Grammar and Social Worlds

Part of the Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse book series (PSDS)


This chapter introduces a new way of understanding empirical research in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), whereby the priority is not the exploration of a social problem or oppressive ideology, but rather the discovery of as-yet-unimagined new forms of social structure. Such an approach requires an engagement with those aspects of postmodern theory that dialectical-relational CDA usually rejects: the idea of the self, or subject, as discursively constructed. The chapter also offers a critique of practice theory, which views social actors as actors mediating discourses, and thus placing the burden of responsibility on the individual to effect change. The chapter explores how a CDA that is better informed by postmodern theory allows ways of imagining non-oppressive social structures.


Social World Grammatical Structure Critical Discourse Analysis Practice Theory Grand Narrative 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Atterton, P. (2002). Emmanuel Levinas. In H. Bertens & J. Natoli (Eds.), Postmodernism: The key figures (pp. 231–238). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  2. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  4. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  5. Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and power. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  6. Foucault, M. (1990). The history of sexuality, volume 1: The will to knowledge. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  7. Foucault, M. (1991). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (trans: Sheridan, A.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
  8. Giddens, A. (1979). Central problems in social theory: Action, structure, and contradiction in social analysis. London: MacMillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Levinas, E. (1987). Collected philosophical papers. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Lukes, S. (2005). Power: A radical view. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Lyotard, J.-F. (1984). The postmodern condition: A report on knowledge. (trans: Bennington, G. and Massumi, B.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lyotard, J.-F. (1985). Just gaming. (trans: Godzich, W.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  13. Shildrick, M. (2002). Embodying the monster: Encounters with the vulnerable self. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Shildrick, M. (2012). Dangerous discourses of disability, subjectivity and sexuality. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EnglishSheffield Hallam UniversitySheffieldUK

Personalised recommendations