本論文嘗試探討當代倡議以「批判論述分析」研究媒體文本的代表學者Norman Fairclough之理論內涵及其問題，除了簡述其理論模型的主要特徵外，也檢視學界針對其理論缺失與定位爭議進行評論或批判的若干觀點。本研究認為Fairclough最終並未完全澄清其在理論上的本體論定位，特別是其中擺盪在實在論與建構論之間的爭議部分。但在研究實作上，透過Fairclough在若干實例分析上所提供的示範，顯示其理論架構中所提示的若干分析策略，在對媒體文本的解讀上仍有其相當的效用。

This paper explores the essence and problem of the theory of Norman Fairclough, a representative scholar advocating "critical discourse analysis" in conducting media text research. In addition to introducing briefly the main features of Fairclough's theoretical model, this paper discusses the theoretical deficiency and disputed positioning of the model from critical academic perspectives. The conclusion of this study is that Fairclough has still not completely clarified the positioning of ontology in his theory, particularly regarding the disputed proportion between realism and constructivism. However, in actual research activity, the examples of certain empirical analyses Fairclough has provided indicate that particular analytical strategies of his theoretical framework are still effective in reading media text.