19   DEVELOPMENTAL SEQUENCE (Internalization)
91   OPERATIONAL SEQUENCE  (Externalization)
987   "Good!"
654   "I like that."
321   "I'll give you a plus for that."
 

(1) Discourse is an external index of internal activities of the self. Discourse is indexical of internal states.
(2) The "ennead matrix" is a comprehensive organizational schema ("taxonomy") for cataloguing the indefinitely large number of internal states of the self. It has three levels of vertical organization and three phases of horizontal organization. The two together form an intersecting matrix of mime zones ("ennead").
(3) "Comprehensive Discourse Analysis" is the procedure where by discourse (or text) is segmented and classified in accordance with the ennead matrix. Discourse units (or segments) are assigned meaning, each in accordance with the nine zones of the matrix.
(4) The discourse itself which is but an index is in this way reconstructed to its full etiology and meaning, revealing the organization of human affairs.
 

2. Discourse and Human Affairs

(2.1) Both tradition and individual experience confirm the idea that discourse or language is Important to humans universally. Indeed, we feel our essence as human depends on rational common sense that is displayed in discourse. The most ordinary, everyday conversations produce discourse that is vitally important as In the offices of the White House, or the family dinner-table talk, or the doctor-patient exchange. In these ordinary discourse samples we can find the quality of human life. They contain our emotions, feelings, thoughts, plans, and strivings in goals and ideals. Discourse is thus an index and a product of human affairs.

(2.2) When we ask someone, "Tell me what they talked about" we accept such answers as, "They talked about their plans for the evening," or "They argued about which movie to see," and so on. We share a meta-language for discussing the content of discourse. This content can variously be labeled topic, text, subject matter, problem, issue, transaction, message, and so on. In some cases the content of discourse is labeled with descriptors borrowed from the discourse sample Itself, as in "They talked about the weather" where "the weather" was actually mentioned by the talkers (e.g. "What's the weather like her?") But in other cases the title for the content of the discourse samples, as in "They talked about their plans for the evening" where the descriptor "plans for the evening" was never mentioned in the discourse sample (e.g. "What shall we do tonight?  How about the movie at 8?" "O.K.")  discourse is thus a cross-referenced index of human affairs.

(2.3) Since discourse is a textual product that can be recorded, unitized, indexed, cross-referenced, and retrieved, a discourse technology has evolved In civilized society. This language industry includes language teaching dictionaries catalogued libraries, computerized literature searches, machine translation of abstracts, court stenography, specialized newspaper sections or columns, and even a service for writing complaint letters. Discourse units can be identified, owned, sold, bought, recognized and modified. Discourse thus originates with a single human being and is an unalienable part of the individual who produced the discourse sample.

(2.4) There exists no discourse sample which was not produced or 'authored' by a particular, unique individual. Even if two discourse samples look alike from the textual aspect (e.g. "Hi." "Hi."  spoken by two passing acquaintances), they are opposite from the interactional aspect (the first "HI" was produced by the man, the second by the woman; or by "the employee" vs. "the boss" or by "the starter of the fight" vs." "the victim of the fight" and so on). We employ marginal notes or annotations to the discourse sample so that we may distinguish who spoke what and when. Even anonymous discourse is authored by specific individuals though their identity is not known. Discourse is thus a collective index of the affairs of individuals.

(2.5) We may now hypothesize that the types of discourse will correspond to the types of human affairs. And as a corollary, we may expect that a topical index of people's daily discourse productions is a real indication of their quality and content of life.

In the general case, discourse does relate to human affairs since we commonly rely on court depositions, news reports, and the testimonials of friends and guides for our emotional and cognitive life. We read about and listen to discourse produced with the intent of informing and describing, as in literature and storytelling about 'places, things, and peoples.' It is evident then that the content of discourse must relate to the content of human affairs.

In a more specific sense, discourse also relates to individual life since all discourse is so produced. Every discourse sample, when analysed, must therefore yield up something about an individual's life. This is evident when we consider the variety of functions accomplished by ordinary, everyday discourse samples: through discourse we inform others of our thoughts and plans, and as well, we give off affective impressions which tell others about our attitudes and feelings.

It is not easy, however, to always discover the exact relation between a discourse sample and the thoughts and feelings of the producer. Thus though discourse relates to thoughts and feelings, It is not always clear just what this relation is. As a matter of practicality, we usually solve this problem by relying on the context of discourse, that is, who produced it, when, where, and under what circumstances. We wish to propose a classification scheme for discourse samples that are adequately annotated or whose context is familiar to the analyst. The classification scheme is a matrix with a horizontal and a vertical axis. The horizontal axis refers to the domains of human affairs, while the vertical axis designates the levels of human affairs. This classification scheme for human affairs will serve as a map or grid upon which to locate the discourse sample under analysis. The classification matrix is meant to be exhaustive with rebounds to types of human affairs, and therefore it can be used to locate any and all discourse samples. The scheme needs to be simple and effective so that anyone could easily learn it and use it, and as well, It needs to be valid so as to reveal real facts about human affairs. The classification of discourse in relation to human concerns is of potential use in many areas of discourse technology. Illustrations will be given for language teaching and psychotherapy applications.
 

3. The Three Domains of Discourse

(3.1) we are presenting in this section the horizontal axis of the classification scheme. Given space limitations, we will restrict ourselves to the most recent version of it and without going into the details of its development. We do give its justification so that readers may judge as to its face validity and may themselves engage in possible theoretical extensions.

The classification scheme is actually composed of elements that are already familiar to readers as we took them from the public domain, both expert literatures by scientists and popular knowledge. It is known for instance that we ordinarily speak consciously or deliberately; thus, we are seen by listeners as "expressing ourselves" -- our meanings, our intentions, our affections, our imaginations, and so on. We are held accountable for the content of the discourse we produce. Our discourse samples are analyzed by others and reacted to. This discourse analysis comprehensive is rather than shallow and narrow. It involves revelations concerning out inner motives, public claims, manner of conduct, and style of execution. When we talk, others constantly and continuously perform a comprehensive discourse analysis of the discourse samples we produce, thus obtaining information about our inner life.

Classification schemes for human affairs and inner life have been invented by many that had a common teaching problem, that of devising a curriculum. These are specific solutions to particular problem areas, for example an ESL or FL curriculum of language and cultural study: what vocabulary, what patterns, what cultural Information and activities, etc. All these classifications schemes are practical; they therefore organize discourse-samples in a way that is relevant for use in the situation for which they were designed. None of them separately in general enough for our purpose, yet all of them together are impracticably complicated. We offer therefore a sort of 'distillation' which categorizes them all into only three domains of human affairs. We will try to show that these three domains capture the underlying dynamics expressed in the variety of classification others have used for indexing the significant elements of human affairs.

The first of the three domains of human affairs encompasses all things relating to the origin of actions. These are familiar to all of us since thereby we judge other people's motives, goals, and intentions towards us. The knock on the door: it the stranger selling something or is he an escaped prisoner? The thank you with a smile: is it sincere? It is common sense psychology as well as rational to recognize that people at from some motive, desire, or affection. Also, that without the 'motive goal' or 'drive impulse' there is no action forthcoming.

This is also true of emotions: there is no emotion forthcoming in the absence of an affection or drive to which the emotion is connected. For instance, much liked foods arouse little enthusiasm when we are sick or not hungry. Hunger and health are motivating prerequisites to happy emotions when we enjoy food. Similarly, to enjoy a leisurely walk, or conversation, our hearts cannot remain in a turmoil. Or, to keep a job we need to overcome competing schedules, and we do so by the motivating incentives associated with employment. As a final example, to finish saying a sentence we need to retain our purpose for saying it until the very end of the sentence. Should our motive for saying something dissipate, or be replaced by another motive, we would not then complete the sentence we began. An interruption in the motive or affection for saying it is also an Interruption In the action of completing it. The motive for talk and the discourse produced correspond. This relation is diagramed below:

The origin of actions is some motivational mechanism which includes drives, impulses, affections, strivings, goal attractions, desires, wants, needs, and so on -- anything at all that impels us to action and planning. Thus, discourse-samples are produced only in the persistent presence of an energizing motive, purpose, or intention. We commonly express this Idea by saying for example, "I have nothing to say" or "I have a lot to tell you" indicating something about our motive to talk.

Every discourse unit must have a relation to some motive or intention of the speaker since in the absence of a motive so say something we are Incapable of producing any discourse. Each discourse unit is analyzable as to the possible and probable motives that combined to produce this unique piece of discourse. Once again, our rationality applied to our knowledge and sensations figures out from the context which are the possible and likely motives involved. This figuring out of speaker-motives from contextualized discourse samples is commonly called "making sense of our discourse" (as in reading and listening). It is also a feature of CDA.

In the diagram above there is a space between motivational and sensorimotor mechanisms. This intermediary step is peculiarly human in that it involves the higher mental processes commonly called reflection, reasoning, and understanding. In educational or psychological language It is called "cognitive processes." In general, out cognitive mechanism governs the operations we perform with Ideas, thoughts, symbols, and images. Various cognitive operations are available in our repertoire so that we may reason with meanings, combine symbols, arrive at conclusions.

A few examples may now be given. I want a drink of water (motive). I decide to go get It (means). I go get it (result).

I want to surprise some friends (motive). I think of sending them a card (means). I feel happy and excited about doing it (result).

I'm being asked to take a message on the phone (motive). I rehearse the message in my mind (means). Later, I deliver the message (result).

In these examples, human affairs are portrayed in three phases: motive, means, and result. This is a universal dynamic application to any human situation. The motive of action is traditionally thought of as under the governance of the will. The means of action is traditionally under the governance of the understanding. Finally, the result of action is either a visible motor response of action is either a visible motor response or a sensory experience ("consuminatory reward"). The diagram below gives additional instances within the three phrases of human action.

Go to the top of document