The Relationship between Structure of Discourse and Structure of Ideology A Socio-Cognitive Perspective
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
پوختە
Whereas theoretical and political thought on the existence of ideologies has a long history, fewer focus has been given to their exact nature, socio-cognitive frameworks, discursive replication, and ideological discourse. This article investigates the relation between the structure of discourse and structure of ideology from the socio-cognitive perspective, adopting van Dijk’s (2006, 2008, and 2009) 'sociocognitive' approach. Moreover, ideologies are Ideologies pertain to the concepts and convictions of a group of individuals and the mental character and the psychological studies of ideologies are rare, the aim is to reveal how such cognitive phenomena are interconnected with discourse structures, verbal engagement, communication events and contexts, as well as society structures like dominance and social inequity. In order to understand the structures of discourse and to examine the nature and functions of ideologies in society, the structure of beliefs should be involved in the same way because they interact and subsequently are mutually related into systems. Ideologies' mental characteristics, including their nature as concepts or beliefs their relationship with views and knowledge, and their position as socially shared interpretations, will be discussed. Discourse structures and social structures are of distinct kinds, and the only way to connect them is through language users' mental representations of themselves as individuals and social members.
##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
سەرچاوەکان
Al-Rawi, M.K.S., 2017. The validity of CDA as a means of “uncovering” the ideologies implicit in discourse. IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 22(03), pp.48-53.
Dijk, T.A., 1995. Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. C. Schäffner, & A. Wenden (Eds.), Language and Pace (s. 17-33).
Dijk, T.V., 2000. Ideology and discourse: A multidisciplinary introduction. Pompeu Fabra University, Barcelona.
Eagleton, T., 2014. Ideology. Routledge.
Fattah, B. O. and Salih, S. M. (2022) “Colloquialism and the Community of Practice”, Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 5(1), pp. 77-84. doi: 10.14500/kujhss.v5n1y2022.pp77-84.
Glaser, E., 2014. If ideology is dead, how can the new politics find its voice?. NEF Working Paper, pp.4-17.
Haj Omar, H., 2016. Ideology, media and conflict in political discourse and its translation.
Hodge, B., 2012. Ideology, Identity, Interaction: Contradictions and Challenges for Critical Discourse Analysis. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across Disciplines, 5(2). ideology... British Journal of Sociology, pp.473-499.
Jørgensen, M.W. and Phillips, L.J., 2002. Discourse analysis as theory and method. Sage.Bhatia, Vijay K, John
Koller, V., 2005. Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: evidence from business media discourse. Discourse & Society, 16(2), pp.199-224.
Määttä, S.K., 2014. Discourse and Ideology—Why Do We Need Both?. In Spanish and Portuguese across Time, Place, and Borders (pp. 63-77). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Menard, R., 2017. Critical discourse studies on social values, ideology and Finnish equality.
Mills, Sara (1997) Discourse. Londodn and Newyork: Routledge.
Othman, S. M. and Salih, S. M. (2021) “Dimensions of Implication: A Review of the Saying-Meaning-Implying Trichotomy”, Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(1), pp. 151-162. doi: 10.14500/kujhss.v4n1y2021.pp151-162.
Persson, E. and Neto, L.M., 2018. Ideology and discourse in the public sphere: A critical discourse analysis of public debates at a Brazilian public university. Discourse & Communication, 12(3), pp.278-306.
Pihlaja, S. and Musolff, A., 2017. 14. Discourse and ideology. Pragmatics of social media, 11, p.381.
Purvis, T. and Hunt, A., 1993. Discourse, ideology, discourse, ideology, discourse,
Rasoul, S. H. and Kareem, O. M. (2019) “Synta-Pragmatics of The Conjunctions in Kurdish Language”, Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 2(2), pp. 1-8. doi: 10.14500/kujhss.v2n2y2019.pp1-8.
Renkema, J. ed., 2009. Discourse, of course: An overview of research in discourse studies.
Salih, S. M. (2020) “Textual Presupposition: An Intertextual Account”, Koya University Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 3(1), pp. 1-7. doi: 10.14500/kujhss.v3n1y2020.pp1-7.
van Dijk Teun, A., 2003. Political Discourse and Ideology/Teun A van Dijk. Anàlisi del discurs polític.–Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra, IULA, pp.15-34.
Van Dijk, T. A., 1992. Discourse and cognition in Society. University of Amsterdam, program of Discourse studies.
Van Dijk, T., 2003. Discourse, ideology and context. Mediator: Jurnal Komunikasi, 4(2), pp.325-346.
Van Dijk, T.A., 1995. Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & society, 6(2), pp.243-289.
Van Dijk, T.A., 1995. Ideological discourse analysis. In In.
Van Dijk, T.A., 1995. On macrostructures, mental models, and other inventions: A brief personal history of the Kintsch-van
Dijk theory. Discourse comprehension: Essays in honor of Walter Kintsch, pp.383-410.
Van Dijk, T.A., 1998. Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2001. Discourse, ideology and context.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2002. Political discourse and political cognition. Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse, 203, pp.203-237.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2003. Political discourse and ideology.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2005. Discourse analysis as ideology analysis. In Language & peace (pp. 41-58). Routledge.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2006. Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of political ideologies, 11(2), pp.115-140.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2006. Politics, ideology, and discourse.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2009. Society and discourse: How social contexts influence text and talk. Cambridge University Press.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2011. Discourse and ideology. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction, pp.379-407.
Van Dijk, T.A., 2016. Discourse and racism: Some conclusions of 30 years of research. Interdisciplinary studies in pragmatics, culture and society, pp.285-295.
Verschueren, J., 2012. Ideology in language use: Pragmatic guidelines for empirical research. Cambridge University Press