fairclough

TextincontextJournalofHistoricalPragmatics5:2(2004),229–254.issn1566–5852/e-issn1569–9854
©JohnBenjaminsPublishingCompanyTARGETwooDOCINFOAUTHORJohannaL.WoodTITLETextincontextSUBJECTJHP,Volume5:2KEYWORDSSIZEHEIGHT240WIDTH160VOFFSET1AcriticaldiscourseanalysisapproachtoMargaretPaston*LINKwoo-n*JohannaL.WoodUniversityofAarhusThispaperanalyseslexicalfeaturesinletterswrittentoandbyMargaretPaston,usingFairclough’s(1992)three-dimensionalframeworkfordis-LINKwoo-r9courseanalysis.Historicalpragmatics,asarelativelynewfield,isopentothedevelopmentofnewmethodologiesandtheadaptationofestablishedones.AlthoughFairclough’smethodologyisintendedasasystematicwayofap-proachingmoderntext,itisshowntoberelevantandusefulinhistoricalwork.Thelettersareanalysedincontext,withreferencetothediscursivepractices(production,distribution,andconsumptionoftext)andsocialpracticesofthefifteenthcentury.TheanalysisshowsthatMargaretoccupiesapowerfulpositionwithinherfamilyandthecommunity.1.IntroductionAshistoricalpragmaticsisacomparativelynewfieldinlinguistics,newmethod-ologiesarestillbeingdevelopedandapproachesthatwerefirstadvancedforpresent-daydataarebeingadapted.Thispaperhasadualpurpose:toinvesti-gatewhetherFairclough’s(1992)approachtocriticaldiscourseanalysismaybeLINKwoo-r9adaptedforuseinahistoricalcontext,andtoanalysetheformandcontentofMargaretMautbyPaston’sfifteenth-centuryletters.WithMargaret,theinvestigationrevolvesaroundissuesofheridentityandpowerasawomaninthefifteenthcentury,evidencedbythelanguageofherletters.Theconcernwithmethodologyarisesfromanattempttobesystematicandunbiasedinanalysingthedataandtosituatethedatawithinthecontextoffifteenth-centuryEngland.Thechoicetoapproachthedatausingamethoddevelopedforcriticaldiscourseanalysisisintendedtocomplementotherrecentworkinhistoricalpragmaticsthatadaptsestablishedframeworkstotheanalysisofhistoricaldata230JohannaL.Woodfromletters.NotablefortheapplicationofBrownandLevinson’s(1987)LINKwoo-r7politenesstheorytoformsofaddressinEnglishlettersistheworkofNevalainenLINKwoo-r19andRaumolin-Brunberg(1995)andRaumolin-Brunberg(1996).Morerecently,LINKwoo-r21Bergs(2000)usesthetheoreticalframeworkofsocialnetworktheory(MilroyLINKwoo-r5LINKwoo-r171987)inhisapproachtothePastonletters.AlthoughBax’s(2001)dataarefromLINKwoo-r3plays,notletters,hisuseofframeanalysis(Goffman1974)mightalsobejustasLINKwoo-r12applicabletoletterssinceconversationsare“playedout”inletters;asFitzmauriceLINKwoo-r10(2002:1)comments,theletter“representsanexchangebetweenactors”.Asforthedataitself,thecorrespondenceofthePastonfamilyisoneoftheearliestpersonallettercollectionswritteninEnglishanditsuseasasourceofsocio-historicaldatahaslongbeenrecognized.However,personallettersalsoprovideparticularlyinterestingandusefulmaterialforlinguists.Lettersarepartofadialogue,oraconversation,andinteractionsbetweenwritersandreadersdevelopandbuild.AsFitzmauricepointsout,theletterisatextthatbothrespondstoprevioustextsandanticipatesnewtexts.Inaddition,asstudiesoftexttypeandregisterreveal,personallettersareoftenmoreinformalandrepresentan“oraland“involved”style(e.g.Biber1988,1995).Consequently,LINKwoo-r6thewriters’attitudes,feelingsandemotionsarelikelytobegrammaticallyandlexicallyencoded(e.g.BiberandFinegan1989;Meurman-Solin1997).Howev-LINKwoo-r6LINKwoo-r15er,therearelimitstotheinformalityinlettersthatareimposedbytheconven-tionsofthegenre,andfreedomofpersonalexpressionisconstrainedbytheform.AsWatt(1993:122)comments,thelettercanbe“ononehandconventi-LINKwoo-r25onalisedandinfluencedbythewriter’scultureandontheotheranexpressionofthewriter’sindividualityandimmediatepersonalexperiences”.Therefore,instudyingMargaretPaston,itisessentialtofirstestablishwhatisconventionalinfifteenth-centurylettersinordertoseewhetherandhowshedepartsfromtheconventional.Thatis,theinvestigationhastobeundertakenincontext,andtheuseofFairclough’s(1992)methodisanattempttoestablishthatcontext.LINKwoo-r9Fairclough’smodelwaschosenforseveralreasons.First,themodelgivesasystematicmethodologyforanalysingtextincontext.Themethodisthree-dimensionalandaimstotakeintoaccountthediscursivepracticesandsocialpracticesofthecommunityinwhichthetextisproducedandconsumed.Asmentionedabove,lettersareconventionalisedandtheirformisconstrainedbythediscursivepracticesofthetimeandofteninfluencedbystyleguides.Buttheformcanbeshapedbysocialpractice,anddiscursiveandsocialpracticesaresometimesinterdependent.(Seebelowforanexamplewhichshowstheeffectthattheendofthefeudalsystemhadontheformofletters).AsecondreasonforusingthismethodisthatIaminterestedinissuesofpower,inparticularhowMargaretconstructsandestablishesapositionforherselfwithinherfamilyandwithinthecommunity.Faircloughisconcernedwithincorporatingissuesofpowerintohismodelonamacroscalesince,ashesays,“Hegemonieswithinparticularorganisationsandinstitutionsandatasocietallevelareproduced,Textincontext231reproduced,contestedandtransformedindiscourse”(1992:10).AlthoughthispaperisconcernedwithMargaretPaston,whoistobeviewedasanindividual(evenifshemayhavebeenrepresentativeofwome