Uses of Heritage (2006) has been an important contribution to the development of Heritage Studies. Resting on a thorough ‘re-read’ of this modern classic, the article analyses the text applying some central concepts from Critical Discourse Analysis and Critical Realism in order to review the arguments put forward. One of the linguistic features from Critical Discourse Analysis we draw on is ‘nominalization’, which refers to replacing verb processes with a noun construction. Re-reading Uses of Heritage and other succeeding publications, it is apparent that the phrase ‘Authorized Heritage Discourse’ is nominalized and reified into an entity obscuring who does what to whom, thereby making the ‘Authorized Heritage Discourse’ a self-evident unit of explanation. Furthermore, the insistence on viewing heritage as a cultural process rather than as ‘things’ is not readably compatible with Critical Realism’s non-reductionist stance. Wrapping up, we nonetheless argue that really taking Critical Discourse Analysis and Critical Realism on board could provide a rule of conduct for the future developments of Heritage Studies, where multifarious conceptions of heritage can co-exist.

中文翻译：

---

遗产及其他用途：通过批评话语分析和批评现实主义的视角看待遗产研究

遗产的使用（2006年）对遗产研究的发展做出了重要贡献。本文基于对这一现代经典的彻底“重读”，运用批判性话语分析和批判性现实主义的一些中心概念对文本进行了分析，以便对提出的论点进行回顾。我们从批判性语篇分析中获得的语​​言特征之一是“名词化”，即用名词结构代替动词过程。重新阅读《遗产的使用》和其他后续出版物，很明显，“授权遗产话语”一词已被标称并被归类为一个实体，该实体掩盖了谁对谁做什么，从而使“授权遗产话语”成为不言而喻的单位。说明。此外，坚持将遗产视为一种文化过程而不是“事物”的坚持与批判现实主义的非还原主义立场不相容。总而言之，我们仍然认为，真正地运用批评话语分析和批评现实主义可以为遗产研究的未来发展提供行为准则，在遗产研究的未来发展中，多种多样的遗产概念可以共存。