Mapping the aliran of the academic discipline of entrepreneurship: A ...

even though the model in Graphic 2a shows only one discipline, that many disciplines
may contribute to a discourse.
2.1.2.07 The Foucauldian concept of discourse is not clear and could be said to have
multiple definitions. Mills [2004] citing Foucault [2004] from ‘The archaeology of
knowledge’ summarises these definitions as:
i. the general domain of all statements - that is, all utterances or texts which have
meaning and which have some effect in the real world, count as discourse.
ii. an individualizable group of statements – is one which is used more often by
Foucault when he is discussing the particular structures within discourse.
iii. a regulated practice which accounts for a number of statements – he is
interested less in the actual utterances/texts that are produced than in the rules
and s tructures which prod uce particular utterances and texts [p6].
2.1.2.08 Foucault [2004] himself in ‘The archaeology of knowledge’ first published in
1969 describes his definitions of discourse as indicative of “the rather fluctuating meaning
of the word ‘discourse” [cited in Mills, 2004, p6].
2.1.2.09 Looking at Foucault’s work, I can see a trend over his lifetime in his definitions
of discourse. ‘In death and the labyrinth; The world of Raymond Roussel’, first published
in 1963 the discourse is a text, being the book written by Roussel [Foucault, 1986, p1]. It is
pos sible tha t the field of critical discourse analysis derives from such analyses of textual /
linguistic discourse.
2.1.2.10 In ‘The order of things’, first published in 1966, and ‘The archaeology of
knowledge’, first published in 1969, we start to see the three definitions, summarized by
Mills, emerging, even, as Foucault’s [2004] admits, they are subject to fluctuating
meanings.
2.1.2.11 Guignon has commented that ‘The archaeology of knowledge’ was “Foucault’s
most structuralist text” [Guignon, 1994, p29], but in the context of looking for the archive
of the discourse rather than looking for the origin [Guignon, 1994, p94]. Foucault also
began to see discourses as the ‘unities of function’ [Guignon, 1994, p263].
33