Towards a methodology of cultural discourse studies

Abstract

One of the new theoretical advances in communication studies is the re-emergence of consciousness of culture, whether or not in human communication in general or specific settings of such as health, business, science, or media in particular. However, owing to difference in theory and research goals, there exists a myriad methods for analysis which, if explicit at all, are incompatible or even at odds with one another. Cultural Discourse Studies takes communication as a global system composed of culturally diversified and competing discourses, where cultures are viewed as constituted in and through those discourses. Therefore CDS aims to find differences as well as similarities, interaction as well as interconnection, of cultural discourses, all with a view to enhancing cultural development, harmony and prosperity on the one hand and achieving scientific innovation on the other hand. To resolve the methodological fragmentation in general and to answer the research questions and achieve the objectives just mentioned in particular, CDS formulates a comprehensive and integrated system of explicit approaches, as follows. Intracultural analysis: To search for identity, distinction, particularity, or peculiarity of a cultural discourse, i.e. that of a geopolitical/historical/ethnic community, through structural and interpretive analysis of the relevant discursive components in the data at hand (e.g. self-image, concepts, values, major themes, strategies of meaning-making); Transcultural analysis: To search for incursionby, influence from,or fusionwithaspectsofother cultural discourses by discovering relevant borrowings, transfusions or recreations of concepts and ideas, norms and values, topics and expressions or else responses and reactions of some sort; Crosscultural analysis: To search for differences, contrasts, variations as well as ambivalence between the cultural discourses in question through comparison of relevant discursive components or aspects (e.g. different representations of the ‘same’ reality, variable attitudes towards the ‘same’ issue, contrary actions taken); Intercultural analysis: To search for self and other representations by and interactions between different cultural discourses in question and so also resultant identities, penetrations, and relations of power (e.g. domination, exclusion, marginalization, resistance, cooperation, synergy); Pancultural analysis: To search for commonalities, similarities, equivalences and interconnections between different cultural discourses in question through analysis of relevant discursive aspects (e.g. communicators, conceptions, objectives, shared experiences); Axiocultural analysis: To make evaluations over aspects or properties of cultural discourse(s) in question and propose new norms and ways of communication to enhance cultural development, unity and prosperity. In this regard, CDS adopts its own culturalpolitical standards, global and local. Whilst the global criterion, subject to continuing dialogue across our discipline, is whether and to what extent a discourse is in favour of cultural flourishing–cultural equality, freedom and prosperity, the local criteria are contingent upon the specific native values and concerns of the relevant cultural commu-