Catholich Church on IVF. Critical Discourse Analysis

567 views

Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

Catholich Church on IVF. Critical Discourse Analysis

  1. 1. CATHOLIC CHURCH ON IVF CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSISVictoria Kamasa PhD
  2. 2. IVF IN POLAND  first: 12.11.1986 in Białystok;  total number of children born after IVF in 2009: 4100;  no legal regulations;  four bills concerning IVF under the debate in parliament:  Total prohibition of IVF, punishment for doctors conducting it (PIS);  IVF accessible for every one with state health insurance (SLD);Victoria Kamasa PhD
  3. 3. RESEARCH QUESTIONS How IVF is constructed in the discourse of Catholic Church? What is characteristic of this particular discourse compared to other discourses of Catholic Church and other discourses about IVF?Victoria Kamasa PhD
  4. 4. METHODSVictoria Kamasa PhD
  5. 5. DATA  Main corpus: documents from the official site of The Commission of Polish Episcopate; all documents containing the expression in vitro; 24, 000 tokens; possible differences between particular parts were not taken into account;  Reference corpora: RC1: official documents from the official site of The Commission of Polish Episcopate; RC2: text containing words in vitro (principle of type-accordance). Diverse sources: from statements of pro-IVF and pro-life organization to written inquires of parliament members.Victoria Kamasa PhD
  6. 6. METHODS  Expressions used to talk about IVF:  Choice: Two competent judges; Discussion of the results; Omission of controversial cases;  Expressions: Semantic prosody:  „consistent aura of meaning” (Louw 1993)  10 strongest collocates in National Corpus of Polish; Semantic preference:  „a particular lexical item frequently collocates with a series of items which belong to a semantic set” (Salama, 2011)  10 strongest collocates in National Corpus of Polish ;Victoria Kamasa PhD
  7. 7. METHODS  Expressions in text: Analysis of concordances in search of regularities (Baker, 2006)  Key words: „lexical items that show marked frequency in one text compared to another” (Scott 2006) 3 strongest key words for every reference corpora; Analysis of concordances in search of regularities (Baker, 2006);Victoria Kamasa PhD
  8. 8. RESULTSVictoria Kamasa PhD
  9. 9. EXPRESSIONS USED TO TALK ABOUT IVFVictoria Kamasa PhD
  10. 10. NAMING IVF 96 times in the analyzed texts; Great variety of expressions:  18 different ways of designating IVF; Majority: more than one word:  activity name (method, procedure, technique or practice);  describing word (artificial, extra-systemic or in vitro);  term fertilization. The creativity confirmed in National Corpus of Polish:  5 of the expressions have frequencies higher than 50;  7 of terms used in the texts to describe IVF do not occur in NCP at all;Victoria Kamasa PhD
  11. 11. NAMING IVF - semantic preference and prosody  action names used for IVF: praktyka [practice]: negative semantic prosody; procedura [procedure] semantic preference for actions consisting of some official and highly formalized steps;  describing words: in vitro: strong semantic preference for human procreation; sztuczny [artificial] semantic preference for inanimate objects;  Fertilization: semantic preference for biomedical notions;Victoria Kamasa PhD
  12. 12. NAMING IVF - semantic preference and prosody  rozród [propagation]: semantic preference for animals and unanimated objects; two strongest collocates: gospodarski [farm (adj)] and hodowla [breeding]  reprodukcja [reproduction]: Polisemic in Polish (like in English); 10 strongest collocates are all related to copy of an art work; first one associated with human procreation: 26th position;Victoria Kamasa PhD
  13. 13. DISCOURSES AROUND IVF (1) Negative view of IVF:  55 of 96 occurrences in text; Pointing out negative consequences:  27 occurrences in text;  Examples: illness of mother or child, killing human beings;  np. raka piersi u kobiet poddawanych zabiegom zapłodnienia pozaustrojowego [for example breast cancer by women undergoing in vitro procedures] IVF as subject of objection:  16 occurrences in text;  dlatego sprzeciw wobec invitro uzasadniamy również w oparciu o prawo naturalne [hence we justify the objection against IVF also on the basis of natural law]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  14. 14. DISCOURSES AROUND IVF (2) Negativee view of IVF: Juxtaposing IVF with divorces, abortion, cloning or euthanasia:  8 occurrences in text;  rozwody, konkubinaty, aborcje, zapłodnienie invitro – pokazuje, jaki jest jego świat wartości [divorces, concubinage, abortion – it shows his word of values]; Contrasting with conception resulting from sexual activity:  4 occurrences in text;  ta technika jest moralnie niegodziwą: «powoduje ona całkowite oddzielenie prokreacji od aktu małżeńskiego) [this technique is unethical as it causes total separation of procreation and matrimonial act]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  15. 15. KEY WORDS ANALYSIS REFERENCE CORPUS: DISCOURSE OF EPISCOPATE ABOUT OTHER SUBJECTSVictoria Kamasa PhD
  16. 16. ABOUTNESS1) IN VITRO [IN VITRO]  Concentration on2) EMBRIONÓW biological/ procedural [EMBRYO] aspects of IVF:3) KOMÓREK [CELL] (also  Embryo; position 7 as KOMÓRKI)  Cell;  Steam;4) MACIERZYSTYCH [STEAM]  Fertilization;  Method;5) ZAPŁODNIENIA [FERTLIZATION]6) PRAWA [RIGHT]7) CZŁOWIEKA [MAN]8) CELU [GOAL]9) METODY [METHOD]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  17. 17. DISCOURSES AROUND EMBRYO1. Embryo is human:  14 of 66 occurrences in text;  w pierwszym przypadku niszczymy ludzki embrion, aby pobrać komórki macierzyste, natomiast w drugim - wykorzystujemy organ [in the first case we destroy human embryo to extract steam cells, whereas in the second – we use an organ]2. Embryos are subject of medical and laboratory procedures:  14 of 66 occurrences in text;  nowe propozycje terapii, z którymi wiąże się dokonywanie manipulacji na embrionach i ingerencja w dziedzictwo genetyczne człowieka [new proposals ofor therapy which are connected with manipulating embryos and interference in human genetic heritage]3. Embryos are destroyed:  5 of 66 occurrences in text;  każde klonowanie, które zakłada produkowanie i sukcesywne niszczenie embrionów - nawet jeśli ma służyć leczeniu ludzi chorych [every cloning, which assumes production and successive destruction of embryos – even if it should help sick people]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  18. 18. DISCOURSES AROUND CELL1. Cells are subject of medical and laboratory procedures: o 32 of 61 occurrences in text; o polega «na sztucznym odłączeniu pojedynczych komórek lub grup komórek od embrionu [consists in artificial separation of single cells or groups of cells form embryo];2. Cells are part of human body:  10 of 61 occurrences in text;  mózgu czy pępowinie mogą dać początek także innym komórkom i tkankom, np. nerwowym czy mięśniowym [brain or umbilical cord can be a start also for other cells or tissues, for example nerve or muscular3. Cells are categorized according to their orgin:  8 of 61 occurrences in text;  Categories: EMBRIONALNE [embryo], ZARODKOWE [embryo], NIEGODZIWE [mean];  użyciu linii komórkowych niegodziwego pochodzenia [usage of cell lines of mean orgin];Victoria Kamasa PhD
  19. 19. KEY WORDS ANALYSIS REFERENCE CORPUS: OTHER DISCOURSES ABOUT IVFVictoria Kamasa PhD
  20. 20. ABOUTNESS1) ŻYCIA [LIFE]  Concentration on positive2) RODZINY [FAMILY] values: (also position 10 as  Life, RODZINIE)  Family,3) TRZEBA [IT MUST BE +  Human being PART.]  Love;4) CZŁOWIEKA [HUMAN  Religious character of BEING], (also position 7 texts: as CZŁOWIEK)  God;5) BOGA [GOD], (also position 6 as BÓG)6) MACIERZYSTYCH [STEAM],7) MIŁOŚĆ [LOVE]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  21. 21. DISCOURSES AROUND LIFE Life is in danger and needs protection:  26 from 159 occurrences in texts;  the source of the danger is not named;  polityków o odwagę i skuteczność w obronie życia i godności człowieka [politics for courage and effectiveness in protection of human life and dignity]; Right to life is universal:  12 from 159 occurrences in texts;  podstawowych praw człowieka, zwłaszcza prawa do życia od jego początku aż do naturalnej śmierci [basic human rights, especially right to life from its beginning to natural death]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  22. 22. DISCOURSES AROUND FAMILY1. Family is in danger:  42 from 134 occurrences in texts;  Types of danger: material, negation of its dignity, attacs;  Need of protection;  ataki na małżeństwo i rodzinę stają się z każdym dniem coraz silniejsze [attacks on family are getting stronger with every day]2. Definition of family:  52 from 134 occurrences in texts;  Existence of truth about what the family is;  Cooccuring with małżeństwo [marriage] – 32 examples;  prawda o „instytucji” małżeństwa i rodziny jest „ponad wolą jednostek [the truth about the „institution ‘ of the marriage and family is above the will of the individuals]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  23. 23. DISCOURSES AROUND IT MUST BE + PART.1. There is an obligation to TALK:  21 from 49 occurrences in texts;  Often modified with adverbs: jasno [clearly], szczerze [honestly], zdecydowanie [strongly]  trzeba też jasno powiedzieć, że praktyczna dominacja [it must be clearly said, that practical domination of]2. There is a need of action in a state of danger:  13 from 49 occurrences in texts;  Actions that need to be undertaken: protection (of men, human life, married couples), defense (of human life, freedom of conscience), uprising against evil;  przywrócić priorytet „być” nad „mieć”. Trzeba ratować człowieka. [restore the priority of „to be” over „to have”. The human being must be saved]Victoria Kamasa PhD
  24. 24. CONCLUSIONVictoria Kamasa PhD
  25. 25. CONCLUSION How IVF is constructed in the discourse of Catholic Church?  Inhuman;  Strongly related to laboratory procedures;  Very negative; What is characteristic of this particular discourse compared to other discourses of Catholic Church and other discourses about IFV?  Concentration on the medical, technical site of IVF;  Talking about danger and actions related to it;Victoria Kamasa PhD
  26. 26. BIBIOGRAPHYAdamson, G., Demouzon, J., Lancaster, P., Nygren, K., Sullivan, E., & Zegershochschild, F. (2006). World collaborative report on in vitro fertilization, 2000. Fertility and Sterility, 85(6), 1586–1622. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.01.011Albakry, M. (2004). U.S. "Friendly Fire" Bombing of Canadian Troops: Analysis of the Investigative Reports. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 1(3), 163–178. doi:10.1207/s15427595cils0103_3Alcaraz-Ariza, M. Á. (2002). Evaluation in English-Medium Medical Book Reviews. International Journal of English Studies, (vol. 2 (1)), 137–153.Anderson, W. J. (2006). The phraseology of administrative French: A corpus-based study. Amsterdam [u.a.]: Rodopi.Bachmann, I. (2011). Civil partnership – “gay marriage in all but name”: a corpus-driven analysis of discourses of same-sex relationships in the UK Parliament. Corpora, (Vol. 6 (1)), 77–105.Baker, P. (2006). Using corpora in discourse analysis. Continuum discourse series. London: Continuum.Bednarek, M. Corpora and Discourse: A Three-Pronged Approach to Analyzing Linguistic Data. In M. Haugh (Ed.), Selected Proceedings of the 2008 HCSNet Workshop on Designing the Australian National Corpus (pp. 19–24). Somerville: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Centrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. Zmiany w zakresie wiary i religijności polaków po śmierci jana pawła ii.Bosek, L. (2009). Refleksje wokół prawnych uwarunkowań wspomaganej prokreacji. Diametros, (20), 37–61.Breeze Ruth. (2011). Critical discourse analysis and its critics. Pragmatics, (21:4), 493–525.Chełstowska, A. (2011). Stigmatisation and commercialisation of abortion services in Poland: turning sin into gold. Reproductive Health Matters, 19(37), 98–106. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(11)37548-9Fairclough, N. (2009). A Dialectical-Relational Approach to Critical Discourse Analysis. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 162–186). London: SAGE.Galasiński, K. S. (2001). Naming the Nation: A Critical Analysis of Names in Polish Political Discourse. Political Communication, 18(1), 51–66. doi:10.1080/10584600150217659Victoria Kamasa PhD
  27. 27. BIBIOGRAPHYHidalgo Tenorio, E. (2011). Critical Discourse Analysis, An overview. Nordic Journal of English Studies, (Vol 10, No 1 (2011)), 184–210.Instytut Statystyki Kościoła Katolickiego. Dominicantes 1992-2010 - wykresy. Retrieved from http://www.iskk.pl/kosciolnaswiecie/75-dominicantes.htmlInstytut Statystyki Kościoła Katolickiego. Dominicantes metodologia. Retrieved from http://www.iskk.pl/kosciolnaswiecie/63-dominicantes.htmlKim, R. (2012, July 2). In vitro? Szczęście, nie grzech. Newsweek, pp. 24–26.Lang, W. (2000). Prawne problemy ludzkiej prokreacji. Toruń: Wydawn. A. Marszałek.Lukac, M. (2011). Down to the bone: A corpus-based critical discourse analysis of pro-eating disorder blogs. Jezikoslovlje, (12.2), 187–209.Machinek, M. (2007). Spór o status ludzkiego embrionu. Olsztyn: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego.Mautner, G. (2005). The Enterepreneurial University: A discursive profile of a higher education buzzword. Critical Discourse Studies, 2(2), 95–120. doi:10.1080/17405900500283540McDonnell, O., & Allison, J. (2006). From biopolitics to bioethics: church, state, medicine and assisted reproductive technology in Ireland. Sociology of Health & Illness, (28), 817–837.Mishtal, J. (2010). Neoliberal reforms and privatisation of reproductive health services in post-socialist Poland. Reproductive Health Matters, 18(36), 56–66. doi:10.1016/S0968-8080(10)36524-4Mohd Don, Z., Knowles, G., & Fatt, C. K. (2010). Nationhood and Malaysian identity: a corpus-based approach. Text & Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 30(3), 267–287. doi:10.1515/TEXT.2010.014Orzeszyna, J. (2005). Teologiczno-moralny aspekt niepłodności w małżeństwie. Kraków: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PAT.Victoria Kamasa PhD
  28. 28. BIBIOGRAPHYCentrum Badania Opinii Społecznej. WIARA POLAKÓW.PAP. Apel biskupów ws. in vitro. "O łaskę Ducha Św. dla sumień parlamentarzystów". Retrieved from http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/1,114873,8575243,Apel_biskupow_ws__in_vitro___O_laske_Ducha_Sw__dla.htmlParry, S. (2003). The politics of cloning: mapping the rhetorical convergence of embryos and stem cells in parliamentary debates. New Genetics and Society, 22(2), 177–200. doi:10.1080/1463677032000102594Połoska, F. & Protaziuk, M. Projekty ustaw o in vitro - podobieństwa i różnice. Retrieved from http://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/1,114884,12122899,Projekty_ustaw_o_in_vitro___podobienstwa_i_roznice.htmlSaramonowicz, A. Apel do mediów, Rzecznika Praw obywatelskich i Rzecznika Praw Dziecka o obronę praw człowieka. Retrieved from http://www.petycje.pl/petycjePodglad.php?petycjeid=5891Scott, M. (2010). Problems in invastigeting keyness, or clearing the undergrowth and marking out trails… In M. Bondi & M. Scott (Eds.), Keyness in texts (pp. 43–57). Amsterdam ;, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub. Co.Scott, M. T. C. (2006). Textual Patterns: Keyword and Corpus Analysis in Language Education. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Sinclair, J. (2005). Corpus and text: Basic principles. In Martin Wynne. In M. Wynne (Ed.), Developing linguistic corpora. A guide to good practice (pp. 1–16). Oxford, Oakville, CT: Oxbow Books on behalf of the Arts and Humanities Data Service; Available direct [in the U.S.] from David Brown Book Company.Smyczyński, T. (1996). Wspomagana prokreacja ludzka: Zagadnienia legislacyjne. Poznań: Wydawnictwo "Nakom".Stefaniak, P. (2009). Jeszcze bez ograniczeń. Retrieved from http://www.rynekzdrowia.pl/Rynek-Zdrowia/Jeszcze-bez- ograniczen,51770,2.htmlSzamatowicz, M., & Grochowski, D. (1994). Infertility treatment in Poland. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, 1994, (Vol. 11, No. 4), 182–184.Święchowicz, M. (2012, July 2). In vitro. Widok na szczęście czy zwykłe przestępstwo? Newsweek, pp. 23–27. Retrieved from http://spoleczenstwo.newsweek.pl/in-vitro--widok-na-szczescie-czy-zwykle-przestepstwo,93603,1,1.htmlOrzeczenie, No. K.26/96 (Trybunał Konstytucyjny May 28, 1997).Victoria Kamasa PhD
  29. 29. BIBIOGRAPHYvan Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of Critical Discourse Analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283. doi:10.1177/0957926593004002006van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: a plea for diversity. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 95–120). London: SAGE.Weiss, G., & Wodak, R. (2007). Introduction: Theory, Interdisciplinarity and Critical Discourse Analysis. In G. Weiss & R. Wodak (Eds.), Critical discourse analysis. Theory and interdisciplinarity (pp. 1–34). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Weninger, C. (2010). The lexico-grammar of partnerships: corpus patterns of facilitated agency. Text & Talk - An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 30(5), 591–613. doi:10.1515/TEXT.2010.029Wodak, R. (2001). What CDA is about - a summary of history, important concepts and its developments. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1–13). London: SAGE.Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (Eds.). (2001). Methods of critical discourse analysis. London: SAGE.Victoria Kamasa PhD

×