The Many Meanings of Discourses in Place

A Review of Conceptualisations in Nexus Analysis Studies

Bibliographic Data

ID23311156
AuthorsJustyna Legutko (0000-0001-7193-5047, Linnaeus University, corresponding author), Elisa Räsänen (0000-0002-9697-0372, Aalto University)
Year2026
Volume25
Publication date2026-01-19
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueInternational Journal of Qualitative Methods (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1609-4069 • E-ISSN: 1609-4069
PublisherSAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/16094069261463470
OpenAlexW7171505012
LanguageEN
References cited63

Nexus analysis has become an increasingly influential framework in applied linguistics for examining the relationship between discourse and social action. Rooted in linguistic anthropology, interactional sociolinguistics, and critical discourse studies, it treats social action as the primary unit of analysis and discourse as central to understanding how actions are produced. A key concept, discourses in place (DiP), focuses on the symbolic and indexical meanings of signs in material environments, and encompasses the overt and covert discourses shaped by material, visual, and interactional affordances of a place. Despite its many operationalizations across empirical studies, the definitions of DiP have not been examined systematically. This paper addresses this gap by conducting a scoping literature review of 55 empirical studies that operationalise DiP within nexus analytical research. Through a critical engagement with its varying conceptualisations, the paper elucidates how DiP has been defined across diverse contexts. The review highlighted wide variation in how DiP is conceptualized, ranging from material to conceptual and from static to dynamic, with some perspectives emphasizing language use and others focusing on actions and arrangements. Drawing on these findings, the paper proposes a set of critical questions to support future qualitative researchers in refining their use of the concept and in critically considering related concepts within nexus analysis that may overlap. Our aim is to invite fellow qualitative researchers into a conversation about the nature of DiP. In doing so, the paper contributes to theoretical development within nexus analysis by encouraging greater conceptual clarity and reflexivity in the use of DiP across nexus analytical studies.

Affordance · Agency (philosophy) · Conversation · Conversation analysis · Covert · Critical discourse analysis · Discourse analysis · Nexus (standard) · Reflexivity · Categorization, perception, and language · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Multilingual Education and Policy

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access