Collective Review: The Theoretical and Methodical Polymorphism of Discourse Studies—Discourse-Orientated Studies' Challenging Research Practice

Authors

  • Hannah Sophie Rosenberg Goethe-Universität Frankfurt/Main

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-16.3.2431

Keywords:

discourse studies, discourse theory, discourse analysis

Abstract

Discourse studies is an interdisciplinary field which has become increasingly important in recent years and has been developed as an established research perspective at the intersection of language and society, of knowledge and power. This research perspective's theoretical and methodical polymorphism, however, leads time and again to uncertainties and problems, particularly in the conception and implementation of studies of this type. Three works which respond—in different ways—to the requirement for systematization and orientation occurring as a result of this field's polymorphism are presented below. It should be noted that the presented works are not to be misunderstood as method books or guidance to the "correct" implementation of discourse-orientated studies, but should rather be read as a motivation to and a comprehension of questions, problems, and directions of discourse studies, even across national and disciplinary borders.

URN: http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs1503281

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Hannah Sophie Rosenberg, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt/Main

Hannah ROSENBERG arbeitet seit 2010 am Institut für Sozialpädagogik und Erwachsenenbildung der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt/Main. Aktuelle Forschungsinteressen und Arbeitsschwerpunkte sind: Theorie der Erwachsenenbildung, Diskurs- und Gouvernementalitätsforschung, Wissenschaftsforschung, Praxistheorie.

Published

2015-08-12

How to Cite

Rosenberg, H. S. (2015). Collective Review: The Theoretical and Methodical Polymorphism of Discourse Studies—Discourse-Orientated Studies’ Challenging Research Practice. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 16(3). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-16.3.2431

Issue

Section

FQS Reviews