Form and function.

Discourse analysis

1. Form and Function ( Discourse Analysis ) Level-7

2. Introduction According to McCarrthy (1991), discourse analysis describes the language above the sentence:  its context and the cultural influence, which affect language in use. A discourse carries much more than its form, it also carries its own particular function, which means that there is not necessarily one-to-one relationship between a given suprasegmental choice and a meaning, hence form and function might be analyzed separately in order to depict the real meaning of a discourse.

3. Difference between form and function Form is concerned with syntactic structure up to the sentence level, i.e. the arrangement of morphemes and words into the larger units of group, clauses, and finally, sentences. Form is also concerned with the syntagmatic relationship between words within clauses and sentences. Function is concerned with the purpose which those grammatical forms are designed to serve in human affairs.

4. F orm refers to the way traditional grammar deals with forms and classes of words ; for instance, a verb, an adverb, a subject, an interrogative sentence, etc. On the other hand, in discourse analysis, the function of forms and classes of words are not exclusively related to their forms or classes , but the way the sentence is produced or play a significant role . For example, in "She went home." the structure is in the form of a declarative clause, however, this form can be used in order to apply another function, other than the affirmative (declarative) function, for example: “She went home?”. Therefore, the same sequence has got another value, the one of a question, even though it maintains the same structure (form) of a declarative (affirmative) clause.

5. Within discourse analysis it is often the case that the functions of linguistic items in both spoken and written text are not predictable simply from a consideration of their forms . Chaudron (1988: 39) states that although many verbal behaviors can be quickly and confidently identified, there are “frequently finer nuances of meaning and tacit rules of discourse implicit in even the simplest expression…” This can result in the conversion of linguistic items from one function to another relative to the overall proceedings of the discourse. Nunan (1991: 42) adds that in terms of the discourse we are engaged in, “predictability will depend on whether the discourse or text type contain predictable patterns, and also the extent to which we are familiar with these patterns …” Therefore, the contextual environment in which items appear in either a descriptive, expressive or social role has to be considered in order for their function to be accurately evaluated.

6. Approaches to Discourse analysis Structural approach: Discourse is a particular unit of language. Functional approach: Discourse is a particular focus of language use.

7. Structural approach to discourse Structural approach finds the constituents that have particular relationships with each other and that can occur in a restricted number of arrangements but the problems with this approach is, the units in which people speak do not always look like sentences, or grammatically correct sentences. Example; (From “The Colour Purple”, Alice Walker) Jack is tall and kind and don't hardly say anything. Love children. Respect his wife, Odessa, and all Odessa Amazon sisters.

8. Example; Colourless green ideas sleep furiously (Chomsky ) Solving the problem: adopt Lyons’s distinction between system-sentences and text-sentences . System sentences are well-formed abstract theoretical sentences generated according to the existing grammar rules. T ext-sentences are context-dependent utterances or parts of utterances which occur in everyday life. The discourse analysis will be concerned with text-sentences.

9. Functional approach to discourse Utterances may have multiple functions. The major concern of this approach to discourse analysis can turn out into a more general and broader analysis of language functions.

10. Jakobson's functions of language Roman Jakobson (1960)  defined six functions of language (or communication functions), according to which an effective act of verbal communication can be described . Each of the language functions has an associated factor . Component/factor Function Addressor (emotive) Addressee ( conative ) Context ( referential) Contact ( phatic ) Message ( poetic ) Code ( metalinguistic )

11. Emotive (Expressive or Affective) function: relates to the Addresser (sender) and is best exemplified by interjections and other sound changes that do not alter the denotative meaning of an utterance but do add information about the Addresser's (speaker's) internal state, e.g. "Wow, what a view !“ Conative function: engages the Addressee (receiver) directly and is best illustrated by vocatives and imperatives . (Oriented to the hearer and impact on the hearer.) e.g. "Tom! Come inside and eat !“ 3. Referential function: corresponds to the factor of Context and describes a situation, object or mental state. The descriptive statements of the referential function can consist of both definite descriptions and deictic words. e.g. "The autumn leaves have all fallen now .“

12. 4. Phatic function: is used for the sake of interaction and is therefore associated with the Contact/Channel factor. The Phatic Function can be observed in greetings and casual discussions of the weather, particularly with strangers. It also provides the keys to open, maintain, verify or close the communication channel: e.g. "Hello?", "Ok?", " Hmmm ", "Bye "... 5. Poetic Function: focuses on "the message for its own sake" (the code itself, and how it is used) and is the operative function in poetry as well as slogans. 6. Metalinguistic function : is the use of language (what Jakobson calls "Code") to discuss or describe itself.