Abstract
Discourse has become a buzzword in the social sciences, and discourse analyses proliferate in European integration studies, too. This chapter suggests, however, that we need to better account for the knowledge- and research-philosophical implications of the linguistic turn in order to capitalise on what discourse studies are good at: envisaging an alternative conception of the political, including of political legitimation. After a brief review of discourse research in European integration studies, the chapter expounds the full implications of the linguistic turn and highlights the distinct epistemologies it has brought about. The chapter then introduces Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), the discourse epistemology used as a primary entry point in the book. It outlines the analytical strategy adopted to combine CDA with sociological and political theory and explicates how it is implemented in a combined, computer-aided content and discourse analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
To give an illustration: the meaning of ‘tree’ was seen to derive from convention (a language community’s agreement to call this phenomenon ‘tree’) and from the principle of difference (the fact that the ‘tree’ was denoted as being different from, that is as not being, bush or meadow), not from physical reality that motivated some linguistic sound (Moebius, 2009, p. 421).
- 2.
Note, however, that Lévi-Strauss, while regarding symbolic systems as super-subjective and ahistoric just as Althusser ideology, still assumed them to be internalised in mental structures of the individual, remaining somewhat true to a subject-centred philosophy of mind.
- 3.
Other inspirations of poststructuralist thought, especially in the works by Derrida, Foucault and Deleuze, include the socio-ethnology of Marcel Mauss and Robert Hertz and the surrealism of the Collège de Sociologie (Moebius, 2009).
- 4.
In addition, it did away not only with economic determinism (as Althusser already did), but also the idea of an ideological superstructure as determining subjects’ relating to the world, thereby challenging orthodox Marxist assumptions in more fundamental ways.
- 5.
Where analysis rests on material generated from interviews, focus groups or participant observations, discourse researchers seek to additionally involve the informants in the reflection of the researcher’s insights so as to ensure that the research accounts for their criticisms, not just for that of peers in academia.
- 6.
- 7.
Indeed, the stress that CDA puts on the distinction between ‘discursive’ and ‘non-discursive’ practices seems to result not from a fundamentally different ontological position, but from a narrower understanding of discourse as an assembly of linguistic and multimodal artefacts. In a (post)structuralist understanding, discourse encompasses the semiosis of social relations more generally, including non-linguistic aspects of signification.
- 8.
A CDA category, which sits in between the construction of interpersonal relations and the construction of interpretive authority, relates to the author(s) own self-situation, for example the signalling of belonging and positioning through stylistic means (N. Fairclough, 1995) or through strategies of perspectivation and mitigation (Reisigl & Wodak, 2001).
- 9.
Triangulation is here used not as a means to achieve a more accurate interpretation, but to enhance a more complex reading of the texts, based on the mutual information of the methods.
- 10.
I wish to thank the subscription service of Rzeczpospolita for having granted free access for the duration of a month.
- 11.
The following tailored search strategies were developed for the different databases. Gazeta Wyborcza: “konstytucja europejska” or “konstytucja dla Europy” or “konwent” or “traktat konstytucyjny” or “Traktat ustanawiający Konstytucję dla Europy” or “europejska konstytucja”; Rzeczpospolita: konstytucj∗ europejsk∗, Konwen∗, europejsk∗ konstytucj∗, konstytucj∗ dla Europy, konstytucj∗ UE, trakta∗ konstytucyjn∗, Traktat ustanawiając∗; Le Monde and Le Figaro: constitution européenne OR traité constitutionel OR convention NOT convention européenne des droits de l’homme.
- 12.
Kohn points to three different types of country-comparison: along with being contexts of a subject of analysis (see above), countries may also feature as object or as unit of analysis. In the former case, the focus is on understanding the specificity of a country, how (institutions in) country X compare to (institutions in) country Y; in the latter case, countries are classified along one or more dimensions (GNP, political regimes etc.) in order to understand how social institutions and processes are systematically linked to variations in national characteristics (Kohn, 1989, p. 20f). This latter type of country-comparison is preferred in the ‘comparative method’ applied in comparative politics and sociology.
- 13.
The ‘comparative method’ favours multiple-case studies where ‘nations’, ideally, figure as controlled variables and where generalisation is based on statistical (population-based) frequency. It focuses on between-case-studies, ranging from (inductive) description and generation of typologies to deductive hypothesis-testing and prediction (Landman, 2008, pp. 4–11).
- 14.
This political-ideological cleavage is ‘lived’ differently in the two national contexts. The two French dailies, then, still sorted themselves into the traditional right-left opposition of French domestic politics, with Le Monde endorsing a social democrat editorial line and highlighting speakers from the left-wing coalition and Figaro readers.
- 15.
Content analysts endorsing an empiricist, quasi-experimental setting additionally carry out sophisticated annotation tests and subsequent reinstructions of annotators to ensure ‘intercoder-reliability’ (Krippendorf, 2004).
- 16.
Semi-automated coding in atlas.ti is based on a search function. It searches given words combined in Boolean operators, identifies text passages entailing the search words and annotates them depending on the reader’s confirming/rejecting decision.
- 17.
At this point, I wish to express my special thanks to Anaïs Bordes and Ewelina Sokołowksa, who gave invaluable support in our discussions of selected coding decisions.
References
Andersen Åkerstrøm, N. (2003). Discourse analytic strategies. Understanding Foucault, Koselleck, Laclau, Luhmann. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Althusser, L. (1976). Ideologie et appareils idelogiques d’Etat. Notes pour une recherche. In L. Althusser (Ed.), Positions (1965–1975) (pp. 67–125). Paris: Les Éditions sociales.
Angermüller, J. (2015). Why There Is No Poststructuralism in France. The Making of an Intellectual Generation. London: Bloomsbury.
Angermüller, J., Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (2014a). The Discourse Studies Reader: An Introduction. In J. Angermüller, D. Maingueneau, & R. Wodak (Eds.), The Discourse Studies Reader. Main Currents in Theory and Analysis (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Angermüller, J., Maingueneau, D., & Wodak, R. (2014b). Theoretical Inspirations: Structuralism vs. Pragmatics. Introduction. In J. Angermüller, D. Maingueneau, & R. Wodak (Eds.), The Discourse Studies Reader. Main Currents in Theory and Analysis (pp. 17–21). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Angermüller, J., Nonhoff, M., Herschinger, E., Macgilchrist, F., Reisigl, M., Wedl, J., … Ziem, A. (Eds.). (2014). Diskursforschung. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch (Vol. 1, 2). Bielefeld: transcript.
Austin, J. L. (1962). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bachmann-Medick, D. (2016). Cultural Turns. New Orientations in the Study of Culture. Berlin: De Gruyter.
Bachmann-Medick, D. (2019). Cultural Turns, Version: 2.0 Docupedia-Zeitgeschichte.
Bartelson, J. (2013). Three Concepts of Recognition. International Theory, 5(1), 107–129.
Benton, T., & Craib, I. (2001). Philosophy of Social Science. The Philosophical Foundations of Social Thought (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan.
Biegoń, D. (2016). Hegemonies of Legitimation. Discourse Dynamics in the European Commission. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Bigo, D. (2014). The (In)securitization Practices of the Three Universes of EU Border Control: Military/Navy—Border Guards/Police—Database Analysts. Security Dialogue, 45(3), 209–225.
Bohman, J. (2007). Beyond Distributive Justice and Struggles for Recognition: Freedom, Democracy, and Critical Theory. European Journal of Political Theory, 6(3), 267–276.
Bohman, J., & Rehg, W. (Eds.). (2017) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 ed.). Stanford: The Metaphysics Research Lab Stanford University.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bublitz, W., & Norrick, N. R. (2011). Introduction: The Burgeoning Field of Pragmatics. In W. Bublitz & N. R. Norrick (Eds.), Foundations of Pragmatics (pp. 1–20). Berlin: de Gruyter.
Buzan, B., Wæver, O., & de Wilde, J. (1998). Security: A New Framework for Analysis. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Pub.
Carta, C., & Morin, J.-F. (Eds.). (2014). EU Foreign Policy through the Lens of Discourse Analysis. Making Sense of Diversity. Surrey: Ashgate.
Checkel, J. T. (1998). The Constructivist Turn in International Relations Theory (A Review Essay). World Politics, 50(2), 324–348.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.
Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in Late Modernity. Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Christiansen, T., Jørgensen, K. E., & Wiener, A. (2001). The Social Construction of Europe. London: Sage.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Philosophical, Paradigm and Interpretive Frameworks. In J. W. Creswell (Ed.), Qualitative Inquiry: Research and Design. Choosing Among Five Approaches (pp. 15–34). Thousand Oaks; London; New York: Sage.
de Cillia, R., & Wodak, R. (2005). Political Discourse. In U. Ammon, P. Trudgill, N. Dittmar, & K. J. Mattheier (Eds.), Sociolinguistics/Soziolinguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch zur Wissenschaft von Sprache und Gesellschaft (Vol. 2, 2nd ed., pp. 1602–1615). Berlin: de Gruyter.
de Saussure, F. (1977 [1916]). Course in General Linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans.). Glasgow: Fontana/Collins.
Derrida, J. (1999). Randgänge der Philosophie (2nd ed.). Wien: Passagen Verlag.
Diez, T. (1996). Postmoderne und europäische Integration. Die Dominanz des Staatsmodells, die Verantwortung gegenüber dem Anderen und die Konstruktion eines alternativen Horizonts. Zeitschrift für Internationale Beziehungen, 3(2), 255–281.
Diez, T. (1999). Die EU lesen. Diskursive Knotenpunkte in der britischen Europadebatte. Opladen: Leske und Budrich.
Diez, T., & Steans, J. (2005). A Useful Dialogue? Habermas and International Relations. Review of International Studies, 31(1), 127–140.
Doerr, N. (2007). Is ‘another’ Public Space Actually Possible? Deliberative Democracy and the Case of ‘women without’ in the European Social Forum Process. Journal of International Women’s Studies, 8(3), 71–87.
Dunmire, P. (2012). Political Discourse Analysis: Exploring the Language of Politics and the Politics of Language. Language and Linguistics Compass, 11(6), 75–751.
During, S. (2005). Cultural Studies: A Critical Introduction. London and New York: Routledge.
Eagleton, T. (1991). Ideology. An Introduction. London: Verso.
Eder, K., & Kantner, C. (2000). Transnationale Resonanzstrukturen in Europa. In M. Bach (Ed.), Europäisierung nationaler Gesellschaften (pp. 306–331). Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Fairclough, I., & Fairclough, N. (2012). Political Discourse Analysis. A Method for Advanced Students. London and New York: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change (Reprinted ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical Discourse Analysis. The Critical Study of Language. Essex: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2004). Analysing Discourse. Textual Analysis for Social Research (Reprinted ed.). London and New York: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2005). Peripheral Vision: Discourse Analysis in Organization Studies: The Case for Critical Realism. Organization Studies, 26(6), 915–939.
Fairclough, N. (2009). A Dialectical-Relational Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis in Social Research. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 162–186). London et al.: Sage.
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed.). Harlow: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2014). Introduction. In N. Fairclough (Ed.), Language and Power (3rd ed., pp. 1–50). London: Routledge.
Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical Discourse Analysis. In T. A. v. Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as Social Interaction (Vol. 2, pp. 258–284). London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: Sage.
Feilke, H. (2000). Die pragmatische Wende in der Textlinguistik. The Pragmatic Turn in Text Linguistics. In K. Brinker, G. Antos, W. Heinemann, & S. F. Sager (Eds.), Gesprächslinguistik. Linguistics of Text and Conversation. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research (Vol. 1, pp. 64–82). Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Fierke, K. M., & Wiener, A. (2001). Constructing Institutional Interests: EU and NATO Enlargement. In T. Christiansen, K. E. Jørgensen, & A. Wiener (Eds.), The Social Construction of Europe (pp. 121–139). London: Sage.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing Public Policy: Discursive Politics and Deliberative Practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Forchtner, B., & Tominc, A. (2012). Critique and Argumentation. On the Relation between the Discourse-Historical Approach and Pragma Dialectics. Journal of Language and Politics, 11(1), 31–50.
Fossum, J. E. (2005). Conceptualizing the EU’s Social Constituency. European Journal of Social Theory, 8(2), 123–147.
Fühlau, I. (1982). Die Sprachlosigkeit der Inhaltsanalyse. Linguistische Bemerkungen zu einer sozialwissenschaftlichen Analyse. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
Gadamer, H.-G. (2004). Truth and Method (J. Weinsheimer & D. G. Marshall, Trans. rev, 2nd ed.). New York: Crossroad.
Gibbons, M. T. (2008). Hermeneutics. In W. A. J. Darity (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 3, 2nd ed., pp. 462–464). Detroit: Thompson Sale.
Giddens, A. (1984). The Constitution of Society: Outline of a Theory of Structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company.
Glynos, J., & Howarth, D. (2007). Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory. Milton Park and New York: Routledge.
Grice, H. P. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Haahr, J. H., & Walters, W. (2004). Governing Europe: Discourse, Governmentality and European Integration. New York: Routledge.
Habermas, J. (1981). Theorie des kommunikativen Handelns. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp.
Habermas, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action (T. McCarthy, Trans., Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society). Boston: Beacon.
Hajer, M. A. (1993). Discourse Coalitions and the Institutionalization of Practice: The Case of Acid Rain in Britain. In F. Fischer & J. Forrester (Eds.), The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning (pp. 43–76). London: Duke University Press.
Hall, S. (1996). Introduction: Who Needs ‘Identity’? In S. Hall & P. Du Gay (Eds.), Questions of Cultural Identity (pp. 1–17). London: Sage.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic. The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Helsloot, N., & Hak, T. (2007). Pêcheux’s Contribution to Discourse Analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung, 8(2-1), Art.1.
Herschinger, E., & Renner, J. (2015). Diskursforschung in den Internationalen Beziehungen. In C. Masala & F. Sauer (Eds.), Handbuch Internationale Beziehungen (pp. 1–21). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.
Holzinger, K. (2004). Bargaining by Arguing. An Empirical Analysis Based on Speech Act Theory. Political Communication, 21(2), 195–222.
Holzscheiter, A. (2014). Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives, 15(2), 142–162.
Howarth, D., Norval, A. J., & Stavrakakis, Y. (Eds.). (2000). Discourse Theory and Political Analysis: Identities, Hegemonies and Social Change. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
İşleyen, B. (2015). The European Union and Neoliberal Governmentality: Twinning in Tunisia and Egypt. European Journal of International Relations, 21(3), 672–690.
Jäger, S. (1999). Kritische Diskursanalyse: Eine Einführung (2nd ed.). Duisburg: DISS.
Joerges, C. (2006). ‘Deliberative Political Processes’ Revisited: What Have We Learnt about the Legitimacy of Supranational Decision-Making. Journal of Common Market Studies, 44(4), 779–802.
Joerges, C., & Neyer, J. (1997). From Intergovernmental Bargaining to Deliberative Political Processes: The Constitutionalisation of Comitology. European Law Journal, 3(3), 273–299.
Keller, R. (2013). Doing Discourse Research. An Introduction for Social Scientists (B. Jenner, Trans.). London: Sage.
Kerchner, B. (2006a). Diskursanalyse in der Politikwissenschaft. Ein Forschungsüberblick. In B. Kerchner (Ed.), Foucault: Diskursanalyse der Politik. Eine Einführung (pp. 33–67). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Kerchner, B. (Ed.). (2006b). Foucault: Diskursanalyse der Politik. Eine Einführung. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Kohn, M. L. (1989). Cross-National Research in Sociology. Introduction. In M. L. Kohn (Ed.), Cross-National Research in Sociology (pp. 17–31). Newbury Park; London; New Delhi: Sage.
Krippendorf, K. (2004). Content Analysis. An Introduction to Its Methodology. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva Reader. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kutter, A. (2007). Petitioner or Partner? Constructions of European Integration in Polish Print Media Debates on the EU Constitutional Treaty. In N. Fairclough, G. Cortese, & P. Ardizzone (Eds.), Discourse and Contemporary Social Change (pp. 433–457). Bern: Peter Lang.
Kutter, A. (2018). Corpus Analysis. In R. Wodak & B. Forchtner (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Language and Politics (pp. 169–186). London: Routledge.
Kutter, A., & Nonhoff, M. (2014). Legitimation. In J. Angermüller, M. Nonhoff, M. Reisigl, D. Wrana, & A. Ziem (Eds.), DiskursNetz: Wörterbuch der interdisziplinären Diskursforschung (pp. 241–242). Berlin: Suhrkamp.
Lacan, J. (1977). Écrits (A. Sheridan, Trans.). London: Routledge.
Laclau, E., & Mouffe, C. (2001/1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards a Radical Democratic Politics (2nd ed.). London: Verso.
Landman, T. (2008). Issues and Methods in Comparative Politics. An Introduction (3rd ed.). Abingdon and New York: Routledge.
Lemke, T. (2012). Foucault, Governmentality, and Critique. London: Boulder.
Liebert, U. (2007). Structuring Political Conflict about Europe: National Media in Transnational Discourse Analysis. Perspectives on European Politics and Society, 8(3), 235–260.
Martilla, T. (2016). Post-Foundational Discourse Analysis. From Political Difference to Empirical Research. London and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Martin, J. (1985). Process and Text: Two Aspects of Human Semiosis. In J. Bendon & W. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse (Vol. 1). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corperation.
Martin, J. (1992). English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mautner, G. (2009). Checks and Balances: How Corpus Linguistics Can Contribute to CDA. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 122–143). London et al.: Sage.
Mayring, P. (2008). Qualitative Inhaltsanalyse. Grundlagen und Techniken. Weinheim and Basel: Beltz Verlag.
Menz, F., & Wodak, R. (1990). Sprache in der Politik—Politik in der Sprache: Analysen zum öffentlichen Sprachgebrauch. Klagenfurt: Drava.
Moebius, S. (2004). Emmanuel Lévinas´ Humanismus des Anderen zwischen Postmoderner Ethik (Zygmunt Bauman) und Ethik der Dekonstruktion (Jacques Derrida). In S. Kollmann & K. Schödel (Eds.), PostModerne De/Konstruktionen. Ethik, Politik und Kultur am Ende einer Epoche (pp. 45–60). Münster: Lit-Verlag.
Moebius, S. (2009). Structuralismus/Poststructuralismus. In G. Kneer & M. Schroer (Eds.), Handbuch soziologische Theorien (pp. 419–444). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Mosca, L., Teune, S., Rucht, D., & Martin, S. L. (2009). Communicating the European Social Forum. In D. della Porta (Ed.), Another Europe: Conceptions and Practices of Democracy in the European Social Forums (pp. 46–64). London: Routledge.
Neal, A. W. (2009). Securitization and Risk at the EU Border: The Origins of FRONTEX∗. Journal of Common Market Studies, 47(2), 333–356.
Niesen, P., & Herborth, B. (Eds.). (2007). Anarchie der kommunikativen Freiheit. Jürgen Habermas und die Theorie der internationalen Politik. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp.
Nonhoff, M. (2006). Politischer Diskurs und Hegemonie. Bielefeld: transcript.
Nowak, P., Pelikan, J., Gruber, H., de Cillia, R., Mitten, R., & Wodak, R. (1990). Wir sind alle unschuldige Täter’. Diskurshistorische Studien zum Nachkriegsantisemitismus. Frankfurt (Main): Suhrkamp.
Parker-Ryan, S. (2017). Ordinary Language Philosophy. The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://www.iep.utm.edu/ord-lang/.
Pütter, U. (2003). Informal Circles of Ministers—A Way Out of the EU’s Institutional Dilemmas? European Law Journal, 9(1), 109–124.
Reckwitz, A. (2000). Die Transformation der Kulturtheorien: zur Entwicklung eines Theorieprogramms. Weilerswist: Velbrück.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2001). Discourse and Discrimination: Rhetorics of Racism and Antisemitism. London et al.: Routledge.
Reisigl, M., & Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse-Historical Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 87–121). London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: Sage.
Ricœur, P. (1973). Creativity in Language. Philosophy Today, 17(2), 97–111.
Ricœur, P. (1978). The Critique of Religion. In C. E. Reagan & D. Stewart (Eds.), The Philosophy of Paul Ricœur: An Anthology of His Work (pp. 213–223). Boston: Beacon Press.
Risse, T. (2000). Let’s Argue! Communicative Action in World Politics. International Organization, 54(1), 1–39.
Risse, T. (Ed.). (2015). European Public Spheres: Politics is Back. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Roe, E. (1994). Narrative Policy Analysis: Theory and Praxis. Durham: Duke University Press.
Rorty, R. M. (Ed.). (1992). The Linguistic Turn. Essays in Philosophical Method. With Two Retrospective Essays. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Sabatier, P. A., & Jenkins-Smith, H. C. (1999). The Advocacy Coalition Framework. An Assessment. In P. A. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of Policy Process (pp. 117–166). Colorado: Boulder.
Schimmelfennig, F. (2001). The Community Trap: Liberal Norms, Rhetorical Action, and the Eastern Enlargement of the European Union. International Organization, 55(1), 47–80.
Schmidt, V. A. (2011). Speaking of Change: Why Discourse Is Key to the Dynamics of Policy Transformation. Critical Policy Studies, 5(2), 106–126.
Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Snell-Hornby, M. (2010). The Turns of Translation Studies. In Y. Gambier & L. van Doorslear (Eds.), Handbook of Translation Studies (Vol. 1, pp. 366–370). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Spitzmüller, J., & Warnke, I. H. (2011). Discourse as a ‘linguistic object’: Methodical and Methodological Delimitations. Critical Discourse Studies, 8(2), 75–94.
Stembrouck, S. (2010). Discourse Analysis. In L. Cummings (Ed.), The Routledge Pragmatics Encyclopedia (pp. 120–122). London: Routledge.
Stone, D. (2012). Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision Making (3rd rev. ed.). New York: W. W. Norton.
Stone, P. J. (1966). A Perspective on Content Analysis. In P. J. Stone, D. Dunphy, M. S. Smith, & D. M. Ogilvie (Eds.), General Inquirer: A Computer Approach to Content Analysis (pp. 3–19). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Taylor, C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham and London: Duke University Press.
Torfing, J., & Howarth, D. (Eds.). (2005). Discourse Theory in European Politics: Identity, Policy and Governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Tully, J. (1995). Strange Multiplicity. Constitutionalism in the Age of Diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Dijk, T. (1984). Prejudice in Discourse. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
van Dijk, T. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 149–283.
van Dijk, T. (1997a). What Is Political Discourse Analysis? Belgian Journal of Linguistics, 11(Special Issue on Political Linguistics), 11–52.
van Dijk, T. (Ed.). (1997b). Discourse as Social Interaction (Vol. 2). London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi: Sage.
van Dijk, T. (2009). Critical Discourse Studies: A Sociocognitive Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 62–86). London and New Delhi: Sage.
van Dyk, S., Langer, A., Macgilchrist, F., Wrana, D., & Ziem, A. (2014). Discourse and Beyond? Zum Verhältnis von Sprache, Materialität und Praxis. In J. Angermüller, M. Nonhoff, E. Herschinger, F. Macgilchrist, M. Reisigl, J. Wedl, D. Wrana, & A. Ziem (Eds.), Interdisziplinäre Diskursforschung. Ein Handbuch (Vol. 2, pp. 347–363). Bielefeld: transcript.
van Eemeren, F. H., & Grootendorst, R. (2004). A Systematic Theory of Argumentation: The Pragma-Dialectical Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
van Hulst, M., & Yanow, D. (2014). From Policy ‘Frames’ to ‘Framing’: Theorizing a More Dynamic, Political Approach. The American Review of Public Administration (Online First Version), 1–29. .
van Leeuwen, T. (1993). Genre and Field in Critical Field Analysis: A Synopsis. Discourse and Society, 4(2), 193–223.
van Leeuwen, T. (1996). The Representation of Social Actors. In C. R. Caldas-Coulthard & M. Coulthard (Eds.), Text and Practices. Readings in Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 32–70). London and New York: Routledge.
van Leeuwen, T. (2009). Discourse as Recontextualisation of Social Practice: A Guide. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 144–161). London and New Delhi: Sage.
van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing Immigration Control: A Discourse-Historical Analysis. Discourse and Society, 1(1), 83–118.
Wæver, O. (1996). European Security Identities. Journal of Common Market Studies, 34(1), 103–132.
Wæver, O. (2004). Discursive Approaches. In A. Wiener & T. Diez (Eds.), European Integration Theory (pp. 197–215). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wæver, O. (2005). European Integration and Security: Analysing French and German Discourses on State, Nation, and Europe. In J. Torfing & D. Howarth (Eds.), Discourse Theory in European Politics: Identity, Policy and Governance (pp. 33–67). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wagenaar, H. (2011). Meaning in Action. Interpretation and Dialogue in Policy Analysis. Armonk and New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Walter, J. (2014). Europa regieren—Regierungen Europas: Perspektiven einer gouvernementalen Analyse im Anschluss an Foucault. In A. Vasilache (Ed.), Gouvernementalität, Staat und Weltgesellschaft. Studien zum Regieren im Anschluss an Foucault (pp. 171–195). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wiener, A. (2006). Constructivist Approaches in International Relations Theory: Puzzles and Promises. Constitutionalism Webpapers, ConWeb No. 5/2006.
Wiener, A., Börzel, T., & Risse, T. (Eds.). (2019). European Integration Theory (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Wiener, A., Dunoff, J., Havercroft, J., & Kumm, M. (2019). Global Constitutionalism as Agora: Interdisciplinary Encounters, Cultural Recognition and Global Diversity. Global Constitutionalism, 8(1), 1–11.
Winter, R. (2009). Cultural Studies. In G. Kneer & M. Schroer (Eds.), Handbuch Soziologische Theorien (pp. 67–85). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
Wittgenstein, L. (2009 [1953]). Philosophical Investigations (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans. and G. E. M. Anscombe & R. Rhees, Eds., 4th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.
Wodak, R. (2001). The Discourse-Historical Approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (pp. 63–94). London: Sage.
Wodak, R. (2002). Aspects of Critical Discourse Analysis. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik, 36, 5–31.
Wodak, R. (2008). Introduction: Discourse Studies—Important Concepts and Terms. In R. Wodak & M. Krzyżanowski (Eds.), Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences (pp. 1–29). Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R. (2009). The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R. (2015). The Politics of Fear. What Right-Wing Populist Discourses Mean. London: Sage.
Wodak, R., & Chilton, P. (2005). Preface. In R. Wodak & P. Chilton (Eds.), A New Agenda in (Critical) Discourse Analysis (pp. XI–XVIII). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Wodak, R., & Krzyżanowski, M. (Eds.). (2008). Qualitative Discourse Analysis in the Social Sciences. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Wodak, R., Menz, F., & Lalouschek, J. (1989). Sprachbarrieren. Die Verständigungskrise in der Gesellschaft. Vienna: Wiener Zeitschriftenverlag.
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical Discourse Analysis: History, Agenda, Theory and Methodology. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis (2nd ed., pp. 1–33). London; Thousand Oaks; New Delhi; Singapore: Sage.
Wrana, D. (2014). Diskursanalyse jenseits von Hermeneutik und Strukturalismus. In J. Angermüller, J. Angermüller, M. Nonhoff, E. Herschinger, F. Macgilchrist, M. Reisigl, J. Wedl, D. Wrana, & A. Ziem (Eds.), Diskursforschung. Ein interdisziplinäres Handbuch (Vol. 1, pp. 511–536). Bielfeld: transcript.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case Study Research. Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks; London; New Delhi: Sage.
Zienkowski, J., Östman, J.-O., & Vershueren, J. (Eds.). (2011). Discursive Pragmatics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kutter, A. (2020). Advancing the Linguistic Turn: Premises of Conceptual Work. In: Legitimation in the European Union. Postdisciplinary Studies in Discourse. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33031-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33031-6_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33030-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33031-6
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)