Content deleted Content added
TeunAvanDijk (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
archived debate |
||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''This section is preserved as an archive of a discussion from the proposal that Discourse should be merged with CDA. Consensus has been reached to '''oppose''' the merge. [[User:The JPS|<font color="Purple">The <b>JP</b>S</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:The JPS|'''<font color="Purple"><b>talk</b> to me</font>''']]</sup> 18:59, 18 November 2006 (UTC) <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>
==Merger==
On 23 January 2006, [[User:Lapaz|Lapaz]] proposed a merger between this article and [[Discourse]].
Line 8 ⟶ 10:
*'''Opposing Merger''' - Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is a complex theory and model that has interpretations of texts and languages that go beyond the study of discourse analysis, and exceed the scope of many schools of thought on the interpretation of discourse. <p> CDA should remain independant from Discourse Analysis (DA) due to its innovative and complex nature. Whilst similar, the studies achieve different results when applied, and thus CDA and DA should remain apart, and more people should focus on the addition of Critical Linguistics (CL) as a conterpoint to CDA and as a resource for those interested in Discourse Analysis. The combination of CDA, DA, and CL would improve the understanding of the masses and no one would have even suggested such a merger be allowed. <p>Adam Moreland
*'''Strongly Oppose''' - for many reasons, the major one being the very principle of Wikipedia to provide correct, detailed and relevant information: (a) CDA obviously is a specific part (approach, perspective) within discourse studies in general, and hence cannot be identified or collapsed with the broader field: we do not collapse syntax with grammar, or grammar with linguistics either: an encyclopedia should also have items that are specific; (b) CDA is now a vast field of research with many scholars, its own journals, meetings, etc. in many countries (c) Many users search the internet specifically for CDA and should thus also find it in Wikipedia (indeed the Wikipedia item on CDA comes out on top in Google!). The article is not perfect, and there are regular intrusions that add blatant errors or information that has nothing to do with CDA, but as it stands the article gives the essential. More specifically what is needed is (i) more history of the development of CDA in several disciplines, (ii) a longer section on methods of CDA (also showing that there is no such thing as ''specific'' methods of CDA), (iii) more information about the applications of CDA in real world problems. ''Teun A. van Dijk'' (Nov 17, 2006)
</div>
==CDA and Discourse Analysis==
| |||