To explain the exercise of power through the use of language and its effects on power relations and program construction, verbal interaction between three planners in two program planning meetings was analyzed. The study revealed that political relationships enacted through the use of language situated crucial planning action. Specifically, learning objectives and adult education tenets as well as ethical imperatives took shape within a socio-political context constituted by the planners' "talk." For this reason, the negotiation of power and interests was a central feature of the planning process. It can be concluded, therefore, that program construction is contingent upon communicative action. One of the implications of the study is that responsible planners must not only be aware of many levels of meaning in discourse but must also know how to use language skillfully and politically to exercise the full extent of their agency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Brown, G.
, & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2.
Caffarella, R. C.
(1988). Program development and evaluation resource book for trainers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
3.
Carnoy, M.
(1984). The state and political theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4.
Cervero, R. M.
, & Wilson, A. L. (1994). Planning responsibly for adult education: A guide to negotiating power and interests. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
Chafe, W. L.
(1979). The flow of thought and the flow of language. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and semantics, 12 (pp. 159-181). New York: Academic Press.
6.
Clegg, S. R.
(1989). Frameworks of power. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
7.
Cobb, S.
, & Rifkin, J. (1991). Neutrality as a discursive practice: The construction and transformation of narratives in community mediation. In A. Sarat & S. S. Silbey (Eds.), Studies in Law, Politics, and Society, 11 (pp. 69-91). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
8.
Dominick, J. E. (1990). How program developers make decisions in practice. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Georgia, Athens.
9.
Fairclough, N.
(1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
10.
Fairclough, N.
(1992). Discourse and social change. London: Polity Press.
11.
Forester, J.
(1989). Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
12.
Foucault, M.
(1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(Summer), 777-795.
13.
Foucault, M.
(1988). Michael Foucault: Politics, philosophy, culture. Interviews and other writings: 1977-1984. In L. D. Kritzman (Ed.), Michael Foucault: Politics, philosophy, culture. Interview and other writings. 1977-1984. New York: Routledge.
14.
Giddens, A.
(1971). Capitalism and modern social theory: An analysis of the writings of Marx, Durkheim and Max Weber. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15.
Giroux, H. A.
(1988). Schooling and the struggle for public life. In S. Arnowitz, S. N. Gilbert, & J. Lears (Eds.), American culture (pp. 147-172). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
16.
Giroux, H. A.
(1994). Living dangerously: Identity politics and the new cultural racism. In H. A. Giroux & P. McLaren (Eds.), Between borders: Pedagogy and the politics of cultural studies (pp. 29-55). New York: Routledge.
17.
Givon, T.
(1984). Information-theoretic preliminaries to discourse pragmatics. Syntax: A functional typological introduction, I (pp. 239-267). Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
18.
Goffman, E.
(1974). Frame analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
19.
Graddol, D.
, & Swann, J. (1989). Gender voices. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
20.
Gumlperz, J. J.
(1982a). Discourse strategies. New York: Cambridge University Press.
21.
Gumperz, J. J.
(1982b). Language and social identity. New York: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Heaney, T.
(1989). When adult education stood for democracy. Adult Education Quarterly, 43(1), 51-59.
23.
Hinds, J.
(1979). Organizational patterns in discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (vol. 12). 135-157. New York: Academic Press.
24.
Houle, C. O.
(1972). The design of education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
25.
Hymes, D.
(1986). Models of interaction of language and social life. In J. J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 35-71). New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.
26.
Issac, J. C.
(1987). Power and Marxist theory: A realist view. Ithica: Cornell University Press.
27.
Jones, L. B.
, & Jones, L. K. (1979). Multiple levels of information in discourse. Discourse Studies In Mesoamericani Languages, 1(58), 5-27.
28.
Lakoff, R. T.
(1990). Talking power: The politics of language. New York: Basic Books.
29.
Lakoff. G.
, & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Lukes, S.
(1974). Power: A radical view. London: Macmillan.
31.
Nadler, L.
, & Nadler, Z. (1987). The comprehensive guide to successful conferences and meetings: Detailed instructions and step-by-step checklists. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
Ochs, E.
(1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givon (Ed.), Syntax and semantics. Vol. 12 (pp. 51-81). New York: Academic Press.
33.
Poynton, D.
(1985). Language and gender: Making the difference. New York: Oxford University Press.
34.
Renkema, J.
(1993). Discourse studies. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
35.
Shotter, J.
(1984). Social accountability and selfhood. New York: Basil Blackwell.
36.
Shotter, J.
(1993). Conversational realities. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Tannen, D.
(1993). Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
38.
Tyler, R. W.
(1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
39.
Walker, D. F.
(1971). A naturalistic model for curriculum development. School Review, 80, 51-65.
40.
Welton, M. R.
(1993). The contributions of critical theory to our understandings of adult learning. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 57, 71-80.
