Fairclough distinguishes between the external and internal relations of texts

External relations are those between texts and their social context, consisting of
social events, social practices and social structures. Events, practices and
structures represent different levels of abstraction within this social world. A text
(for example, a lecture) is itself a social event that happens in the context of a
certain social practice (teaching at university level) in a certain social structure (the
English language). Internal relations can be semantic, grammatical, lexical or
phonological. There is also an intermediate level, mediating between the text and
its social context, which Fairclough calls the discourse level, where
interdiscursive relations are formed. These are relations between different genres,
discourses and styles. Genres, in this model, are understood as ways of
(inter)acting discoursally in the world (for example, interviewing is a genre)
(Fairclough 2003:26). A discourse, in this restricted meaning (as part of the
discourse level), is understood as a way of representing the same area of the world
from a particular perspective (e.g. the discourse of capitalism). Style is a way of
constituting social identities through discourse, for example, by identifying oneself
as a man or as a student. The interdiscursive character of a text (the particular mix
of genres, discourse and styles) is realized in semantic, grammatical, lexical and
(in spoken texts) phonological features of the text. This means that particular
semantic relations or grammatical categories, for example, are seen as primarily
(but not exclusively) associated with certain genres, discourses or styles.
Fairclough’s method is based on three components: description, interpretation
and explanation (Titscher et al2000:153). The first component concerns the
analysis of discourse-as-text (Fairclough 1992) and consists of describing
choices and patterns of vocabulary, grammar, cohesion, text structure, etc.
(internal relations). The next component concerns the analysis of discourse-as-
discursive-practice (ibid.): Internal relations are interpreted in terms of the
genres, discourses and styles represented within the text, for example, in terms of
the identities adopted by the participants. The explanation involves looking at
external relations (discourse-as-social-practice). Given the critical stance of
CDA, relations of power and issues of ideology are of central interest. The type of
questions asked at the explanation stage are, for example: how are social actors
represented (activated/passivated, personal/impersonal) (Fairclough 2003:193)?
What value assumptions are made? What is the orientation to difference in the text
(an openness to and acceptance of difference? an accentuation of difference?)
(ibid.:192).