Three Paradigms discourse analysis

The term discourse analysis is a general term that is used in many disciplines and with various terms. In the study of linguistic, discourse designate a complete unity of language, which is generally greater than the sentence, either verbally or in writing. Discourse is a series of sentences to match that connects proportions and the other one, the sentence to one another, forming a single unit. The unity of the language can be long, short can. Sebagaai a text, discourse is not the order of sentences that do not memmpunyai neighbor bonds, not kaliamat which are enumerated granted.
Discourse analysis related to the study of language / language usage. To shed more light on discourse analysis, we need to ask How language is seen in discourse analysis ?.

In this case, Hikam conveyed the three paradigms of analysis used to look at the language. The third paradigm of discourse analysis that will get a lot for the portion described later in this paper.
The first view is represented by the Positivism - Empirical. Adherents of this view of language as a bridge between humans and objects that exist outside of themselves. Human experience is considered to be directly expressed through the use of language without any constraints aatau distortion, as far as he expressed using logical statements, syntactic, and have a relationship with empirical experience. One hallmark of this thinking is the separation between the ideas / thoughts and reality. In relation to discourse analysis, the logical consequence of this understanding is oranng do not need to know the subjective meanings or values ​​underlying the statement, because what is important is whether the statement was made correctly according to the rules of syntax and seemantik. Therefore, the truth syntax (grammar) is the major areas of positivism flow of discourse.

As noted above, the main focal point of the flow of positivism is based on whether or not the language is grammatically. The term is often referred to is the cohesion and coherence. Good discourse cohesion and coherence always contained therein. Cohesion is a harmonious relationship among the elements in the discourse, whereas the coherence of the discourse cohesion so as to bring the idea tertenti understood by the audience.
The second view in discourse analysis is Constructivism. This view is heavily influenced by the ideas of phenomenology. Flow rejects the view of positivism / empiricism in discourse analysis that separates the subject and the object language. In view of constructivism, language is no longer just seen as a tool to understand the objective reality mere separated from the subject as a transmitter of a statement. Constructivism thus assume that the subject is the main actor or a central factor in discourse activities and social relationships.

In this case, citing Hikam who said that, the subject has the ability to exercise control over certain purposes in any discourse. Language which is understood in this paradigm is set and turned in statements that aim. Each statement is basically dalah creation of meaning, ie act of making himself and the disclosure of the identity of the speaker.
Therefore, discourse analysis is intended as an analysis of the meaning and dismantle certain purposes. Discourse is a hidden purpose of the investigation of the subject memngemukakan a pernyataan.pengungkapan was conducted among others by putting yourself in the position of the speaker with the interpretation follows the structure of the speaker's meaning.
A third view is called a critical view. The views would like to correct the view of constructivism views that are less sensitive to the process of production and reproduction of meaning that occurs ssecara historical and institutional. As written Hikam, pandanga constructivism still analyzing the factors that the inherent power relations in each discourse, which in turn plays a role in forming certain types of the following subject-perilakunya.hal behavior that has led to a critical paradigm.

Discourse analysis is not centered on the correctness or incorrectness grammatical structure or process of interpretation as in the view of constructivism. Discourse analysis in a critical paradigm emphasizes the constellation of forces that occur in the process of production and reproduction of meaning. Individuals are not regarded as a neutral subject that can interpret it freely according to his thoughts, because it is associated with and influenced by social forces that Adal in society. Language here is not understood as a neutral medium that lies beyond the person of the speaker.
Language in a critical view is understood as a representation that play a role in shaping a particular subject, certain themes, as well as strategies in it. Therefore, discourse analysis is used to dismantle existing authority in setuap processes such as language, limits what is allowed to be debated, perspective should be used, what topics dibicarakan.Dengan this view, discourse see the language is always involved in the power relations , especially in the formation of the subject, and the various measures contained in the representation of society. Because wearing a critical perspective, (paradigm) The third discourse analysis is often also called Critical Discourse Analysis / CDA.