. London: SAGE. – 216.
Richardson J.E. (2007) Analyzing Newspapers: An Approach from Critical Discourse Analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave. – 287.
Thompson J.B. (1990) Ideology and Modern Culture. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. – 372.
Usmanova, A.R. (2001). Diskursiia, diskurs [Discursive activity, discourse]. Minsk: Interpresservis; Knizhnyi Dom. – 240. (in Russian)
Van Dijk T.A. (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis // Discourse and Society. №4(2), 249-283.
