关于话语研究脉络的理论综述，有诸多成果。已有研究整理了话语研究领域的诸多流派与方法，重点落在话语理论的发展之“流”，但“重流轻源”的思路导致同一流派的重要内在差异被忽略。本文尝试搁置繁杂多元的流派划分，立足于话语理论之“源”，返回“语言”的哲学理论源头，从英美哲学和欧陆哲学两大进路出发，以在传播学领域广泛应用的两大批判性话语方法，梵迪克和费尔克拉夫的话语理论为对象，辨明批判性话语研究（CDA）一直被忽略的内在分野，并指出不同的理论视野对于传播学话语研究的意义。

There are lots of reviews about the schools of Discourse Analysis. In general, these research put the emphasis on the “theory flow” as to summarize the current status, but the difference exits in a same school always be neglected. With here completely different, writer likes going back to the “theory source” of European Philosophy and Analysis Philosophy, and point out the neglected but important differences existed in CDA through focusing on two discourse theories of Van Dijk and Norman Fairclough practiced widely in communication fields.