Discourse Analysis

The Relationship between Discourse and Power

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

1.1. Background

The term ‘Discourse’ refers to a complete unit of language, in which it is

the highest and largest grammatical unit in grammatical hierarchy, with sentences,
clauses, phrases, words respectively as the next lower language unit and phoneme
as the lowest one. As a complete language unit, discourse then should cover
concepts, thoughts, or ideas that are intact, so that it can be understood by the
reader (in written case) or listener (in spoken case) without any doubt. Therefore,
discourse has a broader meaning than just as a reading material since it focuses
more on language in use.

Furthermore, in Bahasoan and Kotarumalos (2014), discourse can be

defined based on Foucault's understanding as the field of all statements,
sometimes as an individualization of groups of statements, and sometimes as
regulative practices seen from a number of statements. By this definition, it is
shown that discourse always intersect with knowledge, and in fact, the practice of
power is always directly proportional to knowledge, or in other word, there is a
deep relationship among discourse, knowledge, and power. Moreover, curiosity
about something (or in this case means knowledge) that becomes an expression of
the desire for power is expressed in discourse as organized practices and
organizing social relations. Thus, this kind of discourse is considered as a practice
that changes social constellation and produces something and that the link
between knowledge and power lies when the discourse is changed as a claim to
the truth and contextual that is visible in the discourse of any field such as
education, law, religion, and so on.

1
 Nevertheless, the power in this context is not hierarchical (e.g. state
power, apparatus power, etc.) so that the power is interpreted as normalizing or
stabilizing something according to the field of power about knowledge itself, as
well as power that pegs from and on behalf of and which disciplines. And such
power spreads and operates within existing social mechanisms. The operation of
power will continuously create a knowledge entity, and vice versa the
administration of knowledge will have the effect of power, so that the discourse of
truth is formed and produced through the processes and mechanisms of power and
that discourse cannot stand autonomously within the framework of objective truth,
in which discourse becomes an inseparable part of the power process and
mechanism. It is therefore, this present writing is set to further investigate the
relationship between discourse and power.

1.2. Problem Statement

“What do discourse and power mean? And how discourse and power can
relate to each other?”

1.3. Objective

The objective of this present writing is to describe what discourse and

power are as well as to find out how discourse and power themselves can relate to
each other.

2
 CHAPTER II

DISCUSSION

A. Definition of Discourse

Discourse as a term in language is becoming increasingly common in a

wide range of academic and non-academic contexts. The term discourse itself can
be defined broadly. In many structural approaches, discourse is viewed as a
particular unit of language, in which it is a level of structure higher than the
sentence or higher than another unit of text. It is then in accordance with Stubbs
(as cited in UK Essays, 2018) that thought discourse as language above the
sentence or above the clause.

Meanwhile, by functional approach, the functionalist defined the study of

discourse as “the study of any aspect of language use” (Fasold, as cited in UK
Essays). This is consistent with Brown and Yule (as cited in UK Essays), stating
that “the analysis of discourse is necessarily the analysis of language in use”. By
these definitions, it can be seen that the analysis of language use to the analysis of
purposes and functions of language in human life cannot be separated and that the
major concern is to examine how any language produced by man is used to
communicate for a purpose in a context which can turn out into a more general
and broader analysis of language functions.

Additionally, Fairclough (as cited in UK Essays) has distinguished

discourse into two primary senses; discourse as social action and interaction
(predominant in language studies), and discourse as a social construction of reality
(predominant in post- structuralism social theory).

All in all, defining discourse as utterance seems to be balance both the

functional emphasis on how language is used in context and the formal emphasis
on extended patterns (Schiffrin, as cited in UK Essays) and that discourse should
cover concepts, thoughts, or ideas that are intact, so that it can be understood by
either the reader or listener without any doubt.

3
 B. Definition of Power

Power, in general, is defined as the ability to cause or prevent an action,

make things happen; the discretion to act or not act, in which the ability conferred
on a person by law to determine and alter (by his or her own will) the rights,
duties, liabilities, and other legal relations, of himself or others.

In social science and politics, power is the capacity of an individual to

influence the conduct (behavior) of others. The term "authority" is often used for
power that is perceived as legitimate by the social structure. The use of power
then need not involve force or the threat of force (coercion). An example of using
power without oppression is the concept "soft power," as compared to hard power.
In addition, Michel Foucault saw power as a structural expression of "a complex
strategic situation in a given social setting" that requires both constraint and
enablement (as cited in Wikipedia).

Furthermore, power is dynamic in its usage and can transform from one
form of power to another, and for that, Lukes (as cited in Sik & Fei, 2017) has
attempted to articulate three different forms or faces of power called “dimensions”
as follows.

 Behavioral dimension of power refers to decision-making power that is

manifest in the open contest for dominance in situations of objective
conflict of interests.
 Non-decision-making power is power behind the scene. It involves the
mobilization of organizational bias (e.g., agenda fixing) to keep conflict of
interests from surfacing to become public issues and to deprive
oppositions of a communication platform to raise their voices, thereby
limiting the scope of decision-making to only “safe” issues that would not
challenge the interests of the power-wielder.
 Ideological and works by socializing people’s needs and values so that
they want the wants and do the things wanted by the power-wielders,
willingly as their own. Conflict of interests, opposition, and resistance

4
 would be absent from this form of power, not because they have been
maneuvered out of the contest as in the case of non-decision-making
power, but because the people who are subject to power are no longer
aware of any conflict of interest in the power relationship, which may
otherwise ferment opposition and resistance. Power in this form can be
exercised without the application of coercion or reward, and without
arousing perceived manipulation or conflict of interests.

All in all, power can be seen as possession of the qualities (especially

mental qualities) required to do something or to get something done.

C. The Relationship between Discourse and Power

Foucault (as cited in Bahasoan & Kotarumalos, 2014) viewed discourse as

a tactical element that operates in power relations. It then indicates that there is a
reciprocal relationship between discourse and power. Furthermore, as explained
aforementioned in the background that discourse becomes an inseparable part of
the power process and mechanism, it then can be said that discourse is a tool for
the interests of power, hegemony, cultural dominance and science. Moreover, it
can be seen that the distribution of discourse to the community in the post-modern
era is carried out strategically through the media, both printed and electronic,
which in this case, the discourse as viewed by Foucault above can be used as an
enforcer or a tool to strengthen power and of course also has a great influence so
that it can affect the mindset of the community. Foucault also said that the whole
discourse had quite strategic potential whether the discourse was dominant or not.

Furthermore, Foucault explained that discourse or knowledge also

operates strategically based on certain interests and that discourse is socially
distributed among the community while carrying a variety of ideologies, which
ultimately aims to influence the community as the object of the process of
discourse spreading. For instance, advertisements from skin care or beauty
products in our country mostly use models with fair skin, in which it can lead to
the discourse that the other women with black or light brown skin is considered

5
ugly, bad and not beautiful. Another example is the shampoo and hair
conditioning advertisement can cause an ideology which plays a strategic role to
insert racism ideology into society that might change people's mindset, in which
discourse of “fair or bright skin” will build ethnic sentiment since the
advertisements do not give rise to a sense of justice that may offense the Papuans
ethnic in this country. In these two cases, the public opinion will be controlled in
accordance with the ideology that the black or light brown skin and the curly hair
are considered not beautiful. It then will benefit producers of skin care or beauty
products that use these advertising media. In this case, even though the conception
of beauty is very relative, the capitalist agent (the cosmetics manufacturer's
trading strategy) plays a role in playing the aforementioned discourse. Thus, it is
very important to have a deep review for a given discourse, either explicitly or
implicitly.

Additionally, during the reign of Soeharto, people became so frightened to

be accused for not being ‘Pancasilais’ since they would certainly be watched for
their activities and could even be jailed. This ‘Pancasilais’ discourse was used by
the New Order government to make a general conception of how an Indonesian
should be based on Pancasila and not to against it, yet in this case, what was used
by the New Order was their own version of Pancasila, in which it leaves no room
for speculation and is full of doctrine. Unlike the cosmetics and beauty products
advertisements case above where the hegemony or power of capitalism uses
discourse to maintain and strengthen its existence, this case of New Order era is
not only limited to capitalism, but also applies to the political repressive power of
the authorities. In the New Order era, it can be seen how the authorities created
and distributed the discourse that communism and marxism are a hidden danger
for this nation. This discourse then succeeded in shaping the social mindset of the
Indonesian people, or in other word, the New Order authorities successfully
gained sympathy and support from the majority of the Indonesian people at that
time.

6
 By the case of New Order above, it can be concluded that discourse with
power has a systematic relationship; that a power will be sustainable if it has
succeeded in mastering public opinion or the ideological side of society as an
object of control, in which for this reason the use of discourse is needed. In that
case, the mastery of public opinion was successfully carried out by the New Order
by distributing and stabilizing the discourse of communism that was very cruel
and inhumane so that it was natural for them to be suppressed. Jones in his
summary of Foucault (as cited in Bahasoan & Kotarumalos) says humans will
only know the truth according to what they understand in human discourse itself,
and it is clear that humans are also hindered and limited by the particular
discourse they face.

Furthermore, Foucault explained that power is a mechanism that creates

legal rationality and knowledge as a tool to enforce greater power. For instance,
an incumbent governor who wants to regain political power will work hard to
dominate all sources of power and knowledge directly related to the process of
political succession. As a step to win, this incumbent as a candidate will have
consultation with various elements, especially the election organizers (e.g. KPU
and Bawaslu) as the most responsible elements in controlling power through their
knowledge and authority. Additionally, due to the power to justify the knowledge
and power of health, even though the incumbent is not medically fit, a doctor
might recommend that the incumbent be healthy and fit to run in the election, yet
the public does not have the academic right to protest because the power of
knowledge is in the doctor. Thus, collaboration of various elements of knowledge
and power then supports power in general on behalf of the State, which in this
case the incumbent governor who is elected even by fraudulent means will use
this knowledge and power tool to keep his position.

CHAPTER III

CONCLUSION

7
 To sum up, discourse as the largest unit of language that consists of the
other units of language including; sentence, clause, phrase, word, and phoneme,
should cover the intact concepts, thoughts, or ideas, so that it can be understood
by either the reader or listener without any doubt. Meanwhile, power is the ability
to cause or prevent an action, or to do and get something done. These two
elements (discourse and power) then have reciprocal relationship, in which the
discourse is used as an enforcer or a tool to strengthen power as well as gives
great influence to affect the mindset of the community. Thus, discourse is
considered as a practice that changes social constellation and produces something
and that the link between knowledge and power lies when the discourse is
changed as a claim to the truth and contextual that is visible in the discourse of
any field such as law, health, and so on.

REFERENCES

Bahasoan, A. & Kotarumalos, A. F. (2014). Praktek Relasi Wacana dan Kuasa

Foucaltdian dalam Realias Multi Profesi di Indonesia. Retrieved from
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://ejourna
l.unpatti.ac.id/ppr_iteminfo_lnk.php%3Fid

8
 %3D960&ved=2ahUKEwjh7KbT8brpAhUQfX0KHRuMAFgQFjABegQI
DRAG&usg=AOvVaw15vW8dNmNPWFdedFViyAwk

Essays, UK. (2018). Discourse and Discourse Analysis English Language Essay.
Retrieved from
https://www.ukessays.com/essays/english-language/discourse-and-
discourse-analysis-english-language-essay.php?vref=1

iEduNote. (2017). Power: Definition, 10 Sources of Power, Uses of Power

(Explained). Retrieved from https://www.iedunote.com/power

Sik, H. Ng & Fei, D. (2017). Language and Power. Retrieved from

https://oxfordre.com/communication/oso/viewentry/10.1093$002facrefore
$002f9780190228613.001.0001$002facrefore-9780190228613-e-
436;jsessionid=6746CB5F87D83161B39BF4BC08CDD079

Wikipedia. (n.d.). Power (social and political). Retrieved May 17, 2020 from
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(social_and_political)