ABSTRACT

The discourse-mythological approach (DMA) analyses psycho-discursive constructions of narrative in archetypal storytelling. The what and how of narrative warrants the concerns of discourse analysts who scrutinise the language of text and talk to understand the contexts in which narratives are constructed and their relation to social power. Discourse, semiotics and psychoanalytical theory have been synergised through the development of DMA; by moving towards a psycho-discursive position, ‘affective practice’ was adopted through a revised approach to Wetherell’s (2012. Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. Sage) concept. This paper makes the case for psycho-discursive approaches in critical discourse studies before introducing Jung’s (1959. The archetypes and the collective unconscious. Routledge and Kegan) concept of archetypes and the collective unconscious. This confronts some of the tensions and misconceptions around Jung’s work whilst acknowledging the breadth of other psychoanalytical approaches that might benefit critical discourse studies. After providing examples of archetypes (monomyth and the trickster), I conclude by considering what these developments in narrative analysis mean for the field. As long as we remain critically concerned with ideology, approaches that analyse narrative construction through more attention to psychology, evolution and biology can help us to further innovate the interdisciplinary landscape of critical discourse studies.

摘要

话语-神话方法（DMA）分析了原型故事中叙事的心理-话语结构。在什么和如何叙述权证的话语分析师谁审查文本和谈话的语言的关注，了解其叙事构造的背景和他们的社会权力关系。通过DMA的发展，话语，符号学和心理分析理论得到了协同。通过迈向心理分散的立场，通过对Wetherell（2012.情感与情感：新的社会科学理解。Sage）概念的修订方法，采用了“情感实践” 。在介绍荣格（1959）之前，本文为批判性话语研究中的心理分散方法提供了理由。原型和集体无意识。Routledge和Kegan）的原型和集体无意识的概念。面对荣格作品周围的一些紧张和误解，同时也认识到可能有益于批判性话语研究的其他心理分析方法的广度。在提供了原型（怪异和骗子）的例子之后，我以叙事分析中的这些发展对这一领域意味着什么而得出结论。只要我们仍然非常关注意识形态，通过更多地关注心理学，进化论和生物学来分析叙事结构的方法就可以帮助我们进一步创新批评性话语研究的跨学科格局。