[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Xmca-l] Re: A methodological question



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9N1LGKNRzXs

I think that, one of the most strong ideological blows to capitalism and
imperialism and existing world order, at least ideologically, was his
sentence that, "Human rights are spoken frequently, but we must speak of
the rights of the humanity as well".

In one sentence, this forner guerilla, now a soldier of ideas as he called
himself later, he destoyed this one of the most important ideological
weapons of imperialism and if, movements in the 1st world and also 2nd
world, from that time on, could have adopted this "discourse" , this new
concept, this new ideological weapon for humanity against imperialism, now
our world would be much different than today...because imperialism kills
the consciences of billions of human being with such weapons, turn them
into "dead souls" without ability to think and to act...





On 10 February 2017 at 10:53, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks David and Ed and all.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10 February 2017 at 00:55, Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>
>> David
>>
>>     I was thinking of the SFL version of RST (I think - although I didn’t
>> check - that the particular tool on this site incorporates some of
>> Mathiessen’s ideas). If you know differently, I would appreciate that
>> information. I think, doing as you did in your previous email, would work
>> well also, but there is, perhaps, with this tool less of a learning curve.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> > On Feb 9, 2017, at  4:39 PM, David Kellogg <dkellogg60@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Right, Ed. Note that there is a systemic-functional version of RST
>> > developed by Christian Matthiessen (using "elaboration", "extension",
>> and
>> > "enhancement" as the main logico-semantic relations that are realized in
>> > parataxis, hypotaxis, and embedding (these are structurally different,
>> but
>> > we can functionally relate them).
>> >
>> > I've always wondered if there is something developmental going on here.
>> > It's a grammatical expression of the genetic law, because parataxis is
>> > easily SHARED between speakers, hypotaxis is more intra-mental, and
>> > "embedding" is when that intra-mentality can be assumed.
>> >
>> > The latest analysis I did showed no statistically significant change
>> > between first graders and sixth graders in Korean schools in their
>> > hypotaxis and parataxis, but a big change in embedding. I think one of
>> the
>> > reasons that Castro's speeches are so long is that when he embeds, he
>> > unpacks with taxis. But the lack of statistical significance in taxis
>> was
>> > due to extreme variations within groups, dwarfing the variations between
>> > them. The embedding was significant between groups: one of the things
>> that
>> > kids learn about Korean is how to embed.
>> >
>> > Castro: "This nation has had to face the taming of not one tiger, not
>> two
>> > tigers, not three tigers, but the taming of 1,000 tigers."
>> >
>> > Embedding: "of ...." is rankshifted--a noun is embedded in a noun group
>> >
>> > Castro: "Someone once said that it was a paper tiger, and it is, from a
>> > strategic point of view, because some day it will cease being the
>> world's
>> > owner."
>> >
>> > Unpacking: "it was a paper tiger" unpacks "tiger" into a sentence
>> > (elaboration) and then explains (enhancement)
>> >
>> > David Kellogg
>> > Macquarie University
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 7:08 AM, Edward Wall <ewall@umich.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Ulivi
>> >>
>> >> This is only a suggestion, but you might find rhetorical structure
>> theory
>> >> interesting if you want to get at embedding (there is a tool for
>> analysis
>> >> and some discussion: http://www.sfu.ca/rst/06tools/ )
>> >>
>> >> Ed
>> >>> On Feb 9, 2017, at  3:43 PM, Ulvi İçil <ulvi.icil@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Dear xmcas,
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> I would like to direct to you a methodological question and to kindly
>> >> have
>> >>> your idea.
>> >>>
>> >>> I am reading Fidel Castro's speeches. They are full of critiques of
>> >>> neoliberal globalization, capitalism and so on.
>> >>>
>> >>> If I would like to study those speeches in terms of the adult
>> educational
>> >>> aspects, elements they possess (because they are addresses to
>> conscience
>> >>> of the adult world, mostly Cuban people, various sections of Cuban
>> people
>> >>> and society) I wonder what would be the best methodology.
>> >>>
>> >>> For a study something like: Critical discourse in Fidel Castro's
>> >> speeches.
>> >>>
>> >>> Not CDA, I suppose, because, my aim will not be looking at what lies
>> >> behind
>> >>> and hidden in these speeches, because they already demystify
>> capitalism
>> >>> etc. which means that as an analyst I have a subjectivity which is on
>> the
>> >>> side of Castro rather than aiming at criticizing him, I intend to make
>> >>> visible what he criticizes in the global neoliberal world.
>> >>>
>> >>> Discourse analysis?
>> >>>
>> >>> Thinking that I intend to include into the study all the emotional,
>> >>> spiritual elements in those speeches, with many evaluations,
>> >> qualifications
>> >>> like "teaching, medicine nobel professions" etc.
>> >>>
>> >>> Should I study something on the line like "critical discourse
>> (embedded)
>> >> in
>> >>> Fidel Castro's speeches"?
>> >>>
>> >>> If yes, how?
>> >>>
>> >>> And if not, what may be the best possible methodological alternative?
>> >>>
>> >>> It is so interesting that while I studied the valuable works of Norman
>> >>> Fairclough on CDA, on the critique of globalisation etc, which, for
>> the
>> >>> focus of study, they have, various aspects of capitalist,
>> transnational
>> >>> company discourse etc, I found that same critique not as an analysis,
>> >> but,
>> >>> itself, in Fidel Castro's public speeches, criticizing neoliberal
>> >>> globalisation etc, so how to study Castro's speech texts?!
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Thank you very much.
>> >>>
>> >>> Ulvi
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
>>
>