A faircloughian approach to cda: Principled eclecticism or a method searching for a theory?

Abstract

For researchers wanting to take up critical discourse analysis (CDA) as an analytical tool, Norman Fairclough's (1989) early work provided a step‐by‐step approach that he called ‘a guide not a blueprint’. In response to calls for a more explicit theoretical justification, Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) attempted to theoretically ‘ground’ CDA and to spell out its underpinning theories ‘explicitly and systematically’. Their recommendation for a ‘shifting synthesis’ of theoretical sources, however, has been criticised, raising significant questions about the extent to which this work is method‐driven and theoretically‐framed. This article explores some of the issues, considerations and advantages that surfaced as the author drew on a Faircloughian approach to CDA, its theory and method in researching literacy learning.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 55 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.