legitimation, the manufacture of consent and other discursive ways to influence the minds and indirectly the actions of people in the interest of the powerful.
Van Dijk 1995 adds that CDA is part of wide scope of critical studies in the humanities and the social sciences such as sociology, law, literature, and
political science. CDA also pays attention to all levels and dimension of discourse which can be the grammar, style, rhetoric, text organization, speech acts,
pragmatic strategies, and those interactions among others. CDA therefore addresses broader social issues and attends to the external
factors, including ideology, power, inequality, etc. and draws on social and philosophical theory to analyze and interpret written and spoken texts. The
discourse is there to be structured in language use since language is where words, grammatical, and context are chosen in making meaning for the idea that is need
to be transferred to the society and control the interactions among members in an ideological society. The discourse is to be coded on talk and text and beyond this,
social belief, public interest, and histories are the supporting background in which context is made and to be understood making the members of ideological society
stand on the same perception for the common righteousness.
C. Fairclo ugh‟s Approach of Critical Discourse Analysis
For Fairclough 1989, CDA aims to examine how the ways in which we communicate are constrained by the structures and forces of those social
institutions within which we live and function. Jorgensen tries to explain Fairclough‘s conception by mentioning that CDA is the investigation of change.
Fairclough wants to show that while language in use is based from already
established meaning, the process of reproducing and combining the elements happens in discourse. This process results in the change of social and cultural
world. Fairclough‘s intertextuality analysis may ―investigate both the reproduction of meaning where no addition of new elements and the discursive
change where new combinations exist in the discourse Jorgensen, 2002: 7 ‖.
In his view, however, the term ideology is used in a ‗critical‘ sense.
Fairclough 1992 defines ideologies to be:
―significationsconstructions of reality the physical world, social relations, social identities which are built into various dimensions of the formsmeanings of discursive
practices, and which contribute to the production, reproduction or transformation of relations of
domination.‖ Fairclough, 1992: 87
Thus, ideologies are constructed inside the discursive practices to serve the domination.
This critical conception of ideology, which is based on Gramsci‘s 1971 concept of hegemony domination by consent, links it to the process of
sustaining asymmetrical relations of power and inequalities – that is to the process
of maintaining domination. In the words of Fairclough 1995, ideology is meaning in the service of power. Critical discourse analysts, therefore, see
ideologies as serving the interests of certain groups with social power, ensuring that events, practices, and behaviors come to be regarded as legitimate and
common-sense. Ideologies do this elusively, because they inform the way people interpret the world around them, hence hegemony.
The most influential theory of language in CDA that is socially oriented and informed is Systemic Functional Linguistics SFL. As Chouliaraki and
Fairclough state: ―It is no accident that critical linguistics and social semiotics
arose out of SFL or that other work in CDA has drawn upon it SFL theorizes
language in a way which harmonizes far more with the perspective of critical social science than other theories of language 1999: 139.
‖ SFL theorizes language in harmony with the critical society perspective in same way CDA wants
to achieve the notion of social action. While there are undoubtedly other theoretical models that are also critical, SFL is useful for CDA precisely because
it sees language as meaningful behavior and interprets language as a process of making meanings means that it is not only text what people mean but also the
semantic system what they can mean that embodies the ambiguity, antagonism, imperfection, inequality and change that characterize the social system and the
social structure Halliday, 1978. It is because SFL provides insights into the ways in which language is socially constructed and embedded in culture that it becomes
useful for its application in CDA. Fairclough 1995 adds also that the multi- semiotic character of texts and adds visual images and sound using the example of
television language as other semiotic forms which may be simultaneously present in texts.
Discourse, used as an abstract noun, refers to the language use conceived as social practice but hen discourse is used as a countable noun, it refers to a way
of signifying experience from a particular perspective Fairclough, 1993. Fairclough further points out the question of discourse is that the question of how
text figure in relation to other moments in how people represent the world, including themselves and their productive activities. Different discourses are
different ways of representing associated with different positions Fairclough, 2000. Discourse as an abstract noun, is not only concerned with language in use,
