Dear Terry,
Yes, I stated things as I see them. But that doesn’t involve trying to shoe horn what you wrote into how I see things. It involves describing issues present in what you wrote.
It is difficult to see how the structural features of the single definition of one word, — “design” — affords the advantages you promise. Using discourse analysis requires a discourse. A discourse requires more than a single word.
Perhaps I am wrong.
Yours,
Ken
Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | Editor-in-Chief | 设计 She Ji. The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation | Published by Tongji University in Cooperation with Elsevier | URL: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/she-ji-the-journal-of-design-economics-and-innovation/
Chair Professor of Design Innovation Studies | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China ||| University Distinguished Professor | Centre for Design Innovation | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia
—
> Terence Love <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
—snip—
> I see things differently. I suggest from your last post and this, you are trying to shoe horn what I wrote into how YOU see things.
—snip—
> This approach I described is common and widely used in terms of formal discourse analysis of the sort needed for establishing theory accurately.
—snip—
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|