Within Critical Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) the central concern is with social conditions, rather than discursive action. Roger Fowler (1991: 5), in a discussion of the 'different goals and procedures' of different branches of linguistics, describes Critical Linguistics as an 'enquiry into the relations between signs, meanings and the social and historical conditions which govern the semiotic structure of discourse.' CDA is concerned with 'understanding the nature of power and dominance' and how 'discourse contributes to their production' (van Dijk 2001: 301-2. See also Fairclough 1995; Fowler 1991; van Dijk 1995). For both critical linguistics, and for critical discourse analysts, textual context is crucial - with the text 'not the sentence (or the word, or the sound)' important as 'the basic unit' of analysis (Kress 2001: 35). Suitable data for analysis, examining how language legitimates social control, include documents, textbooks, media texts and media broadcasts.
Conversation Analysis (CA) with its roots in ethnomethodology, broadly, examines the methods people use to make sense of their everyday social world. However, unlike ethnomethodology, CA examines 'the minutiae of naturally occurring conversations represented in verbatim transcript' (Potter & Wetherell 1987: 81), looking at accounts in context, and in terms of sequential organization, in order to identify systematic properties in talk. All conversations, from formal and informal settings, provide data for studies in CA, including institutional talk (e.g. Drew & Heritage 1992; Heritage 1997), the media (e.g., Hutchby 1996), and identity construction (e.g. Antaki & Widdicombe, 1998).
Within linguistics different strands of the discipline have different aims and different procedures. Traditional approaches, for example, treat language as a set of precise rules which must be adhered to in order to facilitate efficient communication. This perspective, which builds on existing assumptions about language, focuses on the structure of language units (including sounds), and conventionally involves using invented sentences to illustrate how these rules work - a method which tends to be disconnected from ordinary talk and social context (de Beaugrande 1996).
In terms of compatibility with CAQDAS, Corpus Linguistics (CL) is a linguistic approach which, with its interest in counting or measuring linguistic features, lends itself readily to the search, count, and code facilities of computer programmes. Unlike the rationalist approaches of traditional linguistics, CL (as with sociolinguistics) tends to use naturally occurring language data - 'based on large samples of language use that the researchers hope are representative of general language practices across a group, culture or even a society' (Yates 2001: 94). The data, the 'corpus' of materials, is a body of text frequently available in machine-readable form (McEnery & Wilson 1996). In CL 'concordance programmes' are used to finds words in the context of text segments, to list them in order, and to calculate word frequency.
- Antaki, Charles and Sue Widdicombe (eds., 1998): "Identities In Talk," London: Sage.
- Antaki, Charles, Michael Billig, Derek Edwards, and Jonathan Potter (2003) "Discourse Analysis Means Doing Analysis: A Critique Of Six Analytic Shortcomings", Discourse Analysis Online 1 (1).
- Billig, Michael (1987): "Arguing and Thinking: A Rhetorical Approach to Social Psychology," Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Billig, Michael, Susan Condor, Derek Edwards, Mike Gane, David J. Middleton, and Alan R. Radley (1988): "Ideological Dilemmas: A social psychology of everyday thinking," London: Sage.
- de Beaugrande, Robert (1996): "The Story of Discourse Analysis," pp. 35-62 in: In Teun van Dijk (ed.): "Introduction to Discourse Analysis," London: Sage.
- Edwards, Derek (1997): "Discourse and Cognition," London: Sage.
- Drew, Paul and John Heritage (eds., 1992): "Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings," Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press.
- Fairclough, Norman (1995): "Media Discourse," London: Edward Arnold.
- Fowler, Roger (1991): "Language in the News: Discourse and Ideology in the Press," London & New York: Routledge.
- Garfinkel, Harold (1967): "Studies in Ethnomethodology," Cambridge: Polity.
- Heritage, John (1997): "Conversation Analysis and Institutional Talk: Analyzing data," pp. 161-182 in David Silverman (ed.): "Qualitative Research: Theory, Method and Practice," London: Sage, 1997.
- Hutchby, Ian (1996): "Confrontation Talk: Arguments, Asymmetries and Power on Talk Radio," Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Kress, Gunther (2001): "From Saussure to Critical Sociolinguistics: The Turn Towards a Social View of Language," pp. 29-38 in M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, and S. J. Yates (eds.) "Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader,," London: Sage.
- McEnery, Tony and Andrew Wilson (1996): "Corpus Linguistics," Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
- Middleton, David and Derek Edwards (eds., 1990): "Collective Remembering," London: Sage.
- Potter, Jonathan (1996): "Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric and Social Construction," Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Potter, Johnathan (2000): "Post Cognitivist Psychology," Theory and Psychology 10: 31-7.
- Potter, Jonathan & Margeret Wetherell (1987): "Discourse and Social Psychology," London: Sage.
- van Dijk, Teun A. (1995): "Discourse Semantics and Ideology," Discourse and Society 5 (2): 243-289.
- van Dijk, Teun A. (2001): "Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis," in M. Wetherell, S. Taylor, and S. J. Yates (eds.): "Discourse Theory and Practice: A Reader," London: Sage.
- Wetherell, Margret, Taylor and Simeneon J. Yates (eds., 2001): "Discourse as Data: A guide for analysis," London: Sage.
- Yates, Simeon J. (2001): "Researching Internet Interaction: Sociolinguistics and Corpus Analysis," pp. 93-146 in: Wetherell, Margaret, Taylor, Stephanie, and Yates, Simeon J.: "Discourse As Data: A Guide for Analysis," London, Thousand Oaks, CA, New Delhi: Sage.