UNIT 1: INTRODUCTION TO

DISCOURSE ANALYSIS. DEFINITION

AND SCOPE OF STUDY
WHAT IS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS?

Discourse analysis is the study of language, a subfield of linguistics. Other subfields are phonology, which
studies the sounds of languages and how people use them; lexicography studies words, their meanings
and history; grammar studies how words are put together to form sentences and spoken utterances1.

Discourse analysis:

1. Studies the ways sentences and utterances go together to make texts and interactions
2. How those texts and interactions fit into our social world.

It focuses on how people use it in real life to do things like joke, argue, persuade, flirt… But it also shows
that there are certain kinds of people or belong to certain groups:

1. Language is ambiguous/Ambiguity of language

2. Language is always “in the world”
3. Language and social identity: the way we use language is inseparable from who we are and the
different social groups to which we belong, through gestures, tone, facial gestures, clothes…
4. Language is never used all by itself.

THE AMBIGUITY OF LANGUAGE

All communication contains some elements of meaning that are not expressed directly by the words
that are spoken or written.

For example, when you say “Do you have a pen?”, the question does not directly communicate that you
need a pan; it only asks if the other person is in possession of one. The other person needs to undertake
a process of “figuring out” what you meant, a process which in this case may be unconscious and
automatic.

“People don’t always say what they mean, and people don’t always mean what they say”. To say exactly
what we mean all the time would be impossible; first, as poets, lovers and even lawyers know, language
is an imperfect tool for the precise expression of many things we think and feel; and second because
whenever we communicate we always mean to communicate more than just one thing. When you ask if
someone has a pen, you mean to communicate not just that you need a pen but also that you do not
wish to impose on them+, which is why you approach the requisition indirectly by asking if they have a
pen, even when you know that they have one. Choosing to communicate indirectly is not the same as
choosing to communicate directly.

LANGUAGE IN THE WORLD

Making reference to the social context within which they are speaking or writing. The meaning of an
utterance can change dramatically depending on who is saying it, when and where it is said, and to
whom it is said.

If a teacher asks a student who is about to take an exam the same question “Do you have a pen?” it is
unlikely that the teacher is requesting one, probably designed to make sure that the student has the
proper tool to take the exam or that a pen must be used.

We are always speaking of language in some way “situated” in at least four ways.

1. Within the material way: where we encounter it (on a shop sign or in a textbook).
2. Within relationships: by referring to who they are, how well we know them, whether or not
they have some kind of power over us…
3. Within history: in relation to what happened before and what we expect to happen afterwards.
4. In relation to other languages: utterances and texts always respond to or refer to other
utterances and texts; everything that we say or write is situated in a kind of network of
discourse.

LANGUAGE AND SOCIAL IDENTITY

People are also situated by discourse. What is meant by this is that whenever people speak or write,
they are, through their discourse, somehow demonstrating who they are and what their relationship is
to other people (this also depends on the mood of the person, who they’re talking to, the place they are
in… this is called ADEQUACY). They are enacting their identities. We cannot help communicating our
identity through language. This becomes very present in cinema, TV, theatre…

LANGUAGE AND OTHER MODES

Changing the way I use language is not enough to fully enact these identities. I also have to dress in
certain ways, act in certain ways, and hang out in certain places with certain people. Language alone
cannot achieve all the things I need to do to be a certain kind of person. I always have to combine that
language with other things like fashion, gestures, and the handling of various kinds of objects.

Discourse analysts used to focus almost exclusively on written or spoken language. Now, people are
increasingly realizing not just that we communicate in a lot of ways that do not involve language, but
that in order to understand what people mean when they use language, we need to pay attention to the
way it is combined with these other communicative modes

SO WHAT GOOD IS DISCOURSE ANALYSIS?

We already engage in discourse analysis all the time when we try to figure out what people mean by
what they say and when we try to express our multiple and complicated meanings to them. What is the
point if all of this communication and interpretation is going on so smoothly without us having to attend
to it? It is not. None of us is immune to misunderstandings, offending people by saying the wrong thing,
struggling to get our message across, or being taken in by someone who is trying somehow to cheat us.

Studying discourse analysis can teach you to understand how the societies in which we live are put
together and how they are maintained through our day-to-day activities of speaking, writing and making
use of other modes of communication. To understand why people interact with one another the way
they do and how they exert power and influence over one another. To understand how people view
reality differently and why they view it that way. This study is not just the study of how we use language.
It is also indirectly the study of romance, friendship, psychology, politics, power…

DEFINING TEXT AND DISCOURSE. TEXT LINGUISTICS AND DISCOURSE ANALYSIS.

Discourse Analysis focuses on knowledge about language beyond the word, clause, phrase and sentence
that is needed for successful communication. It looks at patterns of the language across the texts and
considers the relationships between language and the social and cultural contexts in which it is used.
Discourse analysis also considers the ways that the use of language presents different views of the world
and different understandings. It examines how the use of language is influenced by relationships
between participants as well as the effects the uses of language has on social identities and relations.
Considers how views of the world, and identities, are constructed through the use of discourse.
Examines both spoken and written texts.

According to Schiffrin, “text” is the linguistic content, but not the inferences available. According to De
Beaugrande and Dressler (1981), the text is a communicative event which follows seven criteria:

1. Cohesion
2. Coherence
3. Intentionality
4. Acceptability
5. Informativity
6. Situationality
7. Intertextuality

The first two are text internal (studied by text linguistics, text) and the rest are text external (studied by
discourse analysis, context).

Examples:

1.

2.
 3.

When we see the 3rd example, we instantly think of the Philomena snowstorm instead of the movie;
this is called SALIENCY. We have been influenced to think that by the first two examples.

FORM AND FUNCTION

The basic correspondence between form and function is the following:

 Declarative → Statement: The assignment is due tomorrow

 Interrogative → Question: DO you know that man?
 Imperative → Command: Stop the noise.

The linguistic from of an utterance will not necessarily coincide with the functional intention of that
utterance. Grammar: concerned with the formal properties of an item.

Discourse: concerned with what the speaker is using the item for.

 YOu are tired → Claim, but asking fOr veracity

 YOu can clean the rOOms now → Declaration of pOssibility, but pOlite cOmmand
 Will yOu behave → InterrOgative cOmmand
  Will yOu cOme tO dinner tOnight? → InterrOgative invitation
 Isn’t he stupid? → InterrOgative claim
 Did I blOw it!? → Exclamation
 COme in and take a seat → Imperative invitation

How we interpret grammatical form depends on a number of factors, linguistic and non–linguistic:

Intonation:

A: I wish I found a part-time job.

B: You’re not working (SURPRISE)

A: Oh yes I am. But I need the afternoon off to look after my mother. She’s very old.

D: I am upset. Somebody told my boss I have a part-time job.

S: And he doesn’t like that? (MAKING A GUESS AND ASKING FOR CONFIRMATION)

D: No, he doesn’t. He thinks that I am too tired to work. S: I am sorry. I have to admit I told him.

D: You told him? Why? (SURPRISE, ANGER) S: I couldn’t help it. He asked me point-blank.

APPROACHES TO THE PHENOMENON OF DISCOURSE

FORMAL AND FUNCTIONALIST PARADIGMS

“As two approaches to linguistics, formalism and functionalism tend to be associated with very different
views of the nature of language.” (Leech, 1983).

1. Functionalism:
a. Language has functions EXTERNAL to the language system itself.
i. A societal phenomenon universality of the uses of language in human
societies
ii. Development of the child’s communicative needs and abilities in society
iii. Language in relation to its social function.
b. External functions influence the internal organisation of the linguistic system.
2. Formalism: Language has social and cognitive functions but they do not impinge upon the
internal organisation of language.
a. Language = mental phenomenon
b. Linguistic universals = common genetic linguistic inheritance
c. Built–in human capacity to learn language
d. Language = autonomous system

THE FORMAL APPROACH: LANGUAGE ABOVE THE SENTENCE

Formalists define discourse as “language above the sentence or above the clause”. They analyse
constituents (smaller linguistic units), relationships (with one another) and arrangements (they can
occur in a restricted nº of arrangements that are rule–governed).

If there are rules which limit what kind of word can follow another, there are rules which limit what
kind of sentence can follow another sentence. These are called “rules of discourse”. But there are some
problems for this:
 1. People do not always speak in units like sentences. Spoken language is produced in units with
intonational and semantic closure, not necessarily syntactic closure:

You can run a hou- watcha- now whatcha you can- ran a house- you can run a house a- and do the
job, which is important, y’ can’t y- a man can’t do it himself, and a woman can’t do it himself w- if y’
want it to be successful. In most cases.

In the example above we see many mistakes. For example, the speaker doesn’t finish many sentences
(in yellow). There are also morphological mistakes (in blue). There are also a lot of ellisions (in green).

2. Three concepts can be applied to the analysis of a sentence from a formal point of view.
a. Grammaticality
i. MOrphOlOgical errOrs: wOrd endings (Or Other wOrd parts) are wrOng →
The knight kill a dragons (ungrammaticality dOesn’t not stOp cOmmunication)
ii. Syntactical errOrs: where the order is wrOng → The a knight dragon killed.
iii. Semantic errOrs: where the meaning is wrOng → The knight killed a
teaspOOn.

There is a fundamental difference between judgements of grammaticality and judgements of

acceptability of discourse.

*Should I have a coma in the middle of this sentence? → It shOuld be “cOmma”.

(At a wedding) *I wOuld like tO prOpOse tO sOme tOast → Literally meaning is he Or she wants tO
marry “sOme tOast”

(FOreign priest at Sunday mass) *Our church has smaller members every week. → He shOuld say “less
members”, smaller members means the members are smaller in size.

This is “acceptability in context”. Grammatical sentences can constitute acceptable discourse, but they
can also be unacceptable in certain circumstances.

A second line of analysis: in the same way there are rules within sentences, limiting which words can
follow others. There might also be rules within discourse, limiting which sentence can follow another
one. If I write “The knight killed the dragon”, then there might be limits, or constraints, on what I can put
as the next sentence. I might write: “The knight killed the dragon. He cut off his head with a sword”, but
could I write “The knight killed the dragon. The pineapple was on the table”?

It is unlikely, but it does not seem to be wrong. The two sentences MIGHT go together, but the reasons
are not strictly linguistic; they are to do with our knowledge of th world where these events take place.

b. Predictability

Predictions in discourse sequences are set up in terms of propositional content.

NP → (Det) (Adj) N (PP)

VP → V (NP) (PP) (Adv) PP → P (NP)

Police officer talks to a driver: Your tail light is broken, your tires must be exchanged and your bumper
hangs halfway down. That will be 300 dollars.

Driver: Alright, go ahead. They want twice as much as that at the garage.
Predictions occur in discourse in a different way; they are not purely linguistic (RULE–GOVERNED), but
PROPOSITIONAL CONTENT BASED. This is why predictions can be falsified.

c. Structure and meaning

Sometimes in discourse, meaning is not retrievable from syntactic or semantic organization in isolation,
but only from the POSITION THAT EXPRESSION OCUPPIES IN A DISCOURSE SEQUENCE.

(Telephone rings. A answers)

A: HellO. → Directive

B: HellO. Is Jim there? → Question

A: Yes, he is. Is that all? → Ill-fOrmed respOnse.

The same meaning as B’s question could have been conveyed by other sentences: “I want to speak to
Jim”, “Could I speak to Jim?”, “Jim, please…”

Because of position in discourse sequence, syntactic and semantic differences between those sentences
become NEUTRALISED (they are equivalent as discourse moves). This is a case in which discourse
structure controls the meaning which can be conveyed.

In conclusion: a formal approach cannot be appropriate to explain how discourse works because of the
following reasons:

1. Discourse is not always comprised of sentences

2. Grammaticality and predictability do not apply to discourse (acceptability replaces
grammaticality and predictions are propositional content-based)
3. Discourse has structure but this does not mean that this structure is specifically linguistic.

THE FUNCTIONAL APPROACH: LANGUAGE USE

“The analysis of discourse, is necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As such, it cannot be restricted
to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which these forms are
designed to serve in human affairs.” (Brown and Yule, 1983).

Functionalists give much importance to the purposes and functions of language, sometimes to the
extreme of defending the notion that language and society are part of each other and cannot be
thought of as independent (Fairclough, 1989: Focault, 1980). Functional analysis include all uses of
language because they focus on the way in which people use language to achieve certain
communicative goals. Discourse is not regarded as one more of the levels in a hierarchy; it is an all-
embracing concept which includes not only the propositional content, but also the social, cultural and
contextual contents. (Alba, 2009).

ELEMENTS OF COMMUNICATION

 Addressor: person who originates the message.

 Addressee: person to whom the message is addressed.
 Channel: medium through which the message travels.
 Message form: particular grammatical and lexical choices of the message.
 Topic: information carried.
 Code: language or dialect.
  Setting: social or physical context.

MACRO FUNCTIONS OF LANGUAGES

 Emotive function: communicating the inner states and emotions of the addresser: “Oh no!”
“Fantastic!”, swear words…
 Directive function: seeking to affect the behaviour of the addressee. “Please, help me!” “Shut
up!”
 The phatic function: opening the channel or checking that it is working
o Social reasons: “Hello!” “Lovely weather!”
o Practical reasons: “Can you hear me?” “Are you still there?”
 Poetic function: particular form chosen is the essence of the message (advertisements)
 Referential function: function of carrying information
 Metalinguistic function: focusing attention upon the code itself to clarify or renegotiate it.
“What does this word mean?”
 Contextual function: particular kind of communication. “Right, let’s start the lecture.”

Jakobson argues that utterances do not have one single function, but a primary function which is used
simultaneously with different others. “Could you give me the time?” The primary function would be
directive (give me the time), but the secondary could be emotive (expressing a need).

Functional analysis focuses on how people use language to different ends: they are typically concerned
less with the way people intend what they say to serve referential meanings (convey propositional
information), and more with the unintended social, cultural and expressive meanings stemming from
how their utterances are situated in contexts.

The major concern is that discourse analysis can turn out into a more general and broader analysis of
language functions, without leaving a space for the analysis of relationships between utterance; that is,
for analysis of the way the communicative content of an utterance contributes to our understanding of
relationships across utterances, or, alternatively, for the way relationships across utterances help us
understand the form, function, or meaning of a single utterance.
UNIT 2: COHESION AND COHERENCE.
TEXTUALITY IN DISCOURSE

COHESION AND COHERENCE IN DISCOURSE

Cohesion: the way in which the components of the surface text are mutually

connected within a sequence of utterances. Intra-text linking devices are connected to

extra-textual reference. (The concept of text – Seidlhofer & Widdowson, 1999). It is a textual property,
having to do with the textualization of contextual connections.

Coherence: knowledge or cognitive structures implied by the language used that contribute to the
meaning of a given discourse. (The concept of discourse – Seidlhofer &

Widdowson, 1999). Is a discourse property, with the function of realizing those connections.

A text can have no cohesion but derive a coherent discourse. A given text may be cohesive but
discourse-incoherent.

*She flew to New York last week. However, the stew was delicious.

My favourite colour is blue. I’m calmedd and relaxed. In the summer I lie on the grass and look
up.

COHESION IN DISCOURSE

The property of being a text is texture. Texture derives from the fact that the text function as a unity
with respect to its environment. It is realized in relations existing between parts of a text.

Would you like to meet possibly between the seventh to the tenth? Anytime during

those days would be fine. → Those days links back to “between the seventh to the tenth.” Cohesive
relation: a relation that grammar or lexis makes possible.

Cohesive tie:

Cohesion occurs when one element in discourse cannot be effectively decoded (interpreted) without
recourse to another element in the same discourse. Without links would be impossible to understand
some texts/words.

GRAMMATICAL COHESION

It is divided into 4 types:

 Reference: to refer to an element which is recoverable (pronouns, comparative, adverbs like

here, there, now…).
 Substitution: to signal an omission (do for verbal groups, so for clauses).
  Ellipsis: omitting a clause or part of it when it can be assumed (she will go but I won’t [go]).
 Conjunction: connectors which links clauses in discourse.

REFERENCE

There are two types of references: Endophric or exophoric. We need to consider proper names and
definite noun phrases.

 Text or endophoric reference: Amy went to the party. She1 sat with Sarah.
 Anaphoric reference: She wanted to know if Lucy were gonna marry Alex. This was something
she always feared.
 Cataphoric reference: They pressed round him in ragged fashion to take their money. Andy,
Dave, Phil, Stephen, Bob.

SITUATION OR EXOPHORIC REFERENCES (DEIXIS)

The presupposed element can be found outside the text.

 Amy went to the party. She sat with Sarah.

 Put that over there.
 Did you find that jazz record you were looking for?

Reference can be made to different kinds of context.

1. Reference can be made to the context: The plant you2 gave me3 last Christmas4 is dying. →
Exophoric
2. The context of culture: The president is taller than the previous one.
3. The context we share as humankind: The sun will eventually burn out.

 Personal reference:
o Personal pronouns
o Possessive pronouns

Ex: I went out with Jo on Sunday. She looked awful.

 Demonstrative reference:
o Adverbials: here, there, now…
o Nominal: this, that, those…

Ex: Lieutenant Hassab wants to see me at twelve o’clock, but I don’t think I can see him then.

 Comparative reference: sets up a relation of contrast.

o Expressed by such adjectives as same, identical, equal…
o Adjectives in a comparative degree such as bigger, faster…
o Adverbs such as identically, likewise, so, much…
o Quantity and quality: more than, fewer than… Ex: It’s the same cat as the one we saw
yesterday.

A chain of co-referenctial items such as: Mrs Thatcher → The Prime Minister → The Iron Lady → Maggie.
Co-reference is not strictly a linguistic feature but depends on real-world knowledge.

You need some external information to realize that the term refer to the same person.

TEXTUAL REFERENCE

There is a continuum of cohesive elements that can be used for referring back to an entity already
mentioned. This continuum goes from full repetition to pronominal reference, through synonym,
superordinate and general word:

I saw a boy in the garden. The boy (repetition) was climbing a tree. I was worried about the child
(superordinate). The poor lad (synonym) was obviously not up to it. The idiot (general word) was going
to fall if he (pronoun) didn’t take care.

SUBSTITUTION

 Nominal substitution: one, ones, the same… “Let’s go and see the bears. The polar ones rock.”
 Verbal substitution: do. “Did Mary take that letter? She might have done.”
 Clausal substitution: so and not. “Everyone thinks he’s guilty. If so, no doubt he’ll resign.”

ELLIPSIS

 Nominal ellipsis: Do you want to hear another song? I know twelve more.
 Verbal ellipsis. She brought roses and Jackie [brought] lilies.
 Clausal ellipsis: I ran 5 miles on the first day and 8 on the second.

CONNECTIVES/CONJUNCTION

 Addition connectives: and, furthermore, for instance…

 Opposition or Adversative connectors: but, however,instead, on the other hand, yet,
nevertheless, although, though, in spite of, all the same, even if…
 Clause connectives: so, consequently, because, that being so, therefore, as a result, as a
consequence, accordingly, consequently, thus, hence, for this/that reason
 Time connectives: then, next, at this moment, finally, first, second, after that, finally,
afterwards, subsequently, firstly, secondly, in the first place, to begin with, at last, in the end,
eventually…

LEXICAL COHESION

1. Repeated words. → If I say “read” and then “reading”, it is considered a case of repetition with
a change of class.
2. Synonyms and near-synonyms → I heard a sound, but I couldn’t find when that noise came
from. // I turned to the ascent of the peak. The climb is perfectly easy. // There is a boy
climbing that three. The lad is going to fall if he doesn’t take care.
3. Opposites: Dead/alive, present/absent, happy/sad.
4. Superordinates and hyponyms/co-hyponyms → In front of the house were parked three
vehicles: a lorry, a car and a large, red bicycle. // Henry has bought a new Jaguar. He practically
lives in the car.
5. Meronyms or part-whole → Tree: trunk, branch, leaf…
6. General nouns: people, thing, stuff, place.
COHESIVE TIES

Distance between cohesive ties:

1. Immediate
2. Remote → intervening clauses
3. Mediated → tie established with previous elements through other elements in the text.
a. Cohesive chain
b. Identity chain → ties refer to the same thing (co-referentiality). She saw a lovely little
bear and took it home.
c. Similarity chain
i. Same class of things (co-classification). Ana lives in Peru. Pedro does too.
ii. Belonging to same semantic field (co-extension). My sister likes apples and
bananas.

Chains must be related to each other somehow:

The most powerful earthquake to strike India for more than half a century rocked the subcontinent on
Friday, killing more than 1500 people as it toppled buildings and houses in India and Pakistan. The final
toll is expected to rise even further as rescuers search for bodies buried under debris and aftershocks
are expected to rock the region for days.

....→ Co-hyponyms

….→ Synonyms

….→ Meronyms

____→ repetition

A lexical chain is made up of elements that are semantically related with each other usually through co-
extensional connections.

DISCOURSE COHERENCE. WHY FORMAL LINKS ARE NOT ENOUGH

Example 1:

A: That’s the telephone. B: I’m in the bath.

A: OK

Example 2:

A: What’s this?

B: It’s a watch. Why?

A: Funny looking one if you ask me.

Example 3:

Charles Dickens was born on the seventh of February 1812, the year of victory and the year of hardship.
He came crying into the world in a small first-floor bedroom in an area known as New Town or Mile End,
just on the outskirts of Portsmouth where his father, John Dickens, worked in the Naval Pay Office. His
mother. Elizabeth, is reported to have claimed that she went to a ball on the night before his birth …

Example 4:

Psycholinguistic reading skills are not invariant. Reading skills are something that English teachers work
hard to develop. Singapore's economy has developed rapidly in recent years. We shall need to
economise if we are to save money.

We can see that cohesion is neither sufficient nor necessary for the creation of coherent discourse.
Consider these two sentences from example 4:

A. Reading skills are something that English teachers work hard to develop.
B. Singapore’s economy has developed rapidly in recent years.

What is the connection between the two? We can understand once that extended context is provided:

A: Education, particularly literacy, is extremely important for developing the full potential of a
society.

B: True. Take our situation here in Singapore. Reading skills are something that English teachers
work hard to develop.

A: Singapore's economy has developed rapidly in recent years. Would you say that this has
been due, at least in part, to the educational system?

B: I certainly would!

It is also easier to understand example 1 once we have been given more context: A: That’s the
telephone. Can you answer it, please?

B: No, I’m sorry, I can’t answer it because I’m in the bath. A: OK, I’ll answer it then.

Some texts may be coherent and meaningful to some receivers but uninterpretable to others. This has
led some researchers to postulate that it is really background knowledge that is the predominant factor
in the receiver’s ability to perceive coherence.

Example 5: The river had been dry for a long time. Everyone attended the funeral.

With context: If a river has been dry for a long time, then a river spirit has died.

Whenever a spirit dies there is a funeral. The river had been dry for a long time. Everyone attended the
funeral.

This is known as knowledge schemata: mental representations of typical situations, used in discourse
processing to predict the contents of the particular situation which the
discourse describes. The idea is that the mind, stimulated by key words or phrases in the text, or by the
context, activates a knowledge schema and uses it to make sense of the discourse.

Example 6: Imagine a witness in a court case is asked to tell the court about her movements during the
morning. She is asked to tell them everything: the whole truth. She begins as follows:

1. I woke up at seven forty. I made some toast and a cup of tea. I listened to the news. And I left
for work at about 8.30.

Suppose the witness had said:

2. I woke up at seven forty. I was in bed. I was wearing pyjamas. After lying still for a few minutes,
I threw back the duvet, got out of bed, walked to the door of the bedroom, opened the door,
switched on the landing light, walked across the landing, opened the bathroom door, put the
basin plug into the plughole, turned on the hot tap, ran some hot water into the wash basin,
looked in the mirror…

The information given in the second option is assumed, present in the schemata by default. The only
things that are worth mentioning are those things which are different: “I went to work in my pyjamas”
(instead of “my clothes”).

FRAMES, SCRIPTS, SCHEMAS

Script theory attempts to capture the knowledge we use to understand commonplace events like going
to a restaurant: Ruth and Mark had lunch at a restaurant today. They really enjoyed the meal but were
worried about its cost. However, when the bill arrived after the ice cream, they were pleasantly
surprised to find that it was very reasonable.

Script name Component Specific action

Eating at a restaurant Entering Walk into restaurant
Look for table
Decide where to sit
Go to table
Sit down
Ordering Get menu
Look at menu
Choose food
Waiter arrives
Give orders to waiter
Waiter takes order to cook
Wait talk
Cook prepares food
Eating Cook gives foot to waiter
Waiter delivers food to
customer
Customer eats
Talk
Leaving Waiter writes bill
Waiter delivers bill to customer
Customer examines bill
Calculate tip
Leave tip
Gather belongings
Pay bill
 Leave restaurant

OTHER TYPES OF SCHEMATA

1. Generic schemas/prototypes/idealized person schemas: general schemas about individual

people. Person schemas can apply to
a. Specific individuals: Barack Obama, Britney Spears, your father…
b. Types of individuals: expectations based on personality traits. Example: the introvert, a
leader, a celebrity…

Person schemas organize our conceptions of others’ personalities and enable us to develop
expectations about others’ behavior.

2. Self-schemas: structures to organize our conception of our own characteristics.

a. If you conceive of yourself as independent, you may see yourself as individualistic,
unconventional, assertive…
b. If you behave in a manner consistent with your self-schema, you may refuse to accept
money from your parents, refuse to ask others for help with schoolwork, take a part–
time job, or dye your hair an unusual colour.
3. Group schemas/stereotypes
a. Schemas regarding the members of a particular social group or social category.
b. Stereotypes indicate the attributes and behaviours considered typical of members of
that group or social category: stereotypes about races, religious groups or ethnic
groups.
4. Role schemas: Indicate which attributes and behaviours are typical of persons occupying a
particular role in a group.
a. Role schemas exist for most occupational roles: nurses, cab drivers, store managers…
But also for other kinds of roles in groups: group leader, captain of a sports team…
b. Role schemas are often used to understand and predict the behaviours of people who
occupy roles.
5. Interpersonal schemas: generic representation of self–other interactions, which is abstracted
from interpersonal experience.
a. To do with social/affective relationships: love, friendship, fraternal…
b. Allow comprehension and prediction of aims and behaviour

“The role of background knowledge in language comprehension has been formalized as schema theory
… any text, either spoken or written, does not by itself carry meaning. Rather, according to schema
theory, a text only provides directions for listeners or readers on how to retrieve or construct meaning
from their previously acquired knowledge. This previously acquired knowledge is called the reader’s
background knowledge, and the previously acquired knowledge structures are called schemata.” –
Carrel & Eisterhold (1987)

Schemata are really important in reading and listening processes because they serve some purposes:

1. Provide an interpretational framework

2. Direct the interpretation
3. Indicate what is important and not in a given text
4. Make inferences possible

INFERENCES
TYPES OF INFERENCES

1. Necessary (coherence): Without them, the text representation is not coherent. “Mary was
enjoying the party. She went back home really late.”
2. Elaborative: They are not necessary for coherence. Also called optional or embellishing. “Mary
was enjoying the party. The music was really good.” (She was enjoying the party because she
likes dancing and the music was good).

NECESSARY INFERENCES (BACKWARD)

1. Referential bridging inferences include

a. Anaphoric reference: noun phrase. Inferences specifying that the same word across 2
propositions refers to the same concept. “Mary got some beer out of the car. The beer
was warm.”
b. Anaphoric reference: pronoun. Inferences specifying that an anaphor and its
antecedent refer to the same concept. “The warden scratched Mr X. She was furious
with him.”
c. Bridging/Relational: semantically or conceptually relating sentence to previous
consent via frames, schemas, scripts. “Mary got some picnic supplies out of the car.
The beer was warm.” Relational coherence is explanation-based or causal; they explain
what is read by a causal chain or network of previous events and states. “My sister
chopped the onions. Tears were running down her face.”
2. Lexical inferences. “The embassy searched for bugs. The secretaries had seen roaches.”

ELABORATIVE INFERENCES (FORWARD)

Elaborative inferences infer properties and associations that cannot be explained by causal
relationships.

1. Predictive/Forward inferences: predict upcoming info or consequences. “The actress fell from
the 14th floor – she died.”
2. Instantation: knowledge about empirical regularities. “The fish attacked the swimmer” (a shark
or similar)
3. Agents: Infers agents. “A new hot water tank had been installed.” (by a plumber)
4. Goal: infer intentions of agent. “John saw the robbers walking into the bank.”
5. Instrument: associations. “He stabbed the millionaire.” (with a knife)

SEVEN CRITERIA FOR TEXTUALITY (DE BEAUGRANDE AND DRESSLER. 1981)

WHAT MAKES A TEXT A TEXT?

The linguists De Beaugrande and Dressler have 7 criteria of what they call textuality.

Text will be defined as a “communicative occurrence with meets 7 standards of textuality.” If any of
these standards is not considered to have been satisfied, the text will not be communicative. Non–
communicative texts are treated as non-texts.

COHESION
Concerns the ways in which the components of the surface text (the actual words we hear or see) are
mutually connected within sequence. “Wash and core six cooking apples and then put them into
fireproof dish.”

COHERENCE

Concerns the ways in which the components of the textual world (the configuration of concepts and
relations which underlie the surface text, are mutually accessible and relevant).

a. Wash and core six cooking apples. Put them into a fireproof dish.
b. They fought a battle. Afterwards, it snowed.

A text does not make sense by itself, but rather by the interaction of text-presented knowledge with
people’s stored knowledge of the world. “I haven’t had any coffee. It’s Tuesday.” We can infer that this
person doesn’t have coffee on Tuesdays.

Both cohesion and coherence concern the way stretches of language are connected to each other. In
cohesion, stretches of language are connected by virtue of lexical and grammatical dependencies. In
coherence, they are connected by virtue of conceptual or meaning dependencies as perceived by
language users. Cohesion is the surface expression of coherence relations, that it is a device for making
conceptual relations explicit.

A conjunction such as “therefore” may express a conceptual notion of ‘reason’ or ‘consequence’. If the
reader cannot perceive an underlying semantic relation of ‘reason’ or consequence’ between the
propositions connected by ‘therefore’, he will not be able to make sense of the text in question, in other
words, the text will not ‘cohere’ for this particular reader.

INTENTIONALITY

Concerning the text producer’s attitude that the set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive and
coherent text instrumental in fulfilling the producer’s intentions (to distribute knowledge or to attain a
goal specified in a plan).

“Well, sir, “ said the constable, “he’s the man we were in search of, that’s true, and yet he’s not
the man we were in search of. For the man we were in search of was not the man we wanted,
sir, if you understand my everyday way.”

“He is the man they were searching for, but they were searching for the wrong man (he was not
the culprit of the crime).”

Ads, for example, always tend to present intentionality.

ACCEPTABILITY

Concerning the text receiver’s attitude that the set of occurrences should constitute a cohesive and
coherent text having some use or relevance for the receiver, (to acquire knowledge or provide
cooperation in a plan).

The Bell Telephone Company warns people:

a. Call us before you dig. You may not be able to afterwards.

 b. Call us before you dig. There might be an underground cable. If you break the cable,
you won’t have phone service, and you may get a severe electric shock. Then you
won’t be able to call us.

INFORMATIVITY

Concerns the extent to which the occurrences of the presented text are expected vs. unexpected or
known vs. unknown.

a. Call us before you dig. You may not be able to afterwards.

In [a], the assertion that ‘you will not ‘be able to call’ is much more unexpected than it is in [b]. The
processing of highly informative occurrences is more demanding than otherwise, but correspondingly
more interesting as well.

Caution must be exercised lest the receivers’ processing becomes overloaded to the point of
endangering communication.

Every text is somehow informative. Low informativity can be disturbing (cause rejection). Three orders
of informativity:

a. Lowest: predictable info and obvious facts.

b. Medium: probable and frequent info and common facts.
c. Highest: less probable info and unusual or infrequent.

SITUATIONALITY

Concerns the factors which make a text relevant to a situation of occurrence.

The web says “call today”, but it is not clear if today refers to the day the ad was published or if the
number will be available for a long time.

INTERTEXTUALITY

Concerns the factors which make the utilization of one text dependent upon knowledge of one or more
previously encountered texts.

A driver who has seen road sign [a] is likely to see another sign further down the road, such as:
UNIT 3: REGISTER ANALYSIS
SPOKEN VS WRITTEN LANGUAGE

1. According to manner of production:

a. Paralinguistic cues
b. Production circumstances
c. Feedback
2. According to function
a. Transactional – written language
b. Interactional – spoken language
3. According to form

According to Halliday (1985) written language is used:

a. For action: public signs, product labels, TV and radio guides, bills, menus, telephone
directories, ballot papers, computer manuals…
b. For information: newspapers, current affairs magazines, advertisements, political
pamphlets…
c. For entertainmemt: comic strips, fiction books, poetry and drama, newspaper
features, firm subtitles…

The different purposes will be reflected in the characteristics of the texts themselves.

The boundary between the two MEDIA is rather imaginary and also it is often transgressed:

a) a lecture on linguistics delivered for an auditorium of students (spoken writing) may be

recorded and published (written speaking)
b) a lecture is an instance of transactional use of spoken language, it is expected that students
write down their notes and keep the written record for their future reference

Hillier adopts Gregory and Carroll’s framework:

Mode → linguistic features associated with either one of the two media. Refers to choices that the
sender makes as to whether features normally associated with speech or writing shall be included in the
message, regardless of the medium in which it is to be transmitted.

Medium → messages transmitted via phonic and graphic means. Examples:

1. A lecture read before a class

2. Casual e–mail
3. An advertisement (written, may evoke a spoken, conversational mode of language use)

Medium offers the either/or choice, mode provides a scale of continuous gradation.

ACCORDING TO FORM (LINGUISTIC CHARASTERISTICS OF SPEECH AND WRITING)

Okay um, i'm from Pennsylvania ... outs- outside of Philadelphia... and, um, sorta, about 40 miles outside
of it it's rural, relatively rural, sort of area well it's not ... it used to be rural it's getting more, built up but
um yes [LAUGH] definitely, um ... and i lived there... pretty much for my whole life ... um, I went to
college in upstate New York ... um, Saint Lawrence University…

1. Interactive markers and planning fillers

2. Less richly organized
3. Syntax less structures
4. Little subordination
5. Active declarative forms
6. Few passives/it–clefts Wh–clefts
7. Less densely packed info
8. Incomplete sentences/phrases
 Written language Spoken language
Formal discourse markers (logical connectors, Simple connectors: chunks related by “and”
that complementisers…) “but” “if”
Implicit connectors
Rhetorical organisers (firstly, more important Rare to find +2 premodifying adjectives
that, in conclusion) Only one predicate attached to a given
referent at a time
Heavily premodified noun phrases Topic–comment form
Active constructions with indeterminate agent
Info. heavily concentrated Physical context–deictics
Replacement of expressions
Subject predicate form Generalised vocabulary
Repetition of syntactic forms
Passive construction are frequent Prefabricated fillers

WRITTEN LANGUAGE

1. Metalingual markers (to mark relationships between clauses): ‘that’ complementisers,

when/while, logical connectors: besides, moreover, however, in spite of…

But the god went on talking. His voice was soft and soothing. In spite of the menacing hand, the voice
inspired confidence. And in spite of the assuring voice, the hand inspired distrust. (Jack London Stories,
p.189)

2. Rhetorical organisers of larger stretches of discourse: Firstly, more important that, in

conclusion…

The Royal Train should be scrapped after the Golden Jubilee celebrations, a committee of MPs that
scrutinizes royal spending said yesterday: In conclusion, Mr Leigh praised the reduction in spending put
in place by Sir Michael Peat, the Queen's former Keeper of the Privy Purse, who was in charge of her
official finances until he became private secretary to the Prince of Wales. (Telegraph, 4/9/2002)

3. Rather heavily premodified noun phrases (like this one)

(5) But the Royal Train, used extensively during the Queen's three-month nationwide Golden Jubilee tour,
costs twice as much per mile as air travel, it said. (Telegraph, 4/9/2002)

4. Information about a certain referent can be very heavily concentrated

(7) A man who turned into a human torch ten days ago after snoozing in his locked car while smoking his
pipe has died in hospital. (Evening News (Edinburgh), 22 April 1982)

5. Sentences are structured in subject-predicate form

6. Passive constructions are very frequent:

(9) They [The drinks] arrived in two containers at Liverpool Docks on Sunday but their entry was blocked
under an agency arrangement between Customs and Excise and the drinks firm. (Telegraph, 23/8/2002)

SPOKEN LANGUAGE

1. Chunks are related by “and, but, then, if…” Speaker is less explicit than writer.

“S1: yes actually it was pretty funny. um, I was a year ahead of him [S2: mhm ] and we were both in
the environmental studies, program, and, we took a land use planning class, um it was my senior
 year i guess his junior year [S2: mhm ] and, we ended up working on a project, together there [S1:
uhuh ] um, and i didn't, there were two parts to the project and, i didn't work with Jack, directly on
that part i- w- we worked on separate parts [S1: yeah ] um, but, we ended up writing our paper,
there was five of us on it and we wrote a paper [S1: mhm] um, and the school published it ...”

2. It is rare to find +2 premodifying adjectives

It’s a biggish cat… tabby… with torn ears…

3. Only one predicate is attached to a given referent at a time

old man McArthur ... he was a wee chap ... oh very small ... and eh a beard ... and he was pretty
stooped.

4. Sentences are structured in topic–comment from

(a) Your parents, did you call them?
(b) Books, yes, I like them.
(c) [...] organizational studies you can't overlap because it's a it's a student-designed concentration
and you have more restrictions on it.
5. Passive constructions are infrequent. Active constructions with indeterminate group agents are
frequent
(a) Now these are the things, that one has to figure out
(b) uh, so in England they wanna do that on a... constant basis have, cameras everywhere

6.
a. The speaker may rely on physical context, or the immediate environment to supply a referent:
Oh, Look at that. Those lilies are beautiful, aren’t they?
b. The speaker may change or replace expressions as he goes along: [...] yeah i i i guess it's just a
matter of of presentation i mean, i- it would seem to me that in situations, where you are in
effect, inventing a term, it might, make more sense, to start out right at the very beginning, th-
saying what it is you mean, [S2: right ] and then get into the content [S2: right ] whereas is- it's
actually, done almost in reverse
c. Rather generalised vocabulary: a lot of, got, do, thing, nice, stuff, place, things like that....: (a)
[...] it's only rarely that people make really interesting stuff cuz that's just how culture works
you know?
d. The speaker repeats the same syntactic form over and over: I look at the fire extinguishers ... I
look at fire exits I look at what gangways are available ... I look at electric cables what are they
properly earthed ... are they properly covered ....
e. The speaker uses fillers: well, erm, umm, ehh, you know, like, right, I think, if you see what I
mean, so on, of course..... [. ] now after you take that final exam, and you get the grade back
do you_ can y- is there still time to talk to the G-S-I? or no? like i mean like what i'm saying is
like you know like let's say, let's say i'm really close. like like i'm talking, you know what i mean?
[S2: mhm ] like is there still a chance to like kinda just ask him?

REGISTER ANALYSIS

THE CONCEPT OF REGISTER

REGISTER VS STYLE
In 1960s, a group of linguists wanted to distinguish between

a. Variations in language according to the user (defined by variables such as social background,
geography, sex and age)
b. Variations according to use “in the sense that each speaker has a range of varieties and chooses
between them at different times”

What are some examples of register?

1. Journalese (the language of journalists)

2. Baby–talk/motherese (language employed by adults when talking to babies)
3. Language of teachers
4. Language of auctioneers
5. Language of doctors and nurses

There are two perspectives on the analysis of register:

HALLIDAY

Register is characterized by “differences in the type of language selected as appropriate to different

types of situation”; and it has a close relationship between language and context of situation. Most
linguists agree with this definition.

BIBER

Biber differentiates registers on the basis of text collections. He does not infer from the context which
linguistic features will probably occur in a text. Rather, “he looks at register only from the text end as a
set of texts that exhibit relatively high/low frequencies of occurrence of particular grammatical
features.” (Teich 2003, 27)

According to Biber and Conrad (2009, 2019), register is a language variety associated with specific
linguistic characteristics that are common in a text variety and the analysis of the situation of use of the
variety; and style are those features that reflect the speaker’s/writer’s aesthetic preferences.

HALLIDAY AND HASAN’S PROPOSAL

Aspects of context that influence the usage of language

 The social context (those general properties of the situation which collectively function as the
determinants of the text, in that they specify the semantic configurations that the speaker will
typically fashion in contexts of the given type).
 The general properties: three contextual variables (field, tenor and mode)
 The abstract components o the context of situation

Halliday and Hasan define register as a configuration of meanings that are typically associated with a
particular configuration of field, mode and tenor [which must] include the expressions, the lexico-
grammatical and phonological features, that typically accompany or REALISE those meanings.

Halliday identifies three variables that determine register:

 Field → the subject matter of the discourse

 Tenor → the participants and their relationship
  Mode → the channel of communication, spoken or written

Any of all the elements of language may vary in different registers: vocabulary, syntax, phonology,
morphology, pragmatic rules or different paralinguistic features (pitch, volume, intonation…)

Example: Academic article in a professional journal

Field Tenor Mode

Topic: subject matter of the
article
Purposes: publish, spread the
argument…
Topic determines vocabulary
Roles of the participants, status, Channel/medium of
power communication (written,
spoken, e–mailed…)
Relationships between Rhetorical mode: expository,
participants argumentative, narrative,
didactic…
Formality/informality of
language

All these register distinctions have to be matched to CULTURAL EXPECTATIONS. A discussion about the
weather in Britain → will contain lexis and grammar different to that of, for example, Spain. A recipe
book from Singapore will also contain lexis and grammar different to that of another place.

The three variables taken together enable people to characterize the situational content specifically.
According to Halliday, we can infer from the context of situation which linguistic structure and patterns
are likely or unlikely to be used in a text. Field, tenor and mode of discourse describe the context of a
situation in which language is used. Register is described as a functional variety of language according to
the use in particular settings.

Halliday connected three distinct functions of language with the three dimensions of a situation:

FIELD → EXPERIENTIAL MEANING

 ACTIVITY: What is the activity the participants are carrying out?

 TOPIC: What is the topic of the text?
 KNOWLEDGE: How much knowledge does the speaker/writer assume the hearer/reader has?
Do they share knowledge about the topic?
 LEXIS: Linguistic features (basically sets of nouns/verbs)
 LEXICAL FIELDS: Sets of words which are related. Lexical sets show content area (activity or
topic). (A single text may have more than one lexical field).
 JARGON: Do technical terms or jargon make it difficult to understand the language (=exclusion
of outsiders)?

VARIABLE CONTEXT OF PRODUCTION LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF TEXT

FIELD Activity Processes (verbs)
Topic Lexis
Knowledge assumed Lexical fields
Possible participants
Excluded by jargon?

TENOR → INTERPERSONAL MEANING

 What are the relations between the speaker/writer and hearer/reader in terms of power2
(equal/unequal), contact (frequent/infrequent), affective involvement (high/low)?
 Linguistic features (basically expressions of +/- power/equality)
  Is knowledge3 stated as fact or negotiated? (stated = power, possibility opens space for other)
 Attitudinal or neutral lexis? (evaluative language=power)
 Colloquial or formal lexis?
 Vocatives showing roles/relations?
 Politeness

VARIABLE CONTEXT OF PRODUCTION LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF TEXT

TENOR Power: Knowledge stated as facts/
Contact: negotiated:
Affective involvement: Writer evaluates/neutral lexis
Formal/informal language
Vocatives showing roles/
relations
Polite requests

MODE  TEXTUAL MEANING

What is the physical distance between the interlocutors? What are the possibilities of contact between
them? What is the distance between the use of language and the activity (social process) it realizes?

 Language as action → does language make an activity in the world possible (collaboration
between speakers)?
 Language as reflection? → is the use of language the activity itself
 Linguistic features (basically +/- spoken/written) → Monologue or not? Appearance of I/you
(invitation to participate)? Context dependent or not? (use of deixis: it, they, here, now)
Spontaneous or not? (corrections, non–∫tandard forms) Lexically dense noun phrases or
lexically light clauses?

VARIABLE CONTEXT OF PRODUCTION LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF TEXT

MODE Physical distance between
producer and receiver:
Language makes social activity
possible? Action vs Reflection
Dialogue/monologue
Context dependent or
independent
Spontaneous/ nonspontaneous
Information structure in clauses
Density of sentences and NPs
Modification
PROBLEM WITH THE NOTION OF REGISTER

There are as many weather forecasts as there are situations in which such forecasts are made.

1. A weather forecast in a newspaper/TV/radio

2. Differences in formality depending on the audience
3. Shipping forecasts are more specialised than breakfast TV national weather report

Wallace proposes (1981): we must be able to talk about how one register fits into the overall pattern of
registers in a variety of language while at the same time being able to account for variation in the actual
features of more than one occurrence of one register.

BIEBER AND CONRAD’S PROPOSAL

“As a language variety associated with both a particular situation of use and with pervasive linguistic
features that serve important functions within that situation of use.”

The situational context of use (including communicative purposes) and the linguistic analysis of the
words and structures that commonly occur share a function.

For example, in a face-to–face conversation:

a) Situational characteristics
a. Direct interaction
b. Both participants must speak
 c. Usually discuss about personal life or immediate context
b) Typical (pervasive) linguistic features of conversation
a. 1st person pronouns I/We
b. 2nd person pronouns (you)
c. Questions in 2nd person
c) Functional interpretation of the relationship: between situational character and pervasive
linguistic features

MAIN CONCERN

Linguistic features are always functional when considered from a register perspective. That is, linguistic
features tend to occur in a register because they are particularly well suited to the purposes and
situational context of the register. Thus, the third component of any register description is the functional
analysis.

SITUATIONAL CHARACTERISTICS OF REGISTERS AND GENRES:

I. Participants
a. Adressor(s) (speaker or author)
i. Single/plural/institutional/unidentified
ii. Social characteristics: age, education, profession, etc
b. Addressees
i. Single/plural/un–enumerated
ii. Self–other

Are there on-lookers?

II. Relations among participants

a. Interactiveness
b. Social roles: relative status or power
c. Personal relationship: friends, colleagues, strangers
d. Shared knowledge: personal and specialist
III. Channel
a. Mode: speech/writing/signing
b. Specific Medium:
i. Permanent: taped/transcribed/printed/handwritten/e–mail/etc…
ii. Transient speech: face–to-face/telephone/radio/TV/etc
 IV. Production circumstances: real time/planned/scripted/revised and edited
V. Setting
a. Time and place of communication shared by participants
b. Place of communication
i. Private/public
ii. Specific setting
VI. Communicative purposes
a. General purposes (are described on several different levels)4: narrate/report,
describe, exposit/inform/explain/persuade, how–to/procedural, entertain, edify,
reveal self
b. Specific purposes5: summarize info from numerous sources, describe methods,
present new research findings, teach moral through personal story
c. Factuality: factual, opinion, speculative, imaginative
d. Expression of stance: epistemic6, attitudinal7, no overt stance (in a newspaper, we can
find different expressions of stance in different articles, like the news, a science report
or a review).
VII. Topic:
a. General topical “domain”: domestic, daily activities, business/ workplace, science,
education / academic, government / legal / politic / religion, sports, art/
entertainment, etc
b. Specific topic
c. Social status of person being referred to

A collection of samples is a representative sample of the register:

1. Diversity in writers/speaker is necessary

2. Texts from all the subregisters must be included
3. Length: if a register is short (email messages) you can include whole texts; but for registers with
long texts (novels) it is acceptable to take samples from the whole texts.
4. If there are sections of longer texts that have different communicative purposes (research
article sections), you must include samples from each of the sections

ANALYZING LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF REGISTERS

The goal of the linguistic analysis is to identify the language features that are typical or characteristic of
the target register. A basic concern is how to determine whether a linguistic feature is “typical” in a
given register.

Determining what is typical in a register:

a) the need for a comparative approach

b) the need for a quantitative analysis
c) the need for a representative sample

The linguistic analysis of register is based on:

A. Register Features: they can be structures at any linguistic level: words, vocabulary distribution,
grammatical classes, syntactic constructions… The focus is on the extent to which the structure
is used. The linguistic feature in question might occur to some extent in most registers, but it
will be notably frequent in only some registers and comparatively rare in others. This is why we
 need a quantitative analysis (to measure frequency) and a comparative approach (to consider
occurrence in +1 register)
a. Pervasive
b. Frequent
B. Register Markers (“the count is three and two” – baseball game, “once upon a time” – fairy
tales)

CLASSIFYING LINGUISTIC FEATURES IN A PRINCIPLED AND CONSISTENT WAY

Classifying linguistic features is a complicated task. Examples of difficult decisions:

a) Sea creature: sea as an adjective or as a noun? It becomes necessary making a distinction

between adjectives modifying a head non (extinct creatures) and nouns modifying a head noun
(sea creatures)
b) In get a quick read and have a feel for – are the underlined words classified as nouns or as
verbs?
c) In working with transcribed speech, the notion of ‘sentence’ is quite controversial

COMPUTING RATES OF OCCURRENCE (FREQUENCY COUNTS)

This is applied to text samples of different lengths. To compensate – compute “normed” rates of
occurrence (the rate at which a given feature occurs in a fixed amount of text).

This is an example in which text 3.1 has 79 words and text 3.4 has 157 words.

Nº of nouns Nº of pronouns
Text sample 3.1 23 2
Text sample 3.4 17 24

There is a simple formula for such conversions:

Normed rate = (raw count/total word count) * the fixed amount of text

The raw counts above can be converted to rates per 100 words of text. In the case of nouns in text 3.1,
the formula would work as follows.

Normed rate for nouns in the textbook, per 100 words of text: (23 nouns/79 words total) * 100 words =
29.1 nouns per 100 words

The same procedure can be followed to “normalize” the counts for all features.

Normed rate for pronouns in the textbook, per 100 words of text: (2 pronouns/79 words total) * 100
words = 2.5 pronouns per 100 words

DECIDING ON THE LINGUISTIC FEATURES TO INVESTIGATE

It is difficult to decide which linguistic features to investigate. Conrad and Biber (2009) propose a list of
features that might be considered for investigation. Try to select features which are as specific as
possible and that reflect what you believe to be the essence of the register.

If analysing the register Film reviews you find that adjectives are a pervasive and frequent feature,
specify the kind of adjective you refer to as much as possible (descriptive/qualitative adjectives)
THE FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION

This is the final step in register analysis. At this stage, the descriptive facts on both sides (situational and
linguistic) will already be clearly documented:

a) On the one side, you will have described distinctive situational characteristics of the target
register in comparison to other registers
b) On the other side, you will have described linguistic characteristics

The task is to match the two up, explaining why particular linguistic characteristics are associated with
situational characteristics. This step is interpretive; you must explain why these linguistic features are
especially common in this situational context and the kind of function they perform. It is very important
to illustrate your interpretations with clear and convincing examples.

For example, evaluative adjectives are a typical linguistic feature in Film reviews. I can explain their
presence and function in this register by associating it with certain situational characteristics in this
register: the communicative purpose (expressing opinion, attitudinal stance).

Specific situational characteristics that are associated functionally with particular linguistic features:

Situational characteristics Selected linguistic features associated

functionally with the situational charasteristic
Interactivity Questions, 1st and 2nd person pronouns
Personal stance Possibility adverbs, personal pronoun + mental or
desire verbs (I think that…)
Referring to the time and place of here, there, yesterday, last week. demonstrative
communication pronouns
Referring to shared personal knowledge pronouns, first names of friends, vague
references
Referring to shared expert/professional technical words and phrases, references to
knowledge published research studies
General communicative purpose
Narrative past tense verbs, place and time adverbs, 3rd
person pronouns
Description adjectives, adverbs, stative verbs (be, seem,
appear, look)
Directive imperatives, obligation modals (should, have to),
desire verbs with you (I want you to…)
Procedural (“how to”) ordinal numerals (first, second…), imperatives
Explanatory/expository nouns, relative clauses, attributive adjectives
Presentation of information
Elaborating information Adverbial clauses, relative clauses
Condensing information noun–noun sequences, prepositional phrases
(instead of subordinate clauses), past and
present participial clauses (instead of full relative
clauses)
Marking logical relations linking adverbials (for example, however, thus),
finite adverbial clauses (because, if, although)
Production circumstances
Real time vague nouns (thing), hedges (sort of), pronouns,
contractions, ellipsis, repairs, incomplete
utterances
Careful production and revision complex noun phrases, complete sentences