Medical discourse community assignment mau 2 đã chuyển đổi

An Overview of Medical Discourse Studies: Cultural Variation across Genres
and Registers

Introduction
This paper generally tries to explain the anthropological meaning of medical
discourse. In learning discourse and medicine at the same time take us to come upon
culture circumlocutory established. As historically placed practices, medical
discourse forms have a role in culture production and also reproduction. Effectual
intervention in those processes intelligent assessment of communication practices in
contexts of socio cultural.

Content
1. Definition of Discourse
The term “discourse” is a complex and mammoth-like interpretation. Many
previous studies mention the term discourse as very ambiguous since its introduction
to modern science and the various broad interpretations of discourse. Therefore, the
definition of discourse reflected here will focus on the linguistics point of view,
especially that of applied linguistics. Here, it refers to the speech patterns and how
language, dialects, and acceptable statements are used in a particular community.
Discourse as a subject of study looks at discourse among people who share the same
speech conventions. Moreover, discourse refers to the linguistics of language use as a
way of understanding interactions in a social context, specifically the analysis of
occurring connected speech or written discourse, Dakowska (2001) in Hamuddin
(2012).
As a macro level in society, discourse impinges on patients and doctor as part
of social context in medical field. Meanwhile as micro level, discourse influences for
doctor-patients interaction, in communication about illness, healing or medical
treatment.

2. Gesture and Embodied Communicative Action in Medical Interaction
Gesture, posture, and speech equally result meaning in interaction of medical.

Patients’ position can make body parts are able to see by doctor. This paper
investigates such as context and practice. Medical discourse spirited two streams of
work starting in 1960s, they are macro-analytic and micro-analytic. Actually, the
1


analysis of medical discourse concept has been employed, for example on training
and also certifying doctor candidates.
It is unfortunate that, on medical discourse much of the literature delimits
itself in biomedical settings to practitioner-patient interaction and adjusts proposals
for upgrading communication to biomedical models of the patient-doctor gathering,
such as a “biopsychosocial” or “patientcentered” approach. Among practitioners,
communication influences health seekers’ experiences. This strict statement is
supported by many sorts analyses of discursive events implicating practitioners
intercommunicating with each other : grand rounds (Atkinson 1999, Martin 1992),
medical school lectures (Linthorst et al. 2007, Martin 1992), team meetings of
occupational therapists (Mattingly 1998b, and clinical settings where an attending
physician consults specialists (Cicourel 1992).

3. Medical Discourse as Anthropological Concern
In this part, this paper is going to explain language’s model that best fit out
reader to learn ethnographically medical discourse. This paper locates the medical
discourse on that model and an overview but in anthropological concern. Limiting the
connection between discourse and medicine largely creates anthropological sense.
Even though some of view of the connection may be only mentioned.
Discussing about medical discourse especially need general-understanding,
that can help us to avoid the importance of medical. Discussing about illness, perhaps
point to nonmedical theme like speaker traits (other than sickness), family resources,
relationship, and the moral context.
Attention to all signs patterns in discursive events also helps free us from the

hold of referentialist language ideologies. Discourse regarded as healing may never
refer to sickness or healing or to those present. Javanese wayang (shadow puppet
plays), for example, refer to events in old royal courts. Curative efficacy here depends
on the iconicity between two acts in Coyote’s time and two steps—performance and
healing—in ritual time. The same stories can be used to cause as well as cure
sickness, just as in Bangladesh Qur’anic verses may be inserted into amulets to heal
or, if written or read backward, to curse. Here again, sign patterning is crucial to
event meaning.
4. Cultural Variation and Globalization
Both commonalities and variation in medical discourse interest
anthropologists. Studies of symbolic healing have offered putative universals (Dow
1986) or have located shamanic chants somewhere between “our physical medicine
2


and psychological therapies”. We ought, however, add a layer of reflexivity to such
comparisons, asking why they appeal to Navajos among others. Thus our interest in
the rich global diversity of discursive and interactional structures present in healing
encounters, classifying discourses, reflections on healing signs, and illness talk
invites analysis in and of itself, but the interest endures. Consider the rule among
Aboriginal occupants of Darwin fringe camps banning talk about one’s past serious
illnesses (Sansom 1982). Such stories belong instead to those whose interventions
saved one’s life. Sansom in Wilce (2009) studied this after asking a man about his
racking cough and being told that someone coming soon could explain it, no one
could.
The stakes of medical discourse go beyond meaning and the reproduction of
cultural sensibilities and encompass social transformation/reproduction.
5. Genre & Register
Genre is types of discourse linked to even types, patterned to fit recipients’
expectations of both the discourse and the broader event. And the register is various

local speech repertoires
6. Interactional Textuality and Healing (Treatment)
In cultural context, forms of interactional textuality such as the achievement
of coordination in turn taking, or alignment toward a shared sense of the activity at
hand, can take on affective meanings such as intimacy. Senegalese patients ground
the efficacy of encounters with se´rin˜s (vernacular healers, marabouts) in that
intimacy, coupled with hierarchy.
Textuality. Translated or not, discourse is variably coherent, memorable,
quotable, and thus “textual.” From any case of speech in interaction two kinds of
“textuality,” or structures of coherence, can emerge: interactional textuality, i.e., the
social acts, shift performed in talk (including outcomes like being insulted); and
denotational textuality (Silverstein 2004), the quotable “said”-ness of discourse and
patternment form involving denotative meanings. To elaborate denotational
patternment typifies ritual communication (Silverstein 2004), but even a conversation
about one topic hangs together denotatively. The entextualization of discourse
enables its circulation.

Conclusion

3


Medical Discourse studies have contributed to broader anthropological
projects including the analysis of ideologies that empower some communicators and
stigmatize others as pre-modern (Briggs2005). Rooted in close analysis of dyadic
clinical encounters and other discourse forms, recent studies trace interactions
between globally circulating discourse forms and local traditions that have constituted
medical relationships, broadly construed. Textuality, it is denotational or interactional,
enables discourse to circulate, but competing patterns meet on a non-level playing
field. Further studies focusing on encounters of textuality different forms, a sin

Senegal, are called for, as are others investigating how generalizable is the
paradoxical affinity of scientific and ritual discourse apparent in the elaborate
entextualization of some Bangladeshi psychiatrists’ discourse. Finally, given that
some studies consistently uncover patient practitioner collaboration and a degree of
agency on the part of patients, whereas so there is finding somewhat similar settings a
straight forward reproduction of power
relations, both empirical and theoretical work to illuminate this contra dictionary
needed. Such studies stand to contribute to critical medical anthropology and to help
those seeking not only to describe but changing medical fields.

4


References
Wilce, James M. (2009). Medical Discourse. Department of Anthropology,
Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, Arizona.
Hammudin, Budianto. (2012). A comparative study of politeness strategies in
economic journals (Doctoral dissertation, University of Malaya).