1. DEFINITION
CDA is an analytical research methodology that proposes a study of the relations between discourse, power, dominance and social inequality Accordingly, it is “a specific discourse analytic methodology that examines the role played by language in the construction of power relationships and the reproduction of dominance” Two important aspects emerge from this characterisation. a. First, CDA is a multifaceted research methodology, Wodak (2001). The notion of ‘multifaceted’ arises from the fact that the framework is influenced not only by one single discipline. As such scholars from across disciplines have contributed to the development of CDA. Most notable are contributions from disciplines such as linguistics, sociology and social psychology among others. b. Second, of major importance to CDA are the notions of ‘power’ and ‘dominance’. Wodak (2001) contends that the major aim of CDA is to critically investigate the occurrence of social inequality as it is ‘expressed, signalled, legitimated, constituted, and so on, by language use’ (p.2). This is an appreciation of the fact that society itself is structured from power point of view and that language is a tool in this process of power organisation. There are many things that are involved in establishment of power dynamics. For example, issues such as the enactment, reproduction, legitimisation and resistance of power. Thus, relationships of power are not a simple matter of dominant individuals or groups simply asserting their dominance on the dominated. Van Dijk (2012) asserts that notions of power and control are not absolute phenomena. People have more or less power. This ‘partial’ is then in turn more or less resisted, accepted, condoned, complied with, or legitimated by the dominated. the power of discourse cannot be underestimated. Power relations are not only manifested ‘externally’ outside of discourse. These relations are actually shaped through discourse such that there is need to critically investigate discourse so as to establish the nature of relations constructed and/or construed through language use.

2. Power, domination and hegemony in CDA
Power as control Power is a central notion in most critical works on discourse – more specifically the social power of groups or institutions. Social power is defined in terms of control. Thus groups have (more or less) power if they are able to (more or less) control the acts or minds of (members of) other groups. This ability presupposes a power base and privileged access to scarce social resources, such as force, money, status, fame, knowledge, information, ‘culture’ or indeed various forms of public discourse and communication. Power is not absolute. Groups can only be more or less in control or they control,specific situations or social domains. Moreover, dominated groups may more or less resist, accept, condone, comply with, legitimate such power, and even find it ‘natural’. Hegemony – is when the dominant groups domination is taken as natural. Ideology –

3. Approaches an characteristics of CDA
There are three major approaches of carrying out critical discourse analysis of language. These are Fairclough’s Discourse as social practice, Wodak’s Discourse-historical approach and van Dijk’s Socio-cognitive approach. Fairclough and Wodak (1997), as summarised in Rogers et al (2005), outline the major tenets and principles of CDA as follows:
Discourse does ideological work.
Discourse constitutes society and culture
Discourse is situated and historical
Power relations are partially discursive
Mediation of power relations necessitates a socio-cognitive approach
CDA is a socially committed scientific paradigm that addresses social problems.
Discourse analysis is interpretive, descriptive and explanatory and uses a ‘systematic methodology’.
The role of the analyst is to study the relationship between texts and social practices.
In summation, CDA approach to the analysis of discourse and language whose major tenet is that language is a social practice. This entails a focus on the investigation of the discursive relationship between discourse and the notions of power, dominance and hegemony. The theory is predicated on the notion that human interaction is inherently constrained by the nature of power relationships that are prevailing in any given social milieu.