A discourse is not a static, idealized, or totalized unity of words and significances, but a dynamic field of interests, engagements, tensions, conflicts, and contradictions. A discourse or discourse domain should not be isolated from others but be seen in its mutual relevance to them. We must inquire how it functions within the general acquisition of knowledge through discourse and how it could function more effectively for wider participation. Discourse analysis should continually reflect upon its own procedures. Given the unmanageably large and diverse range of data, each project must be selective and focused and so should declare and justify its motives in terms of epistemological interests.
Discourse analysis obliges the investigator to engage and reengage with discourse.
The idealized separation of subject from object, or investigator from data, is not feasible here. Discourse analysis is rich and expansive rather than formalized and reductive. Discourse cannot be adequately analyzed with a fixed algorithm for reifying it into a configuration of formal symbols. To master its issues and problems, discourse analysis must adopt an encompassing interdisciplinary perspective. Discourse analysis should interact with institutions and groups both inside and outside the academy to pursue urgent issues and problems.