SLS-660: Sociolinguistics
Prof. Higgins
October 2, 2007
Paper #1, Draft #1
Ideologies Underlying Mono- and Bilingual Language Policy in the US:
A Contrastive Critical Discourse Analysis of Cyberspaces
Introduction
In this paper, I apply categories of critical discourse analysis (CDA) to two webpages
with competing ideologies to investigate how the texts manipulate distinct Discourses to support
their viewpoints. The following analysis attempts to answer my guiding research question: How
do webpages with competing points of view draw on different Discourses to construct their truth
about Language Policy in the US? The chosen texts represent opposing sides in the debate over
language policy in the United States: US English as the representative text for the monolingual
English model and California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) as the representative
text for the bilingual model. Based on a cyclic analysis of verbal and visual elements using
Fairclough (2003) and Kress and Leeuwen (1998), I argue that both texts draw on established
and recognizable Discourses to validate their organizations and viewpoints. Although both
webpages employ similar devices to communicate their messages, US English draws on
Discourses of American past and traditions to promote English-only policies whereas CABE
employs Discourses of multiculturalism, the future and action to promote bilingual education.
The debate over bilingual education and language policy in the United States is as old as
the independent states themselves. Historically, the United States has adopted different policies
toward minority languages, depending on the political, social, and economic climate of the times
(Dicker, 2000). Recent debates and movements to restrict bilingual education including
Proposition 227 in California, Proposition 203 in Arizona, and the passage of No Child Left
1
Behind, have polarized many Americans over the issue of monolingual (English Only) or
bilingual education.
To understand how both sides of the language policy debate construct and enact their
viewpoints, a critical discourse analysis (CDA) approach is useful and informative. In his
investigation of the use of metaphor to influence public opinion, Johnson (2005) applied a
critical approach to media surrounding the monolingual-bilingual education debate over
Proposition 203 in Arizona. Here it is worth noting that the term monolingual education does not
exist as an official term although the concept stands clearly in opposition to bilingual education.
Johnson (2005) found that anti-bilingual education media drew on a number of metaphors,
including the American Dream, English as unity, and bilingual education as a trap and failure. In
this paper, I move beyond Johnson’s focused analysis of metaphor by examining a variety of
discourse components in two webpages that represent both monolingual and bilingual
approaches to American language policy: US English and California Association for Bilingual
Education (CABE) Over the past 25 years, US English has been at the forefront of the movement
for English only education and English as an official language on the national level. In the past,
US English has been criticized for involvement with anti-immigration organizations as well as its
lack of commitment, despite its own claims, to English language education (Dicker, 2000).
CABE, in contrast, provides an opposing outlook by promoting a positive view of bilingualism
and supporting bilingual education on a regional level. Furthermore, given anti-bilingual
education sentiments in California, notably Proposition 227, a website promoting bilingualism in
a contentious environment offered a promising text for investigating how truths of language
policy are constructed from a critical perspective.
2
Finally, the medium of webpage was chosen for several reasons, including a dearth of
CDA analyses of cyberspace and the ever expanding audience of the internet. Given CDA’s
focus on discourse as both socially shaped and socially constitutive (Fairclough & Wodak, 1997),
the fact that so few CDA studies examine one of the most powerful media for communicating
Discourse through discourse, the internet, comes as a surprise. If researchers are interested in
how discourse reflects and constitutes social life, the internet provides an infinite source of data
for exploring how Discourse is languaged and disseminated. Additional arguments for the world
wide web as a context for CDA come from Mautner (2005), namely, the internet as always
available information source. According to Mautner (2005), the value of analyzing the internet
then comes from “its significance as a medium in all social domains, with the ubiquitous, roundthe-clock connectivity it provides and its privileged status as the primary information source in
the public, and increasing, the private spheres” (p. 812). In our increasingly networked world,
texts on the internet are continuously available and more and more read as the voice of authority.
For these reasons, a contrastive analysis of webpages and their intrinsic Discourses seemed
appropriate and timely while addressing a gap in the literature.
Method
For the sake of depth over breadth, I limit myself to an analysis of each website’s
homepage and about page in this paper. The homepage, or landing page, was selected because it
is the first content viewed by the reader and leaves the first and often strongest impression. To
complement the homepage, each website’s about page was selected with the goal of analyzing
how each organization formally defines and presents itself to the reader. On both webpages, the
about page can be accessed via hyperlinked menus on the homepage. This access path was
3
chosen because any reader desiring to know “about” each organization would presumably follow
the same path. Neither webpage has an additional mission statement link.
The webpage as medium stands at the intersection of words and images, and many
webpages can be categorized as a multimodal combination of the verbal and the visual. To
provide a comprehensive critical discourse analysis of the two multimodal texts, categories of
analysis for both verbal and visual content were needed: “Visually and verbally expressed
meaning may be each other’s double and express the same meanings, or they may complement
and extend each other, or even clash and contradict” (Kress & van Leeuwen, 1998, p. 187).
Similarly, Anthonissen (2003), based on her analysis of South African media in the 1980s,
argues that visual media may express more than verbal media. To analyze visual content, I
borrow components of Kress and van Leeuwen’s grammar of visual design, specifically
Ideal/Real and Centre/Margin distinctions. To analyze verbal content, I employ the
Faircloughian categories of topicalization, presupposition, and words/phrases, including
repetition, synonymy, modality, and synthetic personalization (Fairclough, 2001, 2003).
In the following sections, I present my findings and interpretations in a linear and
compartmentalized fashion. However, the path to reaching these interpretations was not the
result of searching for evidence deductively with pre-defined categories but rather allowing
themes to emerge through a cyclic process of analysis. To arrive at the findings presented below,
I followed a pattern of close engagement with the text, inductive discovery of themes, and reengagement with the text in light of and in order to revise my evolving interpretations.
Throughout my analysis, I use the term the term discourse to refer to the visual and verbal
language of the texts and Discourse to reference the underlying ideology behind the images and
words (Gee, 1999).
4
Analysis
Beginning with a visual analysis is useful for introducing the webpages and their
underlying Discourses while providing a framework for subsequent analysis. In particular, the
analytic component of Ideal/Real in Kress and van Leeuwen’s visual grammar offers a clear
orientation to the organizations’ Discourses. Kress and van Leeuwen (1998) describe their
Ideal/Real distinction as the difference between idealized, generalized and ideological
information (Ideal) and specific, down-to-earth, and more practical information (Real), both of
which can be manifested in different types of space (e.g., visual-verbal, above-below). In their
description, Kress and van Leeuwen argue that if “one or more pictures occupy the top section,
then the Ideal is communicated visually and the text serves to comment or elaborate” (p. 194).
For example, on a newspaper front page, large photographs under the main headline often
embody the Ideal, followed by details and practical information in the accompanying article (the
Real). Following this approach, the Ideal/Real distinction can be analyzed as image-text relations
in the multimodal US English and CABE webpages: The Ideal, in the form of visual images,
occupies the upper part of the webpages, followed by Real, in the form of written text.
On the US English webpage, the visual collage of images at the top of the homepage
represents the Ideal: the Capital Building, the American flag, a map of the United States and the
slogan “Toward a United America” (Figure 1). All of these images point to strong notions of the
American government and tradition, and through connotation, establish the Discourse of
American history and tradition as the desired Ideal. Below the visual graphics follows a
historical description of the organization with facts and dates representing the Real.
5
Figure 1. The Ideal from U.S. English: American Discourses of History and Tradition
In contrast, the visual banner representing the Ideal on the CABE webpage depicts four
multiracial children engaged in learning activities together. With further visual deconstruction,
one can argue that the CABE image illustrates in a more subtle way CABE’s Ideal: Discourses
of multiculturalism (multi-ethnic/multi-racial people), the future (participants are learning; the
small plant is growing; the boy is looking forward/outward with a telescope; presence of a space
rocket as a symbol of technology) and action (participants are active) (Figure 2). Subsequent text
on the CABE webpage provides links to concrete information on how to register as a member,
news and information, and upcoming events, representing the Real.
Figure 2. The Ideal from CABE: Discourses of Multiculturalism, the Future, and Action
Similarly, the Centre/Margin component of Kress and van Leeuwen’s visual grammar
can be used to identify and deconstruct the Discourses behind both webpages. The
Centre/Margin distinction refers to the presentation of information in the context of the whole
page, where centrally located information is considered primary and marginally located
information is deemed secondary, “For something to be presented as Centre means that it is
presented as the nucleus of information to which all the other elements are in some sense
6
subservient” (Kress & Leeuwen, 1998, p. 200). On the US English homepage, the centrally
located content, although not an image but a text, is the history of US English and the statement
of its beliefs, framed by hyperlink menus on either side (Appendix 1). Ideologically, the central
location of US English’s history reinforces the importance of the past and tradition for the
organization. In contrast, the most centrally located content on CABE’s homepage is a
photograph of an unidentified woman holding a tee-shirt that reads “Are you a member of
CABE?” with the accompanying caption “Sign up today. Make a difference for English
Learners” (Appendix 2). On CABE’s webpage, the central location of the woman and her call to
action emphasizes the action component of CABE’s underlying Discourse. Taken literally, this
call to action and movement for advocacy is aimed at changing the situation for English
language learners. In summary, an analysis of Centre/Margin content on both websites reveals
that the most centrally located content reinforces important aspects of each website’s Discourse,
US English with its recourse to history and CABE with its call to action.
Before shifting from an analysis of the visual to the verbal, a brief explanation of the
content of the homepages and about pages is necessary. US English’s homepage and about page
contain three identical paragraphs of written text, which are located in the middle of the page and
orient the reader to the history of the organization. In addition to the three introductory
paragraphs, US English’s about page includes three supplementary paragraphs on recent
developments within the organization, including recent proposed legislature and expanding
official English legislature on the state level. In contrast with US English’s homepage, CABE’s
homepage includes no extended text passages about the history or mission of the organization.
Instead, CABE reserves the official self-presentation for the about page, which can be reached by
navigating the menu below the visual images at the top of the page. Depending on how readers
7
access the about CABE page, they may encounter an intermediary about page with links to
CABE, regions, members, board, and staff and accompanied by a large illustration with the same
motif as the banner at the top of the page: multicultural children actively engaged in learning
with images of the future (Appendix 3). By distinguishing the homepage from the about page,
CABE creates two types of cyberspaces for its readers: the homepage, where there is no selfdescription and readers are allowed to engage with the text and images, and the about page,
where CABE provides a formal self-description. US English, on the other hand, uses the same
written text and layout for both pages, using repetition to reinforce the history and goals of the
organization.
Difference in webpage design and content choices have important consequences for an
analysis of foregrounding in both websites. For both websites, analysis of topicalization and
grammatical subjects reveals how the language of the webpages aims at portraying its
organization and establishing relationships with the reader (de Mejia, 2002). In the written text
for US English, the organization, founding members, and key legislature are placed in the
grammatical subject position to emphasize their importance and legitimize the organization. Six
of thirteen analyzed sentences have the phrase US English as the subject (Appendix 3). Other
privileged grammatical subjects include important members and supporters of US English: Mr.
Mujica (2), states that support English as an official language (2), and the English Unity Act of
2007 (2). In terms of sentence and information structuring in the following examples, there is
effort to foreground text other than the grammatical subject with a resulting backgrounding of
the subject. However, the grammatical subject nevertheless functions as the agent:
(1) Founded in 1983 by the late Senator S.I. Hayakawa, an immigrant himself, US
English now has […]
8
(2) Because of his commitment to keeping this nation unified through a common
language and his own experience as an immigrant, Mr. Mujica has succeeded […]
Additionally, use of adverbials in the text of US English allows the text’s authors to characterize
and judge subjects and agents. For example, agency and importance are ascribed to the Senate as
subject in Excerpt 3, but the preceding adverbial unfortunately characterizes the Senate
negatively and introduces accompanying verb failed. Together, the adverbial and the verb negate
any positive agency for the Senate. In contrast, the adverb currently suggests timeliness and
involvement on the part of US English, the subject of Excerpt 4.
(3) Unfortunately, the Senate failed to act […].
(4) Currently, US English is working…
A similar analysis of topicalization on CABE’s webpage reveals complementary and
contrastive trends and shows how CABE constructs relationships with its readers. Like US
English, CABE uses the grammatical subject position to legitimize its organization. On its about
webpage, where CABE defines itself and presents itself to the reader, a variant of the name
CABE appears as subject in 12 out of 14 sentences (Appendix 4). Analysis of the homepage,
however, provides strikingly different results. Seven of the nine sentences engage the reader via
an implicit you in imperative statements, thereby constructing the reader as the agent and urging
the reader to take action.
(5) [You] Sign up today. [You] Make a difference for English learners.
(6) Support AB 2080 (Coto): State Seal of Biliteracy! [You] Send your letter to the
governor today…
By empowering the reader as the implicit subject and involving the reader with a call to action
via imperatives, CABE webpage reinforces and is reinforced by its underlying Discourse of the
future and action. By definition, a call to action addresses the current status quo and encourages
9
the listener/reader to engage actively in changing future outcomes. In the context Excerpt 5, the
advocacy of the text encourages the reader to take action on behalf of English language learners.
Through synthetic personalization and the implicit and explicit uses of you, CABE
incorporates the reader into its inclusive and multicultural Discourse. In addition to the implicit
you as subject, CABE’s homepage employs explicit uses of you as in “your expertise,” “are you a
member,” and “your letter” and CABE’s about page includes “we live in a rich multicultural,
global society.” Furthermore, the unidentified woman in the middle of CABE’s homepage could
also be interpreted as representing a kind of “everyman” or “everywoman” who stands in for the
reader (personal communication with Prof. Higgins, October 6, 2007). In contrast, US English’s
home and about webpages do not draw on the resource of synthetic personalization to build
relationships with the reader. Although the reader is ascribed agency and engaged implicitly
through menu labels such as “[You] Get Involved,” “[You] Join U.S.E.,” “[You] Contribute”,
“[You] Contact Us,” etc., these menu labels are placed in the Margin as secondary information
for the main text, which itself is characterized by a lack of synthetic personalization, implicit or
explicit. This limited and formulaic use of you reinforces the impersonal nature of the US
English text by continuing to exclude the reader, both as a grammatical subject and as an actor
within the text, and assert US English as the authoritative agent. The only potential link between
the reader and the text is the use of the deictic this in “this nation” to indicate proximity between
the reader and US English and its beliefs and goals.
Analysis of sentence structures is another CDA category that reveals links between
language (discourse) and ideology (Discourse) (Fairclough, 2003). Although the use of clausal
structures to assert presumed knowledge is noticeably absent from both texts on the whole, an
10
appositive and relative clause can be identified and deconstructed as techniques used for labeling.
On the US English homepage, a deliberate appostive concludes the third and final paragraph:
(7) US English believes that the passage of English as the official language will help to
expand opportunities for immigrants to learn and speak English, the single greatest
empowering tool that immigrants must have to succeed.
In Excerpt 7, the text of US English asserts that ability to learn and speak English is both the
most empowering and the most necessary tool for succeeding in the United States, a sort of
panacea for immigration issues. A relative clause on CABE’s about page provides a contrasting
presupposition, namely that language is not the only barrier to participation in US society:
(8) CABE is an advocacy organization whose mission is to promote equity and
educational achievement for students with diverse cultural, racial, and linguistic
backgrounds and for whom language poses an additional barrier to schooling and full
participation in our educational system and society
These examples do not directly support claims about the specific Discourses that I focus on as
underlying US English and CABE’s webpages in this paper. However, the two examples
illustrate how the texts use labeling techniques to construct the two opposing views the
organizations hold regarding language policy and immigration/multiculturalism in the United
States.
The final CDA category, words and phrases, takes a lexical approach to deconstructing
Discourses behind the language of the webpages. Within the broad category of words and
phrases, repetition, synonymy, connotation, and modality provide narrower categories for
analysis (Fairclough, 2001). Both texts utilize strings of repetition and synonyms to create
cohesion within the texts while reinforcing Discourses underlying the text. On US English’s
homepage, the string united-unifying-unified establishes a link between the slogan “Toward a
United America” in the Ideal visual text at the top of the page and the centrally located verbal
text in the middle of the page. Even without surrounding its context, the word united creates
11
intertextual links with Discourses of American history and tradition (e.g., The United States of
America; united we stand, divided we fall; one nation under God; e pluribus unum). Within the
text, the use of the verbs preserve and keep further establishes the state of being unified as the
historical precedent, “preserving the unifying role of English” and “keeping this nation unified.”
Use of the verbs preserve and keep and the preposition toward also suggests that the United
States is in danger of losing its historical unity, implicitly under the wave of non-English
speaking immigrants, and needs to return or move back toward what US English constructs as its
natural and unified state (student comment after presentation, October 1, 2007).
Similarly, repetition of the word immigrant acts a cohesive link between sections of text
while reinforcing aspects of Discourses of American history and tradition behind US English. By
providing examples of immigrants who have not only succeeded but also promote English as an
official language (Senator S. I. Hayakawa and Mauro E. Mujica), the text draws on the American
Dream of advancing from rags-to-riches and from immigrant-to-citizen, while constructing
English as the historically attested means of achieving that transformation. Here it is important to
observe that Mauro Mujica made the transition from Chile to Columbia University for
undergraduate and graduate studies and that S. I Hayakawa was born in Canada and had received
graduated degrees before pursing a doctorate in the United States (US English webpage). In short,
neither “immigrant” embodies the immigrant who is disadvantaged, non-English speaking, and
fleeing poverty or oppression.
Connections between lexical strings of repetition and synonyms on the CABE webpage
and what I call Discourses of multiculturalism, the future and action are not as transparent and
overt as the connections between lexis and Discourses of American history and tradition on the
US English webpage. Three different strings of repetition characterize the page: equity,
12
achievement, and community. Use of the word equity could be interpreted as construing a more
modern and forward-thinking approach to issues of immigration and education as opposed to the
traditional and historical eighteenth century concept of equality, which does not problematize the
issue of access and opportunity within a stratified society. Whereas the term equality implies that
all Americans (once citizens), regardless of their social, cultural, and linguistic backgrounds, will
have equal access and equal opportunity, the term equity suggests that individuals who are
excluded must overcome additional obstacles if they wish to ensure fairness and the same access
and opportunities (Kranich, 2005). With its ties to issues of affirmative action, the term equity
may draw on modern movements such as the civil rights and women’s rights movements as
contrasted with the term equality, which draws the eighteenth century Enlightenment notions and
terminology from the American Revolution (US English’s discourse of American history and
tradition). Repetition of the words achievement (student and educational achievement) and
community reinforces the educational and regional context of the text but may not be indicative
of the Discourses I focus in CABE’s webpage in this paper. The Discourse of taking action,
however, is strongly present in the string of lexical items active-advocacy-participationinvolvement (Excerpt 9) as well as the Discourse of diversity/multiculturalism in the string of
words for all-multicultural-global society-diverse-diversity (Excerpt 10). The effect of these
Discourses on the reader is twofold. In terms of advocacy, the text reveals that CABE and the
students, as well as the reader, must all take action in order to ensure full participation in society
for all individuals (suggested by Discourse of multiculturalism). In terms of diversity, the text
extends the notion of multiculturalism beyond the borders of the state or nation to a global level
(global society).
(9) Students in the 21st century … have to be … active advocates…
CABE is an advocacy organization…
13
barriers to schooling and full participation …
CABE key initiatives include … full involvement of our 5,000 + members
(10) …bilingual education and quality education experience for all students…
…for students with diverse cultural, racial, and linguistic backgrounds…
…rich multicultural, global society…
…respect for diversity
Connotations of individual words and phrases within the webpages also contribute to the
overall experience of the reader. The lexical items 21st century and vision realize CABE’s
Discourse of the future and looking forward. Despite an overall multicultural and all-inclusive
tenor, CABE’s about page also includes the phrases makes us a stronger state and nation and
civically oriented, both reminiscent of US English’s Discourse of American history and tradition.
However, an examination of the larger context disproves an interpretation of this kind. What
makes us a stronger state and nation, according to CABE is the fact that we are multicultural,
global, and diverse. Furthermore, being civically oriented makes us powerful forces in our
communities, communities which are not defined as the United States of America. By using
elements of the Discourse of nationalism in both global and local contexts, CABE appropriates
aspects of US English’s Discourse to argue for an opposing point of view.
In the context of the US English webpages, two additional categories of lexical items
with connotations and implications affect the reader by constructing the truth according to
Discourse of the American past and tradition: dates and use of as well as and himself. For US
English, the use of dates legitimizes the story of US English as an important piece of history, e.g.,
founded in 1983, since 1993, and beginning in 1992. Through dates, US English historicizes
itself and constructs itself as part of the Discourse of American history and traditions that it
espouses. Sentences that introduce important immigrants at the helm of US English use the
expressions an immigrant himself and as well as an immigrant to characterize the leaders as
14
immigrants in addition to their other notable characteristics, e.g., Senator, international
businessman, architect. Both of these phrases send the message to the reader, “You may not have
known this fact, but over and above other admirable achievements, this notable person was also
an immigrant.” In turn, such a message implies that immigrants can achieve great status if they
embrace English as an official language as past immigrants, namely these two immigrants in the
text, have done.
Finally, both texts are characterized by a lack of modal verbs and dominance of the active
voice. Like the positioning of the organizations as grammatical subjects and agents, the absence
of modality also legitimizes the organizations via statements of certainty and fact rather than
possibility: “US English is the nation’s oldest, largest, citizen action group…” (US English) and
“The California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) is a non-profit organization.”
Verbs from US English include is, has, has been, has succeeded, and have enacted, and verbs
from CABE include is, recognize, honor, and include. The only modal verb used in both texts is
must in US English, “the single greatest empowering tool that immigrants must have to succeed.”
Here, however, the modal must construes a sense of obligation and necessity and does not
present the reader (or the immigrant) with other options or possibilities. Other expressions of
modality, including adverbs like certainly and perhaps are absent from the texts.
Conclusion
In closing, both webpages manipulate visual and verbal devices to establish themselves
as legitimate voices on the topic of language policy in the United States. Careful exegesis using
the lens of critical discourse analysis reveals how the language of the texts reflects Discourses
underlying the organizations. In addition to the detailed CDA analysis presented above, several
observations regarding both webpage merit acknowledgement. To further legitimize itself, US
15
English includes a rotating selection of quotes from historical figures, mostly American
presidents, that are used to provide support for English only (e.g., William McKinley, Theodore
Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Thomas Jefferson, Margaret Thatcher, Vaclav Havel, and others):
(11) We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we
intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans (Theodore Roosevelt).
Like other devices, this use of quotes reinforces US English’s Discourse of the past, particularly
the American past, and legitimizes US English’s agenda through the voices of others. Two other
details on US English’s webpage include the movement of the American flag in the upper right
corner and the current date under the flag. Although US English relies on Discourses of the past,
the current date implies to the reader that the content of the webpage is relevant today.
On CABE’s webpages, two variations on the themes of multiculturalism and the future
can be identified. First, the small girl holding a globe reinforces the notion of multiculturalism
and may both extend multiculturalism to a global level and function as commentary or
observation on the global movements of people (immigration). Secondly, in contrast to the selforiented approach of the US English webpage, individuals and objects on CABE’s webpage
indicate an orientation to outside space, for example, planets, the space rocket, the boy with the
telescope looking outward (personal communication with Dr. Higgins, October 2, 2007). This
outward gaze could be interpreted as a component of multiculturalism and inclusiveness or could
represent another Discourse underlying CABE’s webpage. In contrast with US English’s
reinforcement of boundaries, indicated by the sharply defined map of the United States, CABE
projects a rejection of boundaries and nationalism, particularly through the small girl embracing
the globe (personal communication with Dr. Higgins, October 6, 2007).
In drawing conclusions based on the analysis I have presented, several caveats should be
noted. First, the two webpages have different genres and goals. Whereas US English puts forth a
16
statement of national language policy, CABE presents a statement of local educational language
policy. In turn, the intended audience (national versus local) exerts a strong effect on the
discourse of text. For example, US English uses national images to appeal to a broad American
audience while CABE, although neutral on its home and about page, draws on a Southwestern
dessert motif in other parts of its webpage (personal correspondence with Dr. Higgins, October 2,
2007; See Appendix 3). Second, the extent to which the underlying Discourse is clear in the
language of the websites varied. On the US English webpage, links between language
(discourse) and ideology (Discourse) are overt and easily noticed and analyzed. On the CABE
webpage, in contrast, connections between the language use and the underlying Discourses are
more subtle and, as such, are open to different interpretations. Finally, the analysis presented in
this paper examines only a small portion of the websites in terms of total content and potential
categories of analysis. Given these reasons, this paper should be read as nothing more and
nothing less than a preliminary and partial exploration of two webpages using select categories
of critical discourse analysis.
To conclude, I return to my initial claim that both texts strive to legitimize their
organizations using similar devices while guided by different underlying Discourses: US English
draws on Discourses of American past and traditions to promote English-only policy and CABE
employs Discourses of multiculturalism, the future and action to promote bilingual education.
Through analysis, it was clear that the visually expressed meanings in the webpage served as a
foundation and extension for the verbally expressed meanings (Kress & van Leeuwen, 1998).
This finding coincides with Anthonissen (2002) who argues that certain kinds of information
may be more directly communicated with visual rather than verbal text. With regard to visual
language, both texts manipulate visual text to present an Ideal based on and illustrating their
17
guiding Discourses using (1) images of American flags, institutions, and geography (US English)
or (2) images of multiculturalism, active engagement, and forward progression (CABE).
Similarly, both texts manipulate the Center/Margin placement of content to focus the reader’s
attention to the primary information in the middle of the webpage. With regard to verbal
language, both webpages position their organizations as grammatical subjects to frame and
legitimize them as an agents. Additionally, CABE uses synthetic personalization to incorporate
the reader into its inclusive Discourse of multiculturalism. In contrast, US English does not
appear to engage the reader as an active participant in its webpage. Analysis of lexical
phenomena reveals that both texts use repetition and synonymy as devices for creating cohesion
within the texts while pointing to guiding Discourses, e.g., the historical models of unity and
immigrant assimilation (US English) and language of action and equity (CABE). Connotations
also provide evidence for underlying discourses, including Discourses of history (US English)
and Discourses of the future (CABE).
The combined effect of the different categories of analysis reveals that US English, while
constituting and being constituted by its Discourse, focuses on the past and traditions within the
narrow American context whereas CABE looks toward the future in global and multicultural
communities and promotes a course of taking action. In our increasingly digital age, it is crucial
for readers to be aware of the underlying Discourses that organizations’ webpages draw on to
support their agendas and construct their truths about important issues. If not, what more are we
than uncritical consumers in cyberspace?
18
Bibliography
Primary Sources
California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE). (n.d.)
http://www.bilingualeducation.org/ Accessed September 30, 2007.
US English (n.d.). http://www.us-english.org/inc/ Accessed September 30, 2007.
Secondary Sources
Anthonissen, C. (2003). Interaction between visual and verbal communication:
Changing patterns in the printed media. In G. Weiss and R. Wodak (eds.). Critical
Discourse Analysis: Theory and Interdisciplinarity (pp. 297-311). Basingstoke:
Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Dicker, S. J. (2000). Official English and bilingual education: The controversy over language
pluralism in U.S. society. In J. K. Hall & W. Eggington (eds.) The sociopolitics of English
language teaching (pp. 45- 66). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Gee, J. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. London: Routeledge.
Fairclough, N. (2001). Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual analysis for social research. New York:
Routledge.
Fairclough, N. & Wodak, R. (1997). Critical discourse analysis. In T. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse
as social interaction (pp. 259-284). London: Sage.
Johnson, E. (2005). Proposition 203: A critical metaphor analysis. Bilingual Research Journal.
29(1), pp. 69-84.
Kranich, N. (2005). Equity and equality of access: What’s the difference? American Library
Association (ALA) Intellectual Freedom Committee, March 3, 2005
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/iftoolkits/toolkitrelatedlinks/equalityequity.htm Accessed
October 11, 2007.
Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (1998). Front Pages: (The critical) anlaysis of newspaper layout. In
A. Bell & P. Garrett (eds.) Approaches to media discourse. (pp. 186-219). Oxford:
Blackwell Publishes Ltd.
Mautner, G. (2005). Time to Get Wired; Using Web-based Corpora in Critical Discourse
Analysis. Discourse & Society, 16(6), pp. 809–828.
de Mejia, A. (2002). The discourse of elite bilingual education: A critical analysis. In de Mejia.
Power, prestige, and bilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
19
Appendix 1: Layout of US English homepage
20
Appendix 2: Layout of CABE homepage
21
Appendix 3: En route to CABE About page
22
Appendix 4: Topicalization and grammatical subjects on US English and CABE webpages
US English
homepage & about page
CABE
homepage
about page
US English, Inc is the nation’s
oldest…
[You] Sign up today. [You]
Make a difference for English
learners.
The California Association for
Bilingual Education (CABE) is a nonprofit organization…
Founded in 1983 by the late Senator
S.I. Hayakawa, an immigrant himself,
US English now has…
[You] Become a CABE member
CABE has more than 5,000
members…
Mauro E. Mujica, an architect and
businessman as well as an immigrant
from Chile has been…
[You] Share your expertise
CABE recognizes and honors…
Because of his commitment to keeping
this nation unified through a common
language and his own experience as an
immigrant, Mr. Mujica has
succeeded…
Support AB 2080 (Coto): State
Seal of Biliteracy! [You] Send
your letter to the governor
today…
CABE’s vision: This vision is based
on the premise…
US English believes…
Support of AB 1177 (Solorio):
Accelerated English language
Acquisition and Literacy Pilot
Program. [You] Send your
letter…
CABE is an advocacy group…
Currently, US English is working…
[You] Please support English
language Instruction
Improvement Act of 2007
CABE’s key initiatives include…
H.R. 997, the English Unity Act of
2007, was introduced…
The California Association for
Bilingual Education (CABE)
Board of directors in
conjunction with the Executive
Director as established…
In promoting the above, CABE has
established…
In 1996, US English was
instrumental…
The California Association for
Bilingual Education (CABE) is
seeking a visionary leader…
CABE is the premier organization…
[You] Register for CABE 2008
This bill passed…
This professional development…
Unfortunately, the Senate failed to
act…
The goal of Project INSPIRE is to
provide high quality education…
On the state level, 30 states have
English as their official language and
several more are considering…
2-Way CABE: An organization
dedicated to advocating for…
Most recently, Kansas, as well as
Idaho, Arizona, Alaska, Georgia,
Iowa, Missouri, Utah, Virginia and
CAPBE: California Association of
Parents for Bilingual Education: This
affiliate works…
23
Wyoming have enacted…
US English is…
CABTE: California Association of
Bilingual Teacher Educators: This is a
newly formed affiliate…
CASBE: California Association of
Secondary Bilingual Education: This
affiliate works to improve…
24