What is Discourse Analysis?

Discourse analysis is the study of spoken and written “texts” that seeks to understand each part of the discourse in light of the whole discourse as well as its social, cultural, and historical context. While there are many approaches to discourse analysis, this website takes a Systemic Functional Linguistic approach. Discourse analysis treats a text not simply as a set of propositions or grammatically related clauses, but as a tool that the author is using to achieve a social outcome.

Discourse analysis seeks to understand the relationships between language, discourse, and situational context by drawing upon the insights of linguistics, anthropology, sociology, philosophy, communication theory, social psychology, rhetoric, and artificial intelligence. As a result, discourse analysis studies the text needs on three levels: the field, tenor, and mode of the discourse. The field is what is happening in the author’s and readers’ world, the tenor is who is involved and how they are relating to each other, and the mode is how the text is configured to achieve the author’s goals.

Studying the ideational metafunction reveals the field of discourse by observing the way authors use various discourse features to present their view of the situation under discussion. Studying the interpersonal metafunction reveals the tenor of discourse by discovering the way authors use discourse features to navigate their relationship with the readers. Studying the textual metafunction reveals the mode of discourse by observing the way authors use various discourse features to create coherent and cohesive texts that are able to achieve their goals.

Discourse analysis takes into account both the semantic and pragmatic aspects of the text. How an author chooses to structure a discourse affects its meaning and reveals the author’s goals. It studies the discourse features of the text to form an objective interpretation that is based on verifiable data. As a result, discourse analysis has predictive and explanatory power that enables interpreters to compare texts and demonstrate how those texts use various discourse features in different ways to achieve their unique goals.

Why do we need discourse analysis?

Discourse analysis treats language as a resource and not merely a set of rules. A person can learn all the rules of grammar and still not understand what a text means and how it is being used. People use language not simply to communicate propositional truth but to accomplish social objectives. A text, then, is not simply a conglomeration of ideas but a communicative social event intended to achieve specific social goals.

Discourse analysis moves beyond the word, clause, sentence, and paragraph and analyzes each part of the discourse in relation to every other part and to the whole. Because it studies the text as a whole, it seeks to explain how each part contributes to the overall social objectives of the text. It avoids assigning too much weight to individual words or phrases and asserts that even clauses and sentences cannot be interpreted in isolation. Discourse analysis, then, provides a comprehensive linguistic framework which seeks to comprehensively understand a text within its inner co-text and outer social context.

Discourse analysis relies upon vast amounts of objective data rather than subjective intuition. While statistics are not conclusive on their own, they reveal tendencies and relationships that provide discourse analysis with predictive and explanatory power. This objective data also enables interpreters to compare the styles of different texts and authors, going beyond choices of lexis and grammar while also explaining how style is significant for exegesis.

What are the foundational principles of discourse analysis?

The interpreter must take into account the social function of language by analyzing both the author’s role in producing a discourse and the reader’s comprehension and response to the discourse. For example, an author might use a mitigated command to persuade reluctant readers to respond in a particular way without alienating them [1 John 1:6], or he may use a strong exhortation because of the seriousness of the issue [1 John 2:15].

The interpreter, therefore, must understand the language as both a set of rules that need to be followed in order to communicate meaning and as a resource that people use to navigate social relationships and accomplish social goals. For example, a foreigner might understand all the grammatical rules of a second language and still not be able to use the language to achieve any social goals beyond simple daily tasks, such as ordering a meal or finding the bathroom. Likewise, an interpreter might know all the rules of Koine Greek grammar and still not know why a sentence is structured the way it is. An interpreter might correctly identify the first element in a clause as an accusative direct object but not be able to explain why the author placed it first in the clause [John 1:1c].

The interpreter must distinguish between semantics and pragmatics in order to understand both what a discourse means and how a discourse achieves its objectives. For example, the aorist tense-form presents the action of the verb externally as a whole semantically, but pragmatically the aorist is used to drive the mainline of a narrative because it best-suited to relate distinct events in rapid succession, simulating the movement of events one after another in real time. The present tense verb form, however, presents the action of the verb internally, without reference to its beginning or end, slowing down the narrative and drawing the reader in, making it ideal for dialogue and description.

Because choice implies meaning, the interpreter must explain the choices the author makes in the grammatical and syntactical system. For example, why did the author choose an aorist rather than an imperfect [aorist rather than a future in Romans 8:30], or why did the author make the direct object the first element in the clause [John 1:1b].

Likewise, because structure implies meaning, the interpreter must explain how the author has chosen to structure the discourse to help the readers navigate the discourse and successfully interpret it and respond to it appropriately. For example, the author may introduce information unfamiliar to the readers before commenting on it [1 John 1:5], while at other times new information may be inserted without an introduction for a particular effect [1 John 2:20]. While all the components of a clause may be identical, authors may use different word orders to answer different questions. Likewise, sentences, paragraphs, and sections are ordered in a particular way to achieve a particular result. Therefore, the interpreter must determine the structure on every level and determine how that structure determines the meaning of each part and the discourse as a whole.

Because a discourse functions on multiple levels, the interpreter must analyze the field, tenor, and mode of the discourse. The field is what is happening in the author’s and readers’ world, the tenor is who is involved and how they are relating to each other, and the mode is how the text is configured to achieve the author’s goals. For example, John mainly uses mental and verbal processes in 1 John 1:1-3 to emphasize his personal experience of the incarnate Christ as the basis for his qualification to bear witness to him. In 1 John 2:3-11, however, John nominalizes most of the material and verbal processes with articular participles and uses mainly relational processes to analyze various types of people.

The interpreter needs to consider the genre of the overall discourse as well as the genres of the various parts of the discourse and how they cohere with each other. For example, a narrative usually consists of sections of narrative proper and discourse proper, or dialog. Within narrative, there might be background material, asides, and explanations [John 2:6], and in discourse proper there may be embedded narratives [1 John 2:19]. Hortatory discourse usually contains hortatory sections which are often supported by expository sections and embedded narratives [1 John 2:15-17]. The interpreter must determine how each of the sections functions and how they cohere to each other.

What are the prerequisites of discourse analysis of the Greek New Testament?

In order to perform a proper discourse analysis of the Greek New Testament, there are several prerequisites that must be met.

First, the you need to have a working knowledge of Koine Greek grammar and be able to recognize all of the different parts of grammar and distinguish the various morphological forms. Since the analysis must be made on the Greek text itself and not a translation, the better you know the grammar and can quickly parse each form the easier it will be to do discourse analysis.

There are many textbooks and websites to help you get up to speed, but I recommend Rodney Decker’s textbook, Reading Koine Greek, because it provides a solid linguistic foundation as well as thoroughly explaining the grammatical forms and their function. Gary Long’s book, Grammatical Concepts 101 for Biblical Greek: Learning Biblical Greek Grammatical Concepts through English Grammar, does an excellent job explaining grammar if you slept through English classes in school. You should also incorporate the periodic review of paradigms and vocabulary into your schedule.

Second, fluency in reading the Greek New Testament will greatly facilitate your ability to analyze the text. Begin by reading easy portions of the Greek New Testament as quickly as possible with at least 70% comprehension. The goal is not to parse every word or exegete the text but to be able to move through the text quickly and easily. It is also helpful to read a passage in one sitting after you have done your analysis to facilitate fluency.

There are several useful resources out there to help you. Zondervan and UBS have Readers editions of the Greek New Testament that list vocabulary at the bottom of each page. However, do not use an interlinear or Bible software to cheat because this will short-circuit the learning process.

Third, competence in exegesis is also required, so review Greek exegesis so that you are able to understand the syntax of the passage and are able to make a syntactical diagram quickly and easily. Discourse analysis does not replace exegesis, but it builds upon exegesis. A solid exegetical analysis of the text is an essential prerequisite to discourse analysis.

There are several helpful resources out there to make your exegesis go more quickly. B&H and Baylor have great exegetical guides, and the Cyber-Center 
for Biblical Studies has helpful grammatical and exegetical notes and charts as well. Biblearc.com is a helpful resource to teach you how to determine the relationships between clauses and how they fit together to support the main point of the discourse.

Finally, Accordance Bible software is highly recommended because of its sophisticated and fast search capabilities. Stephen Runge’s Lexham six volume Discourse Greek New Testament Bundle on Logos, which has his tagging and explanation of the discourse features of the Greek text, are very helpful.