This document discusses content analysis and discourse analysis. It covers several key topics: 1. Content analysis focuses on analyzing messages based on six questions - who, to whom, why, how, what, and with what effect. It examines frequencies of keywords. 2. Discourse analysis examines symbolic interchange through a variety of communication channels to understand underlying meanings and relationships. It is informed by semiotics and structuralism. 3. Semiotics studies signs and how they derive meaning based on relationships between concepts and images. Structuralism seeks to identify patterns in a system by analyzing the arrangement of parts. Post-structuralism acknowledges uncertainty in meaning and examines marginalized perspectives.

1. Topic 6:
Content/Discourse Analysis
BPAM311

2. Content analysis [1]

Focus on 6 question words
1. Who: Source (e.g., elites, social activists)
2. To whom: Receipt (e.g., citizens, supporters)
3. Why : Encoding process (via. story-telling)
4. How: Channel (e.g., style, persuasive skills)
5. What: Message (known audience)
6. With what effect: Decoding process (e.g., responses,
readability)

the frequencies of most used keywords (KWIC
meaning "Key Word in Context”)
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong2

3. Content analysis [2]

Address 6 questions:
1. Which data are analyzed?
2. How are they defined?
3. What is the population from which they are
drawn?
4. What is the context relative to which the data
are analyzed?
5. What are the boundaries of the analysis?
6. What is the target of the inferences?
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong3

4. Definition of Discourse ( 論述 )
• The summation [ 總和 ] of symbolic interchange,
of what is being talked and written about, of the
interrelations of symbolic interchange, of the
interrelationships of symbols and their
systematic occurrence
• Can be sum total of meeting records, action of
political demonstrators, slogans, posters,
speeches, newspaper articles, satirical prints,
pamphlets, and so on of a time, a place and a
people. Also, spoken words, interactions –
observed, audio- or video-recorded.
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong4

5. I. Semiotics [ 符號學 ] [1]

The theoretical basis of the relational
conception of discourse is derived from the
Swiss structural linguistic Saussure, who
founded Semiotics.

Semiotics, of the study of signs, provides a set
of assumptions and conceptions that permit
systematic analysis of symbolic systems.
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong5

6. Try it……

Explore the possible
meanings behind, and
the possible purpose
of, the electoral
campaign’s poster.

Wordings

Images (Figures,
objects, flags)
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong6

7. Semiotics [2]

Saussure makes a distinction between

Language 語言 (langue): a system of language

Speech 言語 (parole): actual speech act

Linguist primary concern:

Not to describe parole

Establish the elements and their rules of
combination which constitute the linguistic
system
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong7

8. Semiotics [3]
4 characteristics of signs
1. Bring together a concept (signifier) and an image
(signified)
2. Signs are relational
3. The arbitrariness [ 任意 ] of signs
4. Can be put together through
– Syntagmatic relations – combination
– Paradigmatic oppositions – contrastive [ 對比 ]
properties
– E.g. Traffic lights
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong8

9. Semiotics [4]
• Implications: for things and activities to be meaningful,
they must be part of particular discourses
• Each meaning is understood in relation to the overall
practice which is taking place, and each practice in
relation to a particular discourse
• Social semioticians see social life, group structure,
beliefs, practices, and the content of social relations as
functionally analogous to the units that structure
language
• All human communication is a display of signs, a text
to be “read”
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong9

10. Semiotics [5]
• Sign functions are important because they
represent social differentiation mark and
reinforce social relations
• The connections among signs are variable, and
the resultant meanings are variables as well
• Convention to restrict the range of meanings to 3
levels:
1. Denotative [ 指示 ]
2. Connotative [ 有含意 ]
3. Mythological/ allegorical [ 比喻 ]
• E.g., school grades and performance
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong10

11. Semiotics [6]
• As meaning are collected under an ideological
canopy [ 覆蓋 ], knowing the culture becomes
essential
• Within a given cultural system, power and
authority stabilize floating and arbitrary
expressions to establish structural concreteness.
• Theoretical influences of semiotics now flow
from structural linguistics to varieties of
structuralism, post-structuralism, and post-
modernism
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong11

12. Semiotics [7]
Critique
1. No explanation of the limits of the linguistic
structure of language
2. Semiotics analysis tend to be static and
unchanging
3. The model does not allow for the ambiguity
and plurality of the linguistic meaning
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong12

13. II. Structuralism [1]

Made popular by Levi-Strauss in the 1960s

Sees “documents”, once viewed as actual
physical assessable objects, as “texts”, analytic
phenomena produced by definitions and
theoretical operations

Texts, previously considered as self-writings
for others’ reading, become real and
decipherable [ 譯解 ] through a set of
institutionally generated codes, or
interpretive frames
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong13

14. Structuralism [2]

The method of analysis is structuralist when
meaning in the object analyzed is taken to be
dependent on the arrangement of its parts.

Seeks to indentify and array the units in a
system to discover the “deeper” relationships
or patterns underlying the event. The
explanation sought is in terms of underlying
rules, principles, or conventions that produce
surface meanings.
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong14

15. Structuralism [3]
Problems
1. Analysis synchronic [ 只涉及某一特定時期 ],
obviates history
2. Confined to a closed system of meanings.
Explanation is a semantic process that gives a
type of statement like: one that meaningfully
encodes already encoded values
3. “Dehumanizing” in its implications
4. Limited capacity to explain change
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong15

16. III. Post-structuralism [1]

Realize the uncertainty in meaning, thus formal
model of meaning cannot be forced into simple
matrices based on binary ( 二元 ) oppositions

Urge careful reconstruction of written text and
their formulation, constitution, and conventional
interpretation

Conventional canons (rules) of interpretation
reflect dominant values, they obscure [ 隱藏 ]
the virtues of writers, ideas, perspectives, and
values deemed “marginal”
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong16

17. Post-structuralism [2]

Turns attention to the margins and reverses
the usual adherence to dominant cultural
values

A text is an occasion for the interplay of
multiple codes and perspectives. One must
seek to extract and examine the operations by
which meaning is conveyed.
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong17

18. Criticisms of DT
1. The fragmentation of social structures

Does not give primacy to the economy
1. The abandonment of the concept of ideology

Refuse to treat ideology as a form of “false
consciousness”
3. Inability to analyze social and political
institutions

Quite a valid criticism
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong18

19. Example [1]
Alexander and Smith (1993)

Civil society consists of institutions, actors, and
relationships between actors

They assume that the institutions of civil society,
and their decisions, are informed by a unique set
of cultural codes

American civil society displays a set of binary
codes which discusses and interrelates these 3
dimensions of social-structural reality in a
patterned and coherent way.
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong19

20. Example [2]

Data: newspapers, news magazines,
congressional hearing records

Revealed the discursive structure of actions,
structure of social relationships, and social
institutions
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong20

21. Example [3]: Discursive structure of
actions
Democratic code Counter-democratic
Active Passive
Autonomous Dependent
Rational Irrational
Reasonable Hysterical
calm Excitable
controlled Passionate
Realistic Unrealistic
Sane Mad
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong21

22. Example [4]: Discursive structure of
social relationships
Democratic code Counter-democratic
Open Secret
Trusting Suspicious
Critical Deferential
Truthful Deceitful
Straightforward Calculating
citizen Enemy
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong22

23. Example [5]: Discursive structure of
social institutions
Democratic code Counter-democratic
Rule regulated Arbitrary
Law Power
Equality Hierarchy
Inclusive Exclusive
Impersonal Personal
Contractual Ascriptive
Groups Factions
Office Personality
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong23

24. Discussion
Study the below text,
1. Propose some interesting themes after scanning it
2. Identify and explain why some key items, words,
statements that you find them interested, meaningful
and/or doubtful

Any patterns?

Nature of wordings? (positive, negative, mixed, or
positive surface but negative value, and vice versa?)

Meanings? (original, intentional, distortive, etc.)
1. Explain what is/are the contextual factor/s that the
text was appeared
2. Explain what is/are the purpose/s behind the text?
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong24

25. 行政長官 2008 年施政報告（結語）
1. 公平的本質，在於以法治為基礎，沒有一個人受到忽視，每個
人都能根據自身的情況，獲得合理、妥善的對待，並以同樣的
原則和態度對待他人。
2. 公平，還在於讓才幹出 ，成績突出的人，獲得較大的欣賞與眾
回報，因此，共富的重點，在於一批又一批的人，越來越多的
人，通過共同的 搏和分享，從而，雖有處境、能力、模式和拚
過程的分別，但大家最終就像兄弟姊妹都會長大成人一樣，先
後走上富足的道路。
3. 和諧，離不開承擔與包容，關鍵在於自我之外，還兼顧他人。
4. 發展較快的人，對發展較慢的人要主動多作承擔，多作扶持；
發展較慢的人，要以自我承擔，包容他人的精神，力求上進，
力求突破。
5. 有了公平、共富、和諧的理念和實踐，大家都會為有仁義，有
投入，有個性，有意思，有方向感的生活而自豪，明白他人之
所得亦是自己之所得，他人之所失亦是自己之所失，從而就會
無比珍惜屬於我們共同管治、共同擁有的一切。
BAPM311|T6|Dr. Wong25