Cover not available
Part of
Singing, Speaking and Writing Politics: South African political discourses
Edited by Mirjana N. Dedaić
[Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture 65] 2015
► pp. 43–66

Black-boxing and the politics of parliamentary oversight in South Africa

We investigate a parliamentary committee meeting overseeing a state-owned entity, in order to track the processes of knowledge production that occur in parliamentary oversight. The entity’s representatives use “epistemological condensation” (Maton 2014: 130) to present the information they give to the members of parliament as incontestable, effectively “black-boxing” it. “Black-boxing” (Latour 1987: 2) is a process which presents knowledge in such a way that little room is left for questioning it. The committee members also use “epistemological rarefaction” (Maton 2014: 130) to open the black box of the presentation and question its contents, challenging the entity’s practices. This has theoretical implications for building a model of the role of discourse in knowledge production, and practical applications for the strengthening of parliamentary oversight.
Keywords: appraisal, black-boxing, epistemological condensation, epistemological rarefaction, Interactional Sociolinguistics, Legitimation Code Theory, parliamentary oversight, recontextualisation, semantic density
Published online: 30 October 2015
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.65.03sie
References (27)
References
Archer, Margaret. 1995. Realist Social Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Basil. 2003. Class, Codes and Control Volume IV: The Structuring of Pedagogic Discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Galasinski, Dariusz. 1996. “Pretending to Cooperate: How Speakers Hide Evasive Actions.” Argumentation 10 (3): 375–388. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, John. 1982. Discourse Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael and Christian Matthiessen. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hasson, Victoria. 2010. “Rules and Rituals: The Case of the South African Parliament’s New Committee System.” Journal of Legislative Studies 16 (3): 366–379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hibbert, Liesel. 2003. “Changing Language Practices in Parliament in South Africa.” Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 21 (3): 103–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Iedema, Rick. 1999. “Formalizing Organizational Meaning.” Discourse & Society 10 (1): 49–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ilie, Cornelia. 2003. “Histrionic and Agonistic Features of Parliamentary Discourse.” Studies in Communication Sciences 3 (1): 25–53.Google Scholar
. 2006. “Parliamentary Discourses.” In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics 2nd Edition (Volume 9), ed. by Keith Brown, 188–197. Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joubert, Jan-Jan. 2015. “Order! Order! Can Zuma Steal the SONA Show from Malema?” Times Live. February 5, 2015. Accessed February 6, 2015. [URL].Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno. 1987. Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, James. 2009. “Realisation, Instantiation and Individuation: Some Thoughts on Identity in Youth Justice Conferencing.” DELTA – Documentação de Estudos em Lingüística Teórica e Aplicada, 25: 549–583. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Revisiting Field: ‘Semantic Density’ in Ancient History & Biology discourse.” Paper presented at the 41st International Systemic Functional Congress and X Latin-American Systemic Functional Congress , Mendoza, Argentina, April 14–19.
Martin, James, and Peter White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Melbourne: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Maton, Karl. 2011. “Theories and Things: The Semantics of Disciplinarity.” In Disciplinarity: Systemic-Functional and Sociological Perspectives, ed. by Frances Christie and Karl Maton, 62–84. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
. 2014. Knowledge and Knowers: Towards a Realist Sociology of Education. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Maton, Karl, and Rob Moore. 2010. “Introduction: Coalitions of the Mind.” In Social Realism, Knowledge and the Sociology of Education: Coalitions of the Mind, ed. by Karl Maton, and Rob Moore, 1–13. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Pahl, Kate, and Jennifer Rowsell. 2005. Literacy and Education: Understanding the New Literacy Studies in the Classroom. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
Parliament of the Republic of South Africa. 2013. “Oversight.” Accessed June 4, 2013. [URL].
Rampton, Ben, Karin Tusting, Janet Maybin, Richard Barwell, Angela Creese, and Vally Lytra. 2004. “UK Linguistic Ethnography: A Discussion Paper.” Accessed 4 April 2009. [URL].
Rasiah, Parameswary. 2010. “A Framework for the Systematic Analysis of Evasion in Parliamentary Discourse.” Journal of Pragmatics 42: 664-680. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron. 1998. Mediated Discourse as Social Interaction: A Study of News Discourse. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Siebörger, Ian. 2012. “Literacy, Orality and Recontextualization in the Parliament of the Republic of South Africa: An Ethnographic Study.” MA thesis, Rhodes University.
Widdowson, H.G. 1983. Learning Purpose and Language Use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wodak, Ruth. 2009. The Discourse of Politics in Action: Politics as Usual. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Siebörger, Ian & Ralph Adendorff
2017. We’re talking about semantics here. Functions of Language 24:2 ► pp. 196 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.