The nature of discourse
Written discourse
Lesson 2
Fri 26 February, 2016
The nature of written discourse
The mode of a text (a subcategory of register) also includes its
channel: speaking vs writing.
What makes writing different from speaking?
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be… permanent.
Writing is usually static and relatively space-bound. We commit
writing to paper or other technological substitutes. It provides
concrete proof/record that we can refer back again and again.
Rosetta stone
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be… distant.
There is often distance between producers and receivers of
written texts. This means that there is no immediate feedback:
we compose, we trust that the message conveys what we
intended and that the response is the one desired.
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be… planned.
Written texts are usually produced (and received) at a slower
pace than spoken ones. When writing we try to anticipate the
situation in which the text will be read, which leads to careful
organisation. On the side of the receiver, written texts allow
repeated reading and close analysis.
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be… organised.
Written texts are usually organised in units that are easy to
identify (e.g. sentences, paragraphs, chapters, etc.). Unique
features of writing include pages, lines, punctuation and
capitalisation.
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be… formal.
Because of all the previous attributes, writing is often used to
convey important messages. Therefore, the style tends to be
formal (complex sentence construction, lexical richness, respect
for genre conventions, etc.).
The nature of written discourse
Writing tends to be permanent, distant, planned, organised and
formal. But is it always the case?
CMC (computer-mediated
communication), especially if
(quasi-)synchronous, has
features of both written and
spoken language.
Analysing written discourse
Let us now consider the language of written discourse. Based
on the example below, what appear to be its key aspects (from
the micro to the macro level)?
Taken from Tor Vergata University’s website.
Analysing written discourse
Form: print; standard typeface (font).
Spelling, grammar, punctuation: conventional/standard.
Lexis: professional vocabulary, high degree of content words
(esp. nouns, i.e. nominalisation).
Sentence structure: complex sentences w/ dependent clauses
(hypotaxis); use of cohesive devices.
Purpose: informative text (on an institutional website).
Style/register: professional, formal.
Analysing written discourse
Now take a look at the note below. How does it differ from the
previous example?
Taken from The language of speech and writing, p. 8.
Analysing written discourse
Form: handwritten; personal handwriting style.
Spelling, grammar, punctuation: conventional (with
contractions, e.g. can’t; one slip).
Lexis: everyday vocabulary, low degree of nominalisation.
Sentence structure: simple sentences without dependent
clauses (parataxis).
Purpose: apology note addressed to a teacher.
Style/register: semi-formal.
Analysing written discourse
In order to be comprehensive, the analysis of written discourse
needs to consider aspects that go beyond the language, as they
also help to set the texts within a particular genre. These are:
Physical aspects such as shape, size, material, etc.
Typographical features such as formatting, layout,
positioning.
Graphics/visuals such as photos, figures, symbols, etc.
These supporting features create expectations in the reader
of what language and topics to expect.
Analysing written discourse
Take a look at the front cover
of our textbook and identify
its main supporting features.
What does the cover tell you?
What expectations does it set
up?
Analysing written discourse
What the authors think:
Analysing written discourse
Now take a look at the front
cover of Agatha Christie’s
mystery novel.
What expectations does it
create in you? Based on what
supporting features?
Analysing written discourse
As we have seen, written texts can be very different from each
other. How can we account for these differences?
We already know the answer from Lesson 1: they depend on the
elements of the CPPR framework: context, purpose, producer
(i.e. the writer, actual and implied), and receiver (i.e. the
reader, actual and intended).
The differences also depend on the chosen register, particularly
on the genre and its conventional stylistic features.
Analysis of a written genre:
letter of complaint & reply
Letter is a macro-genre: there are so many different types (subgenres) of letters which vary according to CPPRs.
Personal letter
Formal letter
Context
Introductory, reply, series… Institutional, business, customer care…
Purpose
Chat, invite, thank, inform… Request, inform, complain…
Producer Friend, relative, partner…
Customer, employer, organisation…
Receiver
Customer, employer, organisation…
Friend, relative, partner…
Analysis of a written genre:
letter of complaint & reply
Take a look at Handout A. These are two examples of a letter of
complaint from a private consumer to a large company. What
are the main similarities and differences?
The two letter follow the same genre conventions (layout, use
of formulaic expressions for openings and closings, complex
sentence structure, standard grammar). However, there is a
striking variation in register (in letter 1 it becomes closer to
informal spoken language).
How can you explain this using the CPPR framework?
Analysis of a written genre:
letter of complaint & reply
Letter 1
Letter 2
Context
Customer care
Customer care
Purpose
Complaint (followed by
request for further action)
Complaint (followed by request for
further action)
Producer Ellie Miller (age 7)
Sue Simner
Receiver
Company
Company
The differences in language between the two letters largely
depend on the producer (that is, on his/her identity and on
how it is projected in the text).
Analysis of a written genre:
letter of complaint & reply
Now look at Handout B. These are the two replies to the above
letters. What are the main similarities and differences?
Similar functions are expressed: concern to hear the problem,
appreciation at being alerted to the problem, attempt at
appeasement through reimbursement. Both letters follow
similar genre conventions (layout, address, greetings), yet
letter 2 is much longer than letter 1 as it includes a detailed
explanation of what might have happened.
How can you explain this using the CPPR framework?
Analysis of a written genre:
letter of complaint & reply
Reply 1
Reply 2
Context
Customer care
Customer care
Purpose
Response to complain,
appeasement
Response to complain, appeasement
Producer Company
Company
Receiver
Sue Simner
Ellie Miller (age 7)
The differences between the two letters largely depend on the
intended receiver (specifically on the author’s assessment of
the reader’s capacity to correctly interpret the message).
How genres construct their readers
We discussed (Lesson 1) how the relationship between the
producer and the receiver of a text is often mediated by the text
itself. Similarly, genres are involved in the construction of
their audience/readers. Different genres produce different
positionings of the receiver: there is no neutrality!
How genres construct their readers
Compare these
two front pages.
What are the main
supporting features?
What types of
audiences do the
two newspapers
construct?