- citati u SCIndeksu: 0
- citati u CrossRef-u:0
- citati u Google Scholaru:[
 ]
- posete u poslednjih 30 dana:7
- preuzimanja u poslednjih 30 dana:4
|
|
|
2020, vol. 54, br. 4, str. 1260-1278
|
|
Razvoj pojma diskursa kao instrumenta kritičke društvene analize
Development of discourse as an instrument of critical social analysis
Projekat: Demokratski i nacionalni kapaciteti političkih institucija Srbije u procesu međunarodnih integracija (MPNTR - 179009)
Sažetak
Budući da je koncept diskursa postao gotovo nezaobilazan u savremenim proučavanjima velikog broja društvenih i političkih fenomena, te da kao takav predstavlja transdisciplinarni instrument društvene analize i kritike, nesporna je važnost ukazivanja na to u čemu se sastoji njegova teorijsko-metodološka relevantnost. S tim ciljem u radu je data geneza ovog polivalentnog pojma, kroz razvojni prikaz različitih analitičkih nivoa njegovog razmatranja, a u kontekstu opštih okvira naučnih uvida relevantnih za njegovu teorijsku operacionalizaciju. Posebnu analitičku pažnju dobile su koncepcije Mišela Fukoa i Jirgena Habermasa, ne samo zato što je reč o dvema najuticajnijim teorijama diskursa u dvadesetom veku, već i stoga što razlike između njihovih shvatanja pružaju celoviti uvid u važnost ovog pojma.
Abstract
Since the concept of discourse has become almost indispensable in the contemporary research of a large number of social and political phenomena, and as such represents a transdisciplinary instrument of social analysis and critique, it is of indisputable importance to indicate what its theoretical-methodological relevance consists of. For that purpose, the genesis of this polyvalent concept is given in this paper through the developmental presentation of various analytical levels of its consideration within the context of general frameworks of scientific insights relevant for its theoretical operationalization. Particular analytical attention was given to the concepts of Michel Foucault and Jürgen Habermas, not only because those are two of the most influential discourse theories in the twentieth century, but also because the differences between them offer a more comprehensive insight into the importance of this concept.
|
|
|
|
Reference
|
|
2 
|
Bugarski, R. (1989) Introduction to General Linguistics. Beograd: BIGZ, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Derrida, J. (1990) White Mythology. Novi Sad: Bratstvo-jedinstvo, [In Serbian]
|
|
 
|
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998) Habermas and Foucault: Thinkers for civil society?. British Journal of Sociology, vol. 49, br. 2, str. 210-233
|
|
|
Foucault, M. (2007) Order of Discourse. Loznica: Karpos, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Foucault, M. (1998) Archeology of Knowledge. Beograd: Plato, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Foucault, M. (2010) Writings and Conversations. Beograd: Fedon, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Habermas, J. (1980) Theory and Practice: Socio-Philosophical Studies. Beograd: BIGZ, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Halliday, M. (1973) Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold
|
|
|
Halliday, M. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold
|
|
|
Halliday, M. (2003) On Language and Linguistics. London-New York: Continuum
|
|
|
Holzscheiter, A. (2014) Between Communicative Interaction and Structures of Signification: Discourse Theory and Analysis in International Relations. International Studies Perspectives, 15, 142-162
|
|
|
Kelly, M., ed. (1994) Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate. Cambridge: MIT Press
|
|
|
Nikolić, M. (2013) Linguistic Means for Expressing Power in Confrontational Discourse. Beograd: Univerzitet u Beogradu-Filološki fakultet, (doctoral dissertation). Available at: https://fedorabg.bg.ac.rs/fedora/get/o:8041/bdef:Content/get [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Pavićević, Đ. (1995) Ethics of Discourse. Philosophy and Society, VII, 129-157. [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Pešić, M. (2016) Satirical Literary Projections of Social and Political Reality in the Public Sphere of Serbia at the End of XIX and Beginning of XX Century. (doctoral dissertation)
|
|
|
Pešić, M. (2011) Conceptual basis of research on discourse relation, power, politics and democracy. Srpska politička misao, br. 4, str. 309-334
|
|
|
Ristić, D. (2015) Meanings of Action: Sociological Analysis Discursive Practices of Ideology. Novi Sad: Univerzitet u Novom Sadu-Filozofski fakultet, (doctoral dissertation). Available at: https://nardus.mpn.gov.rs/handle/123456789/4509 [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Searle, R.J. (1991) Speech Acts. Beograd: Nolit, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Simić, R., Jovanović, J. (2009) About Discourse. Uzdanica (Jagodina), 6 (2), 7-21
|
|
|
Škiljan, D. (1980) A View on Linguistics. Zagreb: Školska knjiga, [In Serbian]
|
|
|
Willa, D. (1992) Postmodernism and the Public Sphere. American Political Science Review, 86(3): 712-721
|
|
|
Živković, B. (2014) Conversation Analysis: From Sociology to Linguistics. u: Perović S. [ur.] Discourse Analysis: Theories and Methods, Podgorica: University of Montenegro-Institute of Foreign Languages, 77-95
|
|
|
|
|