Colinisation of Discourse

Colonisation of Discourse


Mr Fairclough (some years ago) defines the Colonisation of Discourse as the event in which some particular discourses—topics of consideration—are paid attention to over other discourses for particular reasons other than the worthiness of those particular discourse themselves.


Why? That’s simple! The one who speaks first wins. Because the one who speaks first gets heard first, and the thing spoken becomes the matter first. Likewise, for people around him, what heard first becomes the matter first and perceived the first priority for considerations. This is because the perception of human itself ARRANGES things in its own timeline and put forward different levels of importance to different positions in that timeline.


Thereafter, the positions on the psychological timeline affect its surroundings in ways that, first of all, there comes juxtaposition of different positions of discourse which brings about appropriate reasons for being in different positions. What Dibrini sees is that human always try to rationalise things in front of them, and only things in the front of them—mind the POSITION. Then, for that appropriate reason of the discourse position, human concern for the contexts of each and particular discourse and think those contexts make different positions of discourse. Why? It’s HUMAN ESSENCE!


So, the Colonisation of Discourse is actually the colonisation of human interpretation regardless of what the contexts of discourse are, regardless of whose, when and where the discourse is, and regardless of what those discourses are all about.


Only when human stop concerning with other contexts and irrelevant variable (which they think is relevant) of discourses, then there would be no more Colonisation of Discourse.