ANGLO-AMERICAN SCHOOLS OF SCIENTIFIC COMMUNICATION IN THE CONTEXT OF ACADEMIC DISCOURSE GENRES
Keywords:Anglo-American scientific communication, academic discourse, academic discourse genres, discourse community, academic spoken and written communication
The article presents a critical review of research works dedicated to Anglo-American scientific communication debates on academic discourse genres. This study shows that Standard English represented by British English and American English dominates in Anglo-American scientific communication. It has been assumed that Anglo-American academic discourse, as a scientific notion of discourse study is a hybrid term used to identify two interrelated types of discourse: instructional-pedagogical discourse that comprises teaching and learning practices in educational establishment and research-oriented discourse relating to research data sharing between different discourse communities. The results of the present study have revealed the internal genre taxonomy of Anglo-American research-oriented discourse identified by criterion academic spoken or written communication, with spoken research genres further divided into research report, conference presentation, roundtable discussions, dissertation defence and written research genres divided into research article, monograph, dissertation, abstract, and summary. The research article is claimed to be the leading research genre recognised by a distinct rhetorical structure: Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion and Conclusions. Finally, three main approaches to genre analysis introduced by Anglo-American scientific communication schools have been overviewed, namely neo-rhetorical (North American New Rhetoric Studies), sociocultural (Australian systematic functional linguistics) and linguo-didactic approach (English for Specific Purposes).
Bazerman, С. (1997). The life of genre, the life in the classroom. In W. Bishop & H. Ostrum (Eds.), Genre and writing: issues, arguments, alternatives (pp. 19-26). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Becher, T. and Trowler, P. (2001). Academic Tribes and Territories: intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines (2nd edition). Buckingham: Open University Press/SRHE.
Belcher, D. (2006). English for specific purposes: Teaching to perceived needs and imagined futures in worlds of work, study and everyday life. TESOL Quarterly, 40 (1), 133-156. https://doi.org/10.2307/40264514
Bellés-Fortuño, B. (2010). Spoken Academic Corpora Applied to Language Teaching and Research: Towards a Multimodal Approach (pp. 906-919). London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic Press.
Bennet, K. (2009). English Academic Style Manuals: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8 (1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.12.003
Bhatia, V.K. (Ed.) (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London, New York: Longman.
Bhatia, V.K. (2004). Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. Advances in Applied Linguistics. London: Continuum. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781474212038
Bhatia, V.K. (2008). Genre Analysis, ESP and Professional Practice. English for Specific Purposes, 27(2), 161-174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.07.005
Biber, D. (2006). University language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.23
Brookes, A., & Grundy, P. (1990). Writing for Study Purposes. A Teacher's Guide to Developing Individual Writing Skills. First edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Collins, R. (2012). Genre in Discourse, Discourse in Genre: A New Approach to the Study of Literate Practice. Journal of Literacy Research, 44 (1), 76-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086296x11431627
Christie, F., Martin, J. & Rothery, J. (1989). Genres make meaning: Another reply to Sawyer and Watson. English in Australia, 90, 43–59.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. London, New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078
Ferris, D. (1998). ‘Students’ views of academic aural/oral skills: A comparative needs analysis’. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 289-318. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587585
Flowerdew, J. (2013). English for research and publication purposes. In B. Paltridge, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 137-152). Oxford: Whiley and Sons.
Fortanet, I. (2005). Honoris Causa speeches: an approach to structure. Discourse Processes, 7 (1), 31-51. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605048766
Freedman, A. & Medway, P. (1994). Locating genre studies: Antecedents and prospects. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 1-20). London: Taylor & Francis.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as social semiotic: the social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Hopkins, A., & Dudley-Evans, A. (1988). A Genre-based Investigation of the Discussions Sections in Articles and Dissertation. English for Specific Purposes, 7 (2), 113-122. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(88)90029-4
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary Discourses. Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Michigan: The University of Michigan. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6719
Hyland K., Diani G. (2009) Introduction: Academic Evaluation and Review Genres. In: Hyland K., Diani G. (eds), Academic Evaluation (pp.2-5). London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9780230244290_1
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2011). Academic discourse. In Hyland, K. & Paltridge, B. (eds.) Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis (pp.171-184). London: Continuum.
Ilchenko, O.M. (2013). Dyskursyvni standarty suchasnoi anhliiskoi movy nauky [Discourse Standards of Contemporary English Language of Science]. Studia Linguistica, 7, 327-337.
Kachru, B. (1992). Introduction: The Other Side of English and the 1990s. In B. B. Kachru (ed.), Models for Non-native Englishes. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures (pp. 48-74). Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
Kapranov, Y. V. (2018). Hypothetical Versions on Antropogenesis Localization of the First Populations of the Homo. Logos, 94, 149-158. https://doi.org/10.24101/logos.2018.15
Korolyova, A. V. (2018). Reconstruction of Early Migration Routes of Homo Populations. Logos, 94, 159-166. https://doi.org/10.24101/logos.2018.16
Korneiko, I.V., Petrova, O.B., & Popova, N.O. (2014). Teoriia zhanru: teoretychni ta prykladni aspekty [Genre theory: theoretical and applied aspects]. Kharkiv: “Drukarnia Madryd”.
Lillis, T. & Curry, M. J. (2010). Academic Writing in a Global Context: The Politics and Practices of Publishing in English. London and New York: Routledge.
Luzondo, A. & Ruiz de Mendoza, F. (2017). Argument-structure and implicational constructions in a knowledge base. Onomazein, 35, 25-48. http://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.35.04
Martin, J.R. (1985). Process and Text: Two Aspects of Semiosis. In J. D. Benson and W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse. Vol. 1: Selected Theoretical Papers from the 9th International Systemic Workshop (pp.248-274). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as Social Action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70 (2), 151-167. https://doi.org/10.1080/00335638409383686
Perez, L. C. A. (2001). Designing new genre identities in scientific and technical discourse: cognitive, social and pedagogical implications. Journal of English studies, 3(2), 251-263. https://doi.org/10.18172/jes.81
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J & Feak C. (2004). Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Skills and Tasks. 2nd edition. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139524827
Webster, J. (2015). The Bloomsbury Companion to M.A.K. Halliday. London & New York: Bloomsbury Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781472541888
White, P.R.R.& Motoki S. (2006). Dialogistic Positions and Anticipated Audiences – a Framework for Stylistic Comparisons. In. Karin Aijmer, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen (Eds.), Pragmatic Markers in Contrast (pp. 189-214). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Copyright (c) 2018 Svitlana Shcherbyna
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).