COURSE TITLE: ADVANCED DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
COURSE CODE: ENG 804
ASSIGNMENT: IDENTIFY ANY THREE 21ST CENTURY APPROACHES TO
DISCOURSE ANALYSIS
NAME: OYENIYI, MERCY OLUWAKEMI
MATRIC NUMBER: 24310321797
LECTURER: Prof. ADELEKE.A. FAKOYA
Introduction
Discourse analysis is a dynamic field concerned with the study of language-in-use and the
ways in which communication constructs meaning, identities, and social realities. Scholars
have defined discourse analysis in various ways, reflecting its interdisciplinary nature.
Fairclough (1992) describes it as the study of “language as a form of social practice,”
emphasizing how discourse both reflects and shapes social structures. Gee (2025) similarly
defines discourse analysis as the examination of how language functions in context to build
significance, identities, relationships, and social practices. Schiffrin (1994) adds that
discourse analysis investigates “language beyond the sentence,” focusing on how stretches of
talk or text achieve coherence and meaning.
A central concept in discourse analysis is identity, which refers to how individuals present
themselves and are recognized within social interactions. Identity is not fixed but is
continuously negotiated through discourse (De Fina, Schiffrin, & Bamberg, 2006). In the 21st
century, approaches to discourse analysis have expanded to address new communicative
environments, diverse media, and evolving social structures. Among these, three prominent
approaches stand out: Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), Multimodal Discourse Analysis
(MDA), and Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL).
This assignment will examine these three approaches, highlighting how each contributes to
the understanding of identity in contemporary discourse. CDA emphasizes the relationship
between language, power, and ideology; MDA explores how meaning is constructed across
multiple modes such as text, image, and sound; and SFL provides a functional framework for
analyzing how linguistic choices shape social interaction. Together, these approaches
illustrate the richness of 21st-century discourse analysis and its relevance to the study of
identity in modern contexts.
21st Century Approaches to Discourse Analysis
1) Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) is an interdisciplinary approach to studying language
that examines how discourse (spoken, written, or multimodal communication) both reflects
and shapes power relations, ideology, inequality, and social structures. It is concerned not just
with what is said, but why, how, by whom, and with what social consequences.
CDA views language as a form of social practice—that is, discourse both constructs and is
constructed by society. It was developed in the late 20th century by scholars such as Norman
Fairclough, Teun A. van Dijk, and Ruth Wodak. Fairclough emphasized discourse as social
practice, van Dijk contributed a socio-cognitive model linking discourse to ideology and
racism, and Wodak advanced the Discourse-Historical Approach.
Tools of CDA
Textual Analysis: Examining vocabulary, grammar, and rhetorical devices to uncover
ideological meanings.
Discursive Practice: Analyzing how texts are produced, distributed, and consumed.
Social Practice: Connecting discourse to broader social structures such as education, politics,
or media.
CDA shows how identities are shaped by dominant discourses and power relations. For
example, students may be positioned as “successful” or “struggling” depending on
institutional language, while teachers may adopt identities of compliance or resistance.
2) Multimodal Discourse Analysis (MDA)
Multimodality refers to the use of multiple modes of communication to create meaning.
Rather than relying solely on written or spoken language, multimodal texts combine
linguistic, visual, audio, spatial, and gestural resources to communicate messages.
In contemporary communication—especially digital environments—meaning is rarely
constructed through language alone. Images, layout, colour, typography, sound, movement,
and interaction all contribute to interpretation.
Multimodal Discourse Analysis was pioneered by Gunther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen in
the 1990s. Their book Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary
Communication (2001) established the field. James Paul Gee (2025) also emphasizes
multimodality, noting that oral language itself is multimodal, combining tone, gesture, and
facial expression.
Tools of MDA
Visual Analysis: Studying images, layout, and design.
Gestural and Bodily Modes: Examining facial expressions, gestures, and body orientation.
Digital Multimodality: Analyzing emojis, GIFs, videos, and memes in online
communication.
Intersemiotic Relations: Exploring how different modes (text, image, sound) combine to
construct meaning.
Identity is enacted across modes. A student using emojis in assignments signals a playful or
rebellious identity, while a teacher using formal slides enacts professionalism. In digital
spaces, multimodality is central to how young people construct identities through platforms
like TikTok or Instagram.
3) Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)
Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) is a theory of language that views language as a
social semiotic system—that is, a resource for making meaning within social contexts.
Rather than treating language as a set of abstract rules, SFL examines how people use
linguistic choices to achieve particular purposes in specific situation. It has become highly
influential in linguistics, education, discourse analysis, and applied language studies.
Systemic Functional Linguistics was developed by Michael Halliday in the 1960s and 1970s.
His work An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1994) established SFL as a theory of
language as a social semiotic system. Later scholars such as Ruquiya Hasan, Jim Martin, and
Christian Matthiessen extended SFL into education and genre analysis. Leanne Togher
(2001) applied SFL to clinical discourse, showing how grammatical choices reflect identity
and communicative competence.
Tools of SFL
Mood and Modality: Clause-level choices expressing certainty, politeness, or obligation.
Exchange Structure Analysis: Studying how information and services are demanded or
given (statements, questions, offers, commands).
Generic Structure Potential (GSP): Analyzing genres as goal-oriented steps (narratives,
expositions, service encounters).
Cohesion Analysis: Investigating how texts achieve coherence through reference,
conjunctions, and lexical ties.
Identity is embedded in grammatical choices. For instance, a student saying “Could you
please explain again?” enacts a respectful learner identity, while “Explain this” enacts a more
assertive identity. In clinical contexts, patients’ use of politeness or modality reflects their
identity as communicators, and therapists’ responses shape what identities are possible.
Conclusion
Highlighting the tools of CDA, MDA, and SFL shows how each approach provides distinct
yet complementary insights into identity. CDA uncovers how power and ideology shape
identities, MDA emphasizes multimodal enactments of identity in digital and embodied
contexts, and SFL demonstrates how grammatical and genre choices embed identity in
everyday communication. Together, these approaches equip researchers and educators with
robust analytical tools for understanding identity in the 21st century.
References
De Fina, A., Schiffrin, D., & Bamberg, M. (2006). Discourse and identity. Cambridge
University Press.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.).
Routledge.
Gee, J. P. (2025). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (5th ed.).
Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of
contemporary communication. Arnold.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary
communication. Routledge.
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Blackwell.
Togher, L. (2001). Discourse sampling in the 21st century. Journal of Communication
Disorders, 34(1–2), 131–150. [Link]
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2),
249–283.
Wodak, R. (2001). The discourse-historical approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.),
Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 63–94). Sage.