Discourse analysis is used to interpret the study of real-life circumstances. Brown & Yule (1983:1) state that discourse and writing differ, we will consider a few of the issues of representing written and spoken languages. It cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic structures independent of the purposes or functions which these structures are planned to serve in human affairs. My essay is based on discourse and linguistic, I will focus on two terms to describe the major functions of language and emphasize that this division is helpful, I am going to describe as transactional, which included in expressing social relations and individual states of mind and I will also describe as interactional. Discourse started within the field of linguistics. It originally referred to the entire units of discourse and the discourse community in which these units were spoken. My essay will also focus on the spoken and written language, how the manner of production, the representational of discourse, written text, spoken text, relationship between speech and writing and difference between written and spoken language is being handled. I will also take a journey to look at the sentences and utterance.
2. What is linguistic?
Linguistics is the study of language, how it is put together and how it functions. Different building squares of different sorts and sizes are combined to form up a language. Sounds are brought together and when this happens, they alter their shape and do curiously things. Words are arranged in a certain arrange, and now and then the beginnings and endings of the words are changed to alter the meaning. At that point the meaning itself can be influenced by the course of action of words and by the information of the speaker around what the listener will get it. Linguistics is the study of all of this. There are different branches of linguistics which are given their title, such as, phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax, discourse analysis, semantics, historical linguistics and sociolinguistics (Anon n.d).
3. The Transactional function.
Linguists and linguistic philosophers tend to embrace a limited approach to the functions of language in society. Whereas they regularly recognize that language may be used to perform many communicative functions, they in any case make the common assumption that the foremost important function is the communication of information (Brown & Yule 1983: 1). Lyons (1977:32) states that to observes the idea of communication is promptly used ‘of feelings, moods and attitudes’. It appears likely that communication is primarily a matter of a speaker’s looking for either to educate a listener of something.
The value of the use of language to spread information is well fixed in our social mythology. We all accept that it is the ability of language which has empowered the human race to create diverse societies, each with its particular social traditions, religious performances, laws, verbal agreements and the designs of exchanging. (Brown ; Yule 1983: 2). Brown ; Yule (1983: 2) say that language which is used to communicate ‘factual or propositional information’, can be called basically is the transactional language. In primarily transactional language is expected that, what the speaker or writer has in mind is basically the effective transfer of information.
Example of transactional function:
A: 3 Kg of potatoes please.
It is important that speaker A transmit, so that the listener (B) understands the information precisely. In the event of that the listener (B) has any questions he/she might ask for further information
A: 3 Kg of potatoes please.
B: These ones, or the ones next to the tomatoes?
A: Yes, the ones next to the tomatoes.
B: That’s R16.99
4. The Interactional Function.
Interactional language is the language that is been used to construct and keep up relationships. Linguists philosophers of language and psycho-linguists have in paid specific reflection to the use of language for the transmission of ‘factual or propositional information’, sociologists and sociolinguists are concerned about the use of language, for them, to set up and keep up social relationships (Brown & Yule 1983:3).
It is clearly the case that an incredible deal of everyday human interaction is characterized by the primarily of interpersonal, instead of the primarily transactional use of language (Brown & Yule 1983:3). The interactional function is concerned with the support of social relationships. For example, in the event of two people pass within the road and say,
A: Hello there, all right?
B: Definitely, I am fine much appreciated.
The function of the exchange is absolutely interactional, it serves as it were as a confirmation of the relationship and the reply is straight, it may not be true.
5. Spoken and written language function.
5.1 Manner of production
Brown & Yule (1983:4) state that, from the point of the view of production, it is obvious that spoken and written language make to some degree different requests on language-producers. The speaker has available to him/her the full range of ‘voice quality’ effects, as well as facial expression, postural and gestural frameworks. Prepared with these he/she can always overrule the effect of the words he speaks.
The speaker is also controlling the production of communicative frameworks which are different from those controlled by the writer. He/she is also processing that production below circumstances which are impressively more demanding. The speaker must monitor what it is that he/she has said and decide whether it matches his/her intentions, whereas he/she is expressing his/her current expressions and monitoring that at the same time arranging his/her next expression and fitting that into the in general design of what he/she needs to say and monitoring, in addition, not as it were his/her claim performance but its reception by his/her listener (Brown & Yule 1983:4-5).
Writing is usually permanent and written texts cannot usually be changed once they have been written. A written text can communicate over time and space for as long as the specific language and writing framework is still caught on. Written language tends to be more complex and complicated than spoken language with longer sentences and numerous subordinate clauses. The punctuation and format of composed texts moreover have no spoken identical. In any case a few forms of written language, such as moment messages and email, are closer to spoken language. Writers get no quick criticism from their readers. Hence, they cannot depend on context to clarify things so there’s more got to clarify things clearly and definitely than in spoken language (Anon n.d).
5.2 The representation of discourse in text.
5.2.1 The written text
The idea of ‘text’ as a printed record is recognizable within the study of literature. A ‘text’ may be in an unexpected way displayed completely different editions. Therefore, it is important to consider what it is that is ‘the same’. The words should be the same words, displayed within the same order. Where there are debated readings of texts, editors often than not feel grateful to comment on the core (Brown ; Yule 1983:6).
Written language can be chosen with more significant consideration and thought, and a written argument can be exceptionally advanced, complex, and long. These qualities of writing are possible since the pace of inclusion is controlled by both the writer and the reader. The writer can write and rewrite. So, the reader can also study fast or slowly or stop to think about what he/she has just studied. More importantly, the reader always has the choice of re-reading. It is simple that a reader’s understanding of a text is possible. Therefore, the written language offers more to a thoughtful and planned style (Ferraro & Palmer n.d).
5.2.2 The spoken text
The problems experienced with the idea of ‘text’ as the verbal record of a communicative act ended up a great deal more complex when we consider what is implied by spoken ‘text’. The simplest view to accept is that a tape-recording of a communicative act will protect the ‘text’. The tape-recording may also protect a good deal that will be unessential to the text (Brown & Yule 1983:9).
Spoken language can be the exact and in fact, they need to be. But the correctness in spoken language comes only with an extraordinary deal of planning and compression. Once spoken, words cannot be withdrawn, although, one can apologize for a mistake and create a clarification. One can read from a written text and accomplish the same degree of verbal correctness as written language. But word-for-word reading from a text is not speech-making and in most circumstances the audiences discover speech-reading boring and hold exceptionally small of the information transmitted (Ferraro & Palmer n.d).
5.3 The difference in form between written and spoken language.
There are many differences that can be noted between written and spoken language. People when speaking, they tend to include withdrawals such as ‘I’ll or don’t’ that not to be suitable in formal written language. There are too numerous slang words that are popped into spoken language, that depending on the context are not strictly correct in written language. There are other language traditions that are broken in spoken language, which are more strictly followed to in written language. Examples of this include starting sentences with ‘but or since’ and finishing sentences with prepositions (Rachel 2009).
Spoken language is much more energetic and quicker, there is much less care in it. You will frequently hear local English speakers make language structure slips that they would never make in written language. Mistakes such as, ‘How much apples are left?’ happen when speakers are shaping sentences and changing thoughts rapidly (Rachel 2009).
6. Sentence and utterance
It appears reasonable to propose that the features of spoken language laid out within the previous area should be considered as features of utterances, and those features normally are of written language, as characteristic of sentences. I will say that utterances are spoken, and sentences are written which we will apply these terms to what Lyons describes as ‘the products of ordinary language-behaviour’ (Brown & Yule 1983:19).
In the situation of the term sentence, it is important to be clear around the sort of object one is referring to. Lyons makes a difference between ‘text-sentences and system-sentences’. He describes the ‘system-sentences’ in the following way, system-sentences never happen as the products of standard language-behaviour. Representations of system-sentences may of course be used in metalinguistic discourse of the structure and functions of language and it is such representations that are generally cited in linguistic descriptions of specific languages (Lyons 1977: 31).
6.1 Sentence and utterance on information
The grammarian’s ‘information’ is the single sentence, or a set of single sentences outlining a specific feature of the language being studied. It is also ordinarily the case that the grammarian will have developed the sentence or sentences he/she uses as examples. In contrast, the analysis of discourse, as embraced and represented is ordinarily based on the linguistic produce of someone other than the analyst (Brown ; Yule 1983:20).
Discourse started within the field of linguistics. It originally referred to the entire units of discourse and the discourse community in which these units were spoken. Language has two main functions, the transactional and interactional functions. The interactional function is more concerned with the preservation of social relationships, while the transactional function is concerned with the preservations of information. Spoken language and written language are both ways of communication. However, written language is more formal and should follow the rules of the English language. Spoken language is often more casual. Utterance can be any sound, it doesn’t have to be a word. A burp can be considered an utterance. A sentence can be written or spoken. It’s simply a group of words that expresses a complete thought or idea.