learn to use discourse analysis to analyze oral discourse

Learn to Use Discourse Analysis to

Analyze Oral Discourse

© 2019 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

This PDF has been generated from SAGE Research Methods Datasets.

Learn to Use Discourse Analysis to

Analyze Oral Discourse

Student Guide

Introduction

Discourse analysis is a broad term referring to a range of approaches attentive to

how language is used in various modes in the real world—spoken conversations,

online communication, formal and informal documents, and so on. Discourses

writ large can also refer to how language is combined with actions and ways of

thinking to bring forth a particular identity or claim regarding values or meaning.

Examples of discourse might include spoken gossip, suicide notes, personal ads

on a dating site, a TED Talk, and city planning documents.

What Is Discourse Analysis?

Discourse analysis refers to a range of techniques to analyze language in use.

Rather than focusing on the objective reality of what actually happened during an

event, discourse analysis instead is concerned with language activated around

an event and how that language differs based on who is sharing what to whom.

Discursive analytic techniques may be used by linguists, social psychologists,

literary critics, and social scientists to understand how language functions in

everyday encounters. These encounters could be written, televised, spoken in

conversation, or on an online platform. Some researchers would also consider

discourse to include body language such as gestures and facial expressions as

well as the material world which can activate language. For example, a recycling

bin, though a material object, can generate a conversation on “going green.”

Discourse both reflects and reproduces social relations. Writ large, a discourse

SAGE

2019 SAGE Publications, Ltd. All Rights Reserved.

SAGE Research Methods Datasets Part

2

of 28 Learn to Use Discourse Analysis to Analyze Oral Discourse

can include artifacts and the material world.

Discourses are “ways of combining and integrating language, actions,

interactions, ways of thinking, believing, valuing, and using various symbols,

tools, and objects to enact a particular sort of socially recognizable identity”

(Gee, 2014, p. 201). We might analyze dating apps and how individuals use a

profile, a photograph, and online messaging to portray themselves as attractive.

In this case, we might refer to a “discourse community,” a community with an

agreed upon communicative purpose and with established techniques, such as

“ghosting,” which refers to suddenly ending communication with a potential date.

Related to discourse community is a “community of practice,” which has three

dimensions: regular interaction, shared goals, and shared repertoire (Waring,

2017). Another example is the State of the Union addresses of George H. W.

Bush. We might use discourse analysis to make sense of how he uses language

to present an identity as a leader. We could also analyze the visual delivery of the

address to assess his way of comporting, speaking (pausing, changing his tone),

and occupying physical space.

Oral discourse poses particular challenges for the researcher. Oral language is

acquired in functional and natural ways whereas learning to write is a more

formal endeavor. Oral discourse can refer to both speeches and conversation.

As Moerman (1992) says, “Talk is a central part of social interaction, and social

interaction is the core and enforces, the arena and teacher, the experienced

context of social life” (p. 29). In other words, we see spoken speech as a social

action. Hence, conversation analysis would look at how spoken dialogue reveals

how memory, certainty, and importance govern how the conversation plays out.

For this kind of analysis, we would audio record the conversation and then

transcribe it. Even in transcribing, we would have to decide whether to note

stuttering, pauses, and other oral techniques that help the speaker produce the

conversation or undermine it. Even in a formal, orally delivered speech, we

SAGE



2


can note these verbal elements, such as a misspoken word and an immediate

correction, and analyze how these elements help produce a particular discursive

event. In this dataset, we will analyze a state of the union address by a U.S.

President. This dataset is both oral as well as intended to be archived, transcribed,

and read after its presentation to a national audience. In other words, some

examples of discourse are not clearly oral or written; they can be both. The

president wrote his speech and then delivered it orally. Hence, we can analyze

both its characteristics as oral discourse (a one-time delivery) and written

discourse (a document-in-use by historians, political scientists, and others).

Discourse studies can focus on different components of language depending on

the objectives of the research, such as intentionality, acceptability, informativity,

and intertextuality. Intentionality refers to what speakers intend. Acceptability

refers to what hearers engage and whether the discourse meets with their

approval and understanding. Informativity concerns how new or unexpected the

information is, and situationally refers to ongoing circumstances. Intertextuality

refers to relations with other texts (de Beaugrande, 1997, p. 53). Discourse

analysis can involve coding data. Coding refers to applying topics to textual units

and later analyzing these topics for larger patterns. Beyond coding for content,

we might also code for narrative or discursive strategies in data. There are

numerous strategies for doing so (Burman & Parker, 1993; Potter & Wetherell,

1987). For example, discursive coding might pay attention to textual strategies

such as primacy (what comes first in a narrative), negation (negative language),

distortion (such as exaggerations), emphasis (text treated with more regard),

isolation (expressions that stand out from the rest of a transcript), repetition

(repeated phrases), incompletion (unfinished thoughts), and uniqueness (unusual

expressions) (Alexander, 1988). This approach fits studies aimed at not only

identifying what participants say but how they release information, how they

structure their responses, and how they make claims using specific narrative

techniques.

SAGE



2


In discourse analysis, it is common to notice grammatical devices, use of tense,

and other dramatizing features. In linguistically driven analysis, we might be

attentive to particular units, such as a transitive verb and its direct object. Hence,

our analysis might have predetermined rules that guide our observation or, in

other studies, it might be less rigid. For example, in analyzing President Bush’s

speeches, we might inductively notice metaphors, folksy language, and

references to an abstract collective (“we”). In analyzing this kind of discourse, we

would typically be attentive to linguistic devices such as repetition, parallelism, and

conjuncts (e.g., “however,” “anyway,” “on the other hand”).

Discourse analysis provides insight into types of activities or genres. For example,

we might look at the activity of nonprofit organizations sending letters asking for

membership or donations. We might look at how these letters seek a common

ground between the organization and the recipient. The analysis might point out

the consequences of not joining (i.e., threats to the environment or world stability).

Analysts would look at the logical relations these letters invoke and assumptions

regarding the recipients’ level of interest and willingness to engage. Analysis

might also consider how the sequence of words, sentences, metaphors provide

a function. Constructivity refers to how parts of a discourse can be elements of a

larger whole; there is a hierarchical relationship between them. Strategies refer to

interactional strategies that accomplish a communicative goal, such as offering a

gift to join an organization or using a quotation from a historical figure to invoke

past values.

In analyzing written text, analysis can focus on numerous characteristics, such as

textual formality, expression of attitude, assumed knowledge, and what is at risk

(Eggins & Martin, 1997). In a personal ad, the risk is that no one will respond. In a

presidential address, the risk is that critics will dismantle the speech. A discourse

analysis might be used to focus on a particular text or to explain the differences

among texts, such as comparing Bush’s and Obama’s language in their State of

SAGE



2


the Union Addresses. In this case, we might also draw attention to the difference

in social contexts, for example, how political language in the 2000s was different

after the terrorist attacks of September 11. We might also consider the field, tenor,

and mode of discourse. The field refers to the social action, the tenor to the role

structure (the status and roles of the participants), and mode refers to the symbolic

organization, what part language is playing, such as persuasive, expository, and

didactic (Eggins & Martin, 1997).

Illustrative Example

This example presents a discursive analysis of one of President Obama’s State

of the Union Addresses. More specifically, the example considers particular

discursive strategies, such as calls to reason, that allow the President to make

his case. Analyzing all his addresses over time would provide an even more

interesting example of how rhetorical strategies were employed longitudinally to

communicate with a divisive audience.

Research question: What discursive strategies are evident in President

Obama’s State of the Union Address?

The Data

The example dataset is President Obama’s State of the Union Address from

2010: http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/sou.php. State of the Union Messages to

the Congress are mandated by the United States Constitution (Article II, section

3): “He shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the

union, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge

necessary and expedient.” Since 1790, with occasional exceptions, State of the

Union messages have been delivered once annually.

Analyzing the Data

SAGE



2


http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/sou.php

Established lexical systems exist, such as those classifying modal verbs, verbs

that suggest probability, such as “may,” “might,” or “must” (Yang, 2009).

Nonetheless, the coding approach used in this example was largely inductive and

exploratory. That is, we first read the text and then considered which discursive

practices were in evidence. We discerned repetitive language, such as the word

“but,” as well as the communicative mode that Obama employed, such as being

authoritative, persuasive, or speculative. In addition to the speaker’s apparent

intentionality, we considered rhetorical devices, such as metaphors that bring

the president’s points to life. For example, we coded passages such as the

“worst of the storm,” “the numbing weight,” “victory under one’s belt,” “horse

trading,” “temperatures cooling,” “fiscal hole,” “tightening their belts,” and “closing

the credibility gap.” There are over 15 metaphors used in the speech that function

as commentary on the current state of affairs. They also carry a negative

tone—storms, weight, mountain of debt. One exception to this is “carrying the

dream” forward. So, coding allows researchers to systematically notice and mark

textual components that are similar. We do not know exactly how we will use

our codes in later analysis. The first step is simply to identify textual units that

are similar in some way, then to apply a code to keep track of these similarities.

Put another way, coding is a form of rigor that allows us to ultimately review

communication modes or techniques that are alike. Some of the codes were

descriptive, such as humor, which was applied when laughter or a joke was

evident. Others were more abstract, such as role structure, which refers to the

implied role of the speaker and the audience. In this case, the role structure is

hierarchical; the president has some degree of authority over his audience but

also requires his audience’s support to further legitimize his role. During analysis,

we can see how often a code shows up in the discourse as well as compare the

different text segments coded to a code to assess the topic’s overall discursive

function.

After coding for numerous topics, we assessed the codes regarding patterns and

SAGE



2


how the various communicative modes and techniques served the discourse.

Here is an example of a coded passage. Note that brief definitions of the codes

are included later in this dataset.

So we face big and difficult challenges. And what the American people hope, what they deserve, is for all of

us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences, to overcome the numbing weight of our

politics. For while the people who sent us here have different backgrounds, different stories, different beliefs, the

anxieties they face are the same.

empathy

metaphor

The aspirations they hold are shared: a job that pays the bills, a chance to get ahead, most of all, the ability to

give their children a better life.

appeals

to unity

And you know what else they share? They share a stubborn resilience in the face of adversity. question

After one of the most difficult years in our history, they remain busy building cars and teaching kids,

starting businesses and going back to school. They’re coaching Little League and helping their neighbors. empathy

One woman wrote to me and said, “We are strained but hopeful, struggling but encouraged.”

It’s because of this spirit, this great decency and great strength, that I have never been more hopeful about

America’s future than I am tonight. Despite our hardships, our Union is strong.

quote

We do not give up. We do not quit. We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit. In this new decade,

it’s time the American people get a Government that matches their decency, that embodies their strength. And

tonight I’d like to talk about how together we can deliver on that promise.

claim

making

self-

mention

It begins with our economy. Our most urgent task upon taking office was to shore up the same banks that helped

cause this crisis. It was not easy to do. negation

And if there’s one thing that has unified Democrats and Republicans and everybody in between, it’s that

we all hated the bank bailout. I hated it. I hated it; you hated it. It was about as popular as a root canal.

[Laughter]

bipartisan

claim

repetition

Rather than working with a long list of unstructured codes, we next grouped

them into clusters based on their similarities. In other words, we grouped codes

in primary codes and related subcodes. For example, we noticed a distinction

between codes suggesting a broader mode of communication, such as being

SAGE



2


authoritative, and more technical codes, such as using transitional words such as

“and” and “but.”

Hence, we made a primary code called communicative mode to help organize

subcodes that capture particular ways of communicating, such as making a claim,

being authoritative, or being benevolent. Similarly, we made a primary code called

rhetorical devices to capture more specific devices employed such as using

absolutes, conversational (informal) language, hedges, humor, and negation. The

primary code content refers to specific topics addressed by the speech, such as

America as character, bipartisan claim, historical trajectory, and appeals to unity.

In other words, content was used to gather together codes capturing what was

said, not how it was stated. The primary code engagement strategies refers to

specific approaches to engage the audience, such as collective “we,” empathy,

quoting citizens, and role structure. These subcodes attend more specifically to

ways to engage the audience, such as using the word “we” to suggest a cohesive

America.

Below is the final structure of primary codes and subcodes. Note that the primary

codes are used as organizing codes, not as codes that we apply to textual

segments.

Rhetorical Devices

• absolutes: this code captures language of extreme magnitudes, such as

“always” and “never.” These suggest an absolute condition or claim.

• conversational: this code captures language that is informal, such as what

you might find in a conversation rather than in a formal speech.

• hedges: this code captures language of uncertainty, such as “perhaps” and

“maybe.”

• humor: this code captures moments of humor, whether intentional or not.

Laughter in the audience was one way of observing humor.

SAGE



2


• negation: this code captures words suggesting the opposite of something

actual or positive, such as “not,” “never,” “didn’t.”

• metaphorical language: this code is applied to language using “like” or

“as” (similes) as well as metaphors.

• repetition: this code is applied to a word or phrase that is repeated often

for emphasis.

• question: this code is applied to a question that either answers itself

(rhetorical) or is answered by Obama in the language that follows it.

• short sentence: this code is applied to simple sentences without complex

clauses.

• transitions (ands, buts): this code is applied to sentences that include

conjunctions such as “and” and “but.”

Communicative Mode

• authoritative: this code is applied to language suggesting the president’s

ultimate power.

• claim making: this code captures a statement presented as a fact or truth.

• benevolent voice: This code is applied to statements suggesting kindness

or compassion.

• conditional: this code captures clauses using the word “if,” suggesting a

condition.

• evidence-based reasoning: this code is applied to instances where

excerpts are cited or where numbers or statistics are referenced.

• imperative/request: this code captures language that presents a demand,

appeal, or call to action.

• making promise: this code is applied to statements that promise resources

or attention to address a problem, situation, or constituency.

• offering solution: this code captures language suggesting an answer or

resolution to an acute or chronic problem.

SAGE



2


• self-mentions (personal): this code captures the use of “I,” “me,” “myself,”

and “mine.”

Content

• America as character: this code is applied to statements that present

America as a character in its own right, as a country with an identifiable

unfolding series of events that point to a meaningful, distilled nature.

• bipartisan claim: there are two primary parties in the United States—the

Republicans and the Democrats. this code captures a claim that is intended

to appeal to both parties.

• historical trajectory: This code captures references to the arc of American

history.

• appeals to unity: this code captures references attempting to unite the

deeply divided political parties.

Engagement Strategies

• collective “we”: this code is applied to language such as “we,” “our,” “us,”

suggesting a collective American perspective.

• empathy: this code is applied to statements suggesting empathy (e.g., “I

feel your pain.”)

• quoting citizens: this code is applied to quotes ascribed to American

citizens, thereby adding texture, illustration, or evidence for a claim.

• role structure: this code is applied to language implying a particular

relationship between the speaker and the immediate audience.

• second person: this code is applied to text using the word “you” or “your,”

thereby addressing the audience directly.

In first reviewing the codes under communicative mode, we begin to see which

topics best help us understand discursive strategies in the speech. For example,

SAGE



2


evidence-based reasoning was applied to numerous textual units, as was self-

mentions.

We first ran a code report for each code in a qualitative software program,

then analyzed quotations per code. In generating a report on self-mentions, for

example, we looked for how Obama used the words “I” or “me” to produce

a particular kind of presidential address. Similarly, in generating a report for

American as character, we assessed a larger pattern across the entire address,

one that illustrates the importance of the United States not just as a country

but as an idea or character that the president tries to invoke. Our analysis does

not simply summarize each topic but rather attempts to assess what patterns

within each code suggest about larger meanings. For example, in looking at self-

mentions along with empathy, we see that these two are balanced. The president

does not only talk about himself, he draws attention to others. This balance points

to a larger discursive mode that goes beyond simply summarizing a single code.

(See report below.) Similarly, in reviewing quotations coded to evidence-based

reasoning, absolutes, and claim making, we see appeals to logical reasoning

more broadly and how they function in the presidential address as a whole.

Furthermore, we assess the codes America as character and historical trajectory

to discern how time is employed in the speech and how America is foregrounded

as a heroic “character” within this constructed history. In other words, our analysis

attempts to connect the “parts” to the “whole.” We can identify the negations in the

data, but the next step is to consider analytically how they contribute to the larger

production of meaning. For this reason, the report below is structured based on

the following sections:

• Discursive Modes: Balancing Self-Mentions With Empathy

• Appeals to Logical Reasoning

• America’s Historical Trajectory

• Repetition as Structure

SAGE



2


• Role Structure and Humor

We could have developed other sections but decided to focus on these larger

topics to illustrate a product of discursive analysis.

Presenting Results

Below is an example of a discourse analysis report focusing on particular

strategies evident in the President’s speech. Note that a different researcher might

focus on other strategies or name them somewhat differently; different analyses

should generally support each other and provide complementary insights. For

example, another researcher might code for different types of modal verbs such

as “should,” “will,” “would,” “have got to,” etc. Our analysis instead looks at how

these verbs are used in claim making and offering solutions.

Discursive Modes: Balancing Self-Mentions With Empathy

In reviewing all text segments coded to self-mentions, we see a pattern in how

the president employs the word “I,” calling direct attention to himself. These self-

mentions reinforce a confident persona, contextualize the president’s role, and

reinforce his purpose for occupying his current role. In addressing the credibility

gap in Washington, he says, “Now, that’s what I came to Washington to do”

(emphasis added in all quotations). Here are additional examples:

One year ago, I took office amid two wars, an economy rocked by

a severe recession, a financial system on the verge of collapse, and a

Government deeply in debt.

They’re not new. These struggles are the reason I ran for President.

But when I ran for President, I promised I wouldn’t just do what was

popular; I would do what was necessary.

SAGE



2


From the day I took office, I’ve been told that addressing our larger

challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious.

Self-mentions position the president’s discourse not just around himself but

around a perceived mandate. In repeatedly associating himself with a mission, the

two become interchangeable. In reference to the immediate future, this purpose

becomes more tangible, making him seem active in his role.

Tomorrow I’ll visit Tampa, Florida, where workers will soon break

ground on a new high-speed railroad funded by the Recovery Act.

Some self-mentions suggest intuitive skills. “So I know the anxieties that are

out there right now.” These self-mentions go further to reveal a more personal,

informal tone, making his speech seem perhaps more accessible to viewers of all

educational backgrounds.

Now, one place to start is serious financial reform. Look, I am not

interested in punishing banks.

“Let me know. Let me know. Let me know. I’m eager to see it.”

Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America.

As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates

may become, it’s time to get serious about fixing the problems that are

hampering our growth.

Self-mentions tend to be couched in statements of responsibility or assurance,

such as the following:

Still, this is a complex issue, and the longer it was debated, the more

skeptical people became. I take my share of the blame for not

explaining it more clearly to the American people. And I know that

SAGE



2


with all the lobbying and horse-trading, the process left most Americans

wondering, “What’s in it for me?”

There will be difficult days ahead, but I am absolutely confident we will

succeed.

Despite powerful mentions of self, Obama also balances calls to himself with

attempts to show empathy with the average American. He does not retain focus

on himself. He shares the “stage” with other Americans he references.

For these Americans and so many others, change has not come fast

enough. Some are frustrated, some are angry. They don’t understand

why it seems like bad behavior on Wall Street is rewarded, but hard work

on Main Street isn’t, or why Washington has been unable or unwilling

to solve any of our problems. They’re tired of the partisanship and the

shouting and the pettiness. They know we can’t afford it. Not now.

This kind of language moves us into the lives of average Americans, who

momentarily take the foreground of the speech.

The aspirations they hold are shared: a job that pays the bills, a chance

to get ahead, most of all, the ability to give their children a better life.

These empathy-laden statements are also claims. They attempt to show how the

speaker understands his larger audience. Obama even uses direct quotes, not of

famous individuals but of average Americans, threading their voice with his own.

One woman wrote to me and said, “We are strained but hopeful,

struggling but encouraged.”

Textured details make those people seem real, such as a reference to a window

manufacturer who had to “add two more work shifts just because of the business

SAGE



2


it created.” Obama paints a picture of ordinary Americans in a collage such

as the following, which not only activates the lives of ordinary Americans but

encapsulates scenes in just a few lines.

It lives on in the struggling small-business owner who wrote to me of his

company, “None of us,” he said, “… are willing to consider, even slightly,

that we might fail.” It lives on in the woman who said that even though

she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, “We are strong.

We are resilient. We are American.” It lives on in the 8-year-old boy in

Louisiana who just sent me his allowance and asked if I would give it to

the people of Haiti.

Empathy is used not only to engage but as a direct call to action: “People

are out of work. They’re hurting. They need our help. And I want a jobs bill

on my desk without delay” (1:48). Note that this language combines empathy

and an authoritative request, which, on its own, might sound too domineering.

By preceding the authoritative request with empathetic language, it makes the

request less severe, more justified.

By first making strong “I” statements and then moving into empathy-laden scene-

lets, Obama is able to seem both strong and empathetic. Without the empathy,

he would seem too self-involved. Without the “I” statements, he would seem self-

effacing.

Now, our administration has had some political setbacks this year, and

some of them were deserved. But I wake up every day knowing that

they are nothing compared to the setbacks that families all across this

country have faced this year. And what keeps me going, what keeps

me fighting, is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination

and optimism, that fundamental decency that has always been at the

core of the American people, that lives on.

SAGE



2


This technique is used not only for Americans but for international citizens as

well, as when he references Haitians, the girl who “yearns to go to school in

Afghanistan,” and a man “denied a job by corruption in Guinea.”

Appeals to Logical Reasoning

Obama’s language, including his self-mentions, frequently employs appeals to

reason and causative sentence connectors such as “if,” “reason,” “why,”

“realizing,” “but,” and “just stating the facts.” For example, “[The anxieties are]

not new,” he says, “These struggles are the reason I ran for President.” This

is the language of explanation, of justification, and of causal logic. It reinforces

the speaker as a person governed by reason, as someone who makes claims

based on connecting points of information, not simply presenting isolated pieces

of information. In addition to relying on a list of items connected with “and,”

Obama uses buts and conceptual therefores to generate and sustain this logical

momentum and to connect apparent facts.

That is why jobs must be our number-one focus in 2010, and that’s why

I’m calling for a new jobs bill tonight.

A strong, healthy financial market makes it possible for businesses to

access credit and create new jobs. It channels the savings of families

into investments that raise incomes. But that can only happen if we

guard against the same recklessness that nearly brought down our entire

economy.

But realizing those benefits also means enforcing those agreements

so our trading partners play by the rules. And that’s why we’ll continue

to shape a Doha trade agreement that opens global markets and why

we will strengthen our trade relations in Asia and with key partners like

South Korea and Panama and Colombia.

SAGE



2


But understand, if we don’t take meaningful steps to rein in our debt,

it could damage our markets, increase the cost of borrowing, and

jeopardize our recovery, all of which would have an even worse effect on

our job growth and family incomes.

To make college more affordable, this bill will finally end the unwarranted

taxpayer subsidies that go to banks for student loans. Instead, let’s take

that money and give families a $10,000 tax credit for 4 years of college

and increase Pell grants. And let’s tell another 1 million students that

when they graduate, they will be required to pay only 10 percent of

their income on student loans, and all of their debt will be forgiven after

20 years and forgiven after 10 years if they choose a career in public

service, because in the United States of America, no one should go

broke because they chose to go to college.

Even when the discourse seems to activate emotion, that, too, is often framed in

terms of justification with the use of words such as “despite” and “but,” reinforcing

the speech’s inscribed logic.

But I wake up every day knowing that [political setbacks] are nothing

compared to the setbacks that families all across this country have

faced this year. And what keeps me going, what keeps me fighting,

is that despite all these setbacks, that spirit of determination and

optimism, that fundamental decency that has always been at the core of

the American people, that lives on.

Obama’s appeals to reason is a way to make claims, a larger strategy for

generating a convincing speech. Few of these claims are “hedges.” Many of them

are simply stated as a general truth, such as declaring that “Now, even as we

prosecute two wars, we’re also confronting perhaps the greatest danger to the

American people, the threat of nuclear weapons.” These claims are presented

SAGE



2


as unquestionable, highlighting declarative certainty. Most claim making is framed

in terms of positive statements, couched in logical language, about an improving

economy, or other “good news.”

And as a result, the markets are now stabilized, and we’ve recovered

most of the money we spent on the banks—most but not all.

Pessimistic claims are less common.

One in 10 Americans still cannot find work. Many businesses have

shuttered. Home values have declined. Small towns and rural

communities have been hit especially hard. And for those who’d already

known poverty, life’s become that much harder.

Claims suggesting an intuitive understanding, rather than a rational underpinning,

are less frequent, such as “So I know the anxieties that are out there right

now.” Rather than making such empathetic claims, Obama tends to instead pair

emotive statements with vignettes of Americans. Painting the picture of everyday

Americans is what gives statements such as the following their weight: “America

must always stand on the side of freedom and human dignity.”

Furthermore, Obama uses words suggesting absolutes (“only,” “never,” “every,”

“always,” “absolutely”) to make his statements easy to follow and to minimize

nuance.

The only way to move to full employment is to lay a new foundation

for long-term economic growth and finally address the problems that

America’s families have confronted for years.

It’s because of this spirit, this great decency and great strength, that I

have never been more hopeful about America’s future than I am tonight.

SAGE



2


It would require every insurance plan to cover preventive care.

I’m absolutely convinced that was the right thing to do.

Absolutist language is the language of certainty. It simplifies complexities and

reduces confusion. Though absolutist words are often simplistic or reductive,

combined with logical language and facts, absolutist language has the effect of

making Obama’s conclusions seem sound and undeniable. Combining appeals to

logic, absolutist language, and claims about what has happened, is happening,

and will happen generates discourse that, on the surface, seems indisputable—a

discourse that seems reliable and logically sound.

America’s Historical Trajectory

The State of the Union Address is part of a larger social and communicative

situation, an ongoing tradition set against the background of current American

culture. Obama not only mentions current events to contextualize his speech, he

also makes reference to the U.S.’s larger historical arc, as when he calls attention

to the first railroads, the Bull Run, the Allies at Omaha Beach, and Black Tuesday.

References to time are evident in a timescale invoking two centuries but also

apparent in how he personalizes his ties to the past, for example, in embracing

the vision of “John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan.” These references do not

simply foreground the notion of America’s destiny, they also place Obama within

this larger journey, legitimizing his role in the American story. He also connects

the American story to his listeners: “Again, we are tested. And again, we must

answer history’s call.” To engage in his discourse is to engage in time; the listener

is drawn into the trajectory and into the sustained momentum of American history

and mythic exceptionalism.

This recession has also compounded the burdens that America’s families

have been dealing with for decades: the burden of working harder and

SAGE



2


longer for less, of being unable to save enough to retire or help kids with

college.

The spirit that has sustained this Nation for more than two centuries

lives on in you, its people. We have finished a difficult year. We have

come through a difficult decade. But a new year has come. A new

decade stretches before us. We don’t quit. I don’t quit. Let’s seize this

moment to start anew, to carry the dream forward, and to strengthen our

Union once more.

In the end, it’s our ideals, our values that built America, values that

allowed us to forge a nation made up of immigrants from every corner of

the globe, values that drive our citizens still.

But I also know this: If people had made that decision 50 years ago or

100 years ago or 200 years ago, we wouldn’t be here tonight. The only

reason we are here is because generations of Americans were unafraid

to do what was hard, to do what was needed even when success was

uncertain, to do what it took to keep the dream of this Nation alive for

their children and their grandchildren.

Repetition as Structure

Obama uses repetition to create rhythm and generate a structure for emphasis.

In other words, repetition with variation creates both a melodious rhythm as well

as a structure for making increasingly nuanced points. “We do not give up. We

do not quit. We do not allow fear or division to break our spirit.” In some cases,

the subject of the sentence changes, but the verb repeats. “I hated it. I hated it;

you hated it.” This technique makes an implicit bond between “I” and “you.” Other

examples include the following:

Talk to the window manufacturer in Philadelphia who said he used to

SAGE



2


be skeptical about the Recovery Act, until he had to add two more work

shifts just because of the business it created. Talk to the single teacher

raising two kids who was told by her principal in the last week of school

that because of the Recovery Act, she wouldn’t be laid off after all.

There are stories like this all across America. And after 2 years of

recession, the economy is growing again. Retirement funds have started

to gain back some of their value. Businesses are beginning to invest

again, and slowly some are starting to hire again.

Repetition is used to make a claim and then suggest an imperative. In the

following, “I know they will” is followed by “They will.” This repetition is not only

rhythmic, it serves an authoritative purpose as well.

Now, the House has passed a jobs bill that includes some of these steps.

As the first order of business this year, I urge the Senate to do the same,

and I know they will. They will. People are out of work. They’re hurting.

They need our help. And I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.

Repetition is just as effective in Obama’s attempts to be accommodating: “let me

know. Let me know. Let me know. I’m eager to see it.” Other examples of

repetition include the following paragraph where three subjects (China, Germany,

and India) are all followed by the same verb form: not waiting. It gives more weight

to the verb, as well as draws a greater implied contrast between the U.S. and the

other countries.

Meanwhile, China’s not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany’s not

waiting. India’s not waiting. These nations are—they’re not standing

still. These nations aren’t playing for second place. They’re putting more

emphasis on math and science. They’re rebuilding their infrastructure.

It lives on in the struggling small-business owner who wrote to me of

SAGE



2


his company, “None of us,” he said, “… are willing to consider, even

slightly, that we might fail.” It lives on in the woman who said that even

though she and her neighbors have felt the pain of recession, “We are

strong. We are resilient. We are American.” It lives on in the 8-year-

old boy in Louisiana who just sent me his allowance and asked if I

would give it to the people of Haiti. And it lives on in all the Americans

who’ve dropped everything to go someplace they’ve never been and

pull people they’ve never known from the rubble, prompting chants of

“U.S.A.! U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” when another life was saved.

Role Structure and Humor

Obama’s speech calls attention to role structure, the implied relationship between

himself and his listener and the attendant roles played by himself, members

of Congress, and viewers at large. For example, in the following quotation, he

mentions letters he has read from children regarding their parents’ financial

struggles. The roles implied here are American citizens as individuals with limited

agency, as those requesting answers, whereas the president is the one whose

responsibility it is to address these troubles.

These struggles are what I’ve witnessed for years, in places like Elkhart,

Indiana; Galesburg, Illinois. I hear about them in the letters that I read

each night. The toughest to read are those written by children asking why

they have to move from their home, asking when their mom or dad will

be able to go back to work.

Similarly, in the following quotation, the president makes a request of members of

Congress to be transparent regarding earmark requests. Here, he draws attention

to their role as public servants and his role as leader and request maker.

I’m also calling on Congress to continue down the path of earmark

SAGE



2


reform, Democrats and Republicans—Democrats and Republicans.

Look, you’ve trimmed some of this spending, you’ve embraced some

meaningful change, but restoring the public trust demands more. For

example, some Members of Congress post some earmark requests

online. Tonight I’m calling on Congress to publish all earmark requests on

a single website before there’s a vote so that the American people can

see how their money is being spent.

In assessing role structure in the transcript, we also see moments of humor.

For example, the speech as it is transcribed includes references to laughter and

applause. That is, it captures atmospherics, not just Obama’s spoken words. Note

that not all speeches are transcribed in this manner. This approach to transcription

is, in itself, a decision that researchers make in their study design.

Obama uses humor as a way of activating role structure. In other words, he takes

advantage of the role relationship between himself and those in the immediate

audience. “It was about as popular as a root canal. [Laughter].” In some cases,

Obama reacts to applause or laughter:

We cut taxes for 8 million Americans paying for college. [Applause] I

thought I’d get some applause on that one. [Laughter]

We might make a distinction between internal and external relations in the

discourse. By saying, “I thought I’d get some applause,” Obama is referencing an

external relation, outside the internal relation of the textual items in the speech

proper. In some cases, the audience’s laughter seems unexpected, as in the

following:

Let’s meet our responsibility to the citizens who sent us here. Let’s try

common sense—[Laughter]—a novel concept.

Of course, none of these reforms will even happen if we don’t also reform

SAGE



2


how we work with one another. Now, I’m not naive. I never thought

that the mere fact of my election would usher in peace and harmony

and—[Laughter]—some postpartisan era.

If we were to analyze the video of the speech, we might also see Obama

grin or pause, another indication that he is engaged in an external relation, to

the situation the audience has created by applauding or laughing. The more

that Obama responds to the audience, the more his speech becomes a fluid

communicative moment that changes form in response to the verbal cues of the

audience.

Review

Discourse analysis is used to make sense of the linguistic, content, and rhetorical

structure of language in use, such as a speech, diary, or online forum. After

reading this dataset, you should be able to:

• Define how and why discourse analysis is used in research.

• Use discourse analytic coding techniques.

• Write a discourse analysis report.

Reflective Questions

The following is an excerpt from President H. W. Bush’s State of the Union

address on January 31, 1990.

Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, members of the United States Congress:

I return as a former President of the Senate and a former member of this

great House. And now, as President, it is my privilege to report to you on

the state of the Union.

SAGE



2


Tonight I come not to speak about the state of the government, not to

detail every new initiative we plan for the coming year nor to describe

every line in the budget. I’m here to speak to you and to the American

people about the state of the Union, about our world—the changes we’ve

seen, the challenges we face—and what that means for America.

There are singular moments in history, dates that divide all that goes

before from all that comes after. And many of us in this chamber have

lived much of our lives in a world whose fundamental features were

defined in 1945; and the events of that year decreed the shape of

nations, the pace of progress, freedom or oppression for millions of

people around the world.

Nineteen forty-five provided the common frame of reference, the

compass points of the postwar era we’ve relied upon to understand

ourselves. And that was our world, until now. The events of the year just

ended, the Revolution of ’89, have been a chain reaction, changes so

striking that it marks the beginning of a new era in the world’s affairs.

Think back—think back just 12 short months ago to the world we knew

as 1989 began.

One year—one year ago, the people of Panama lived in fear, under

the thumb of a dictator. Today democracy is restored; Panama is free.

Operation Just Cause has achieved its objective. The number of military

personnel in Panama is now very close to what it was before the

operation began. And tonight I am announcing that well before the end

of February, the additional numbers of American troops, the brave men

and women of our armed forces who made this mission a success, will

be back home.

SAGE



2


A year ago in Poland, Lech Walesa declared that he was ready to open

a dialog with the Communist rulers of that country; and today, with the

future of a free Poland in their own hands, members of Solidarity lead the

Polish government.

A year ago, freedom’s playwright, Vaclav Havel, languished as a prisoner

in Prague. And today it’s Vaclav Havel, President of Czechoslovakia.

And one year ago, Erich Honecker of East Germany claimed history as

his guide, and he predicted the Berlin Wall would last another hundred

years. And today, less than one year later, it’s the Wall that’s history.

Remarkable events—events that fulfill the long-held hopes of the

American people; events that validate the long-standing goals of

American policy, a policy based on a single, shining principle: the cause

of freedom.

1. What does President Bush’s discourse suggest about his intent? Does

he present himself as reliable?

2. Consider rhetorical patterns in his data. What kind of language tends

to show up repeatedly?

3. What communicative modes are evident in these data? (Persuasive?

Emotive? Rational?)

References

Alexander, I. (1988). Personality, psychological assessment, and

psychobiography. Journal of Personality, 56, 265–294.

Burman, E., & Parker, I. (Eds.). (1993). Discourse analytic research: Repertoires

and readings of texts in action. London, UK: Routledge

SAGE



2


de Beaugrande, R. (1997). The story of discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk

(Ed.), Discourse as structure and process. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Eggins, S., & Martin, J. R. (1997). Genres and registers of discourse. In T. A. van

Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Gee, J. P. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (4th

ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.

Moerman, M. (1992). Life after CA. In G. Watson & R. M. Seller (Eds.), Text

in context: Contributions to ethnomethodology (pp. 20–34). Thousand Oaks, CA:

SAGE.

Potter, J., & Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond

attitudes and behaviour. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

Waring, H. Z. (2017). Discourse analysis: The questions discourse analysts ask

and how they answer them. New York, NY: Routledge.

Yang, X. (2009). Devices of probability and obligation in text types. Philadelphia,

PA: John Benjamins.

SAGE



2


learn to use discourse analysis to analyze oral discourse

Documents