john benjamins publishing company - diva portal208075/fulltext01.pdf · has expanded to include...

This is a contribution from Handbook of Pragmatics compiled by Jef Verschueren and Jan-Ola Östman © 2006. John Benjamins Publishing Company

This electronic file may not be altered in any way.The author(s) of this article is/are permitted to use this PDF file to generate printed copies to be used by way of offprints, for their personal use only.Permission is granted by the publishers to post this file on a closed server which is accessible to members (students and staff) only of the author’s/s’ institute.For any other use of this material prior written permission should be obtained from the publishers or through the Copyright Clearance Center (for USA: www.copyright.com). Please contact [email protected] or consult our website: www.benjamins.com

Tables of Contents, abstracts and guidelines are available at www.benjamins.com

John Benjamins Publishing Company

© 2006. John Benjamins Publishing CompanyAll rights reserved

Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren REVISION

in collaboration with Eline Versluys

Handbook of Pragmatics 2006

© 2006. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publ. Co

APPLIED LINGUISTICS

Britt-Louise Gunnarsson

1. Introduction

The term applied linguistics (AL) has been given a wide range of interpretations

( Corder 1973 ; Crystal 1981 ; Trudgill 1984 ; Kaplan 1990 ; Sridhar 1993 ; James

1993 ). The traditional and most widespread use of the term is also the narrowest

one, restricting AL to the application of linguistic research to mother tongue educa-

tion and to the teaching and learning of foreign and second languages. According to

this interpretation, the central issues are language acquisition and learning, testing,

error analysis, and teaching methodology and technology.

A broader interpretation sees AL as covering different types of problem areas

within society, not only educational problems, but practical and social problems

of all kinds ( Trudgill 1984 ; Gunnarsson 1995a ; 1997a ; Bygate 2004 ; Candlin &

Sarangi 2004 ). A glance at the programs of early congresses within applied linguis-

tics shows for instance that language for specifi c purposes, LSP, was recognized

quite early on as a central area of AL. Standardization of terminology, computer

aids and document design were early concerns within this fi eld. Language planning

was another prominent subfi eld of applied linguistics.

At a theoretical level, early AL studies refl ect the situation in general linguis-

tics at the time. Work carried out in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s is clearly indebted

to structuralism and to functional stylistics ( Malmberg 1981: 9 ). Early work in

the LSP fi eld also refl ects structuralism and a functionalist approach to language

( Gunnarsson 1995b ).


2 Britt-Louise Gunnarsson

Over time a broadening of the scope of AL has taken place. As linguistics

has expanded to include pragmatics, text linguistics, discourse analysis, semiotics,

sociolinguistics, psycholinguistics, critical linguistics and conversation analysis,

AL too has undergone changes. The study of smaller units, of words and sentences,

has yielded ground to studies of larger units, of texts and discourse. An interest in

more global text patterns and in spoken discourse, combined with a growing aware-

ness of the relationship between text and context, has changed the subject-matter

of linguistic investigation. The earlier exclusive focus on verbal elements is now

replaced with analyses of the various multimodal dimensions of text and talk.

As theoretical and methodological interests and insights have evolved, lin-

guistic analysis has been able to solve new types of problems, and along with this

widening of the perspective, new areas have become central to those interested in

AL. Medical discourse, communication in the professions, workplace interaction,

intercultural negotiations, forensic linguistics, language and the media, immersion

education, adult language learning, language and education in multilingual settings,

discourse and technology, and language and gender are examples of AL areas in the

2000s.

Disciplines like socio- and psycholinguistics have brought a multidisci-

plinary approach to the study of language and discourse, as has cross-disciplinary

collaboration between linguists on the one hand and anthropologists, sociologists,

ethnomethodologists, psychologists, educationalists and technicians on the other.

In theoretical terms, AL has travelled from structuralism to social constructivism.

This new situation for linguistic research has blurred the borderline between

general and applied linguistics and also between fundamental research and its

application. The earlier view that AL is a matter of applying linguistic research to

problem areas is misleading as a description of modern AL. On the contrary, AL

studies play a part in the development of linguistic theory and methods.

Compared with general linguistics, the subject-matter of applied linguistics

is language and communication in real-life situations, and the goal is to analyze,

understand or solve problems relating to practical action in real-life contexts. The

focus is not on language per se , but on language in use. The link with real life steers

the selection of questions to be asked and also the methods by which answers are

sought. It does not, though, limit the theoretical aspirations of AL.

Martin Bygate means that this theoretical aspiration is “axiomatic”.

The dilemma for the applied linguists, however, is that they “need to be doubly


Applied linguistics 3

accountable, in ways which non-applied academics need not be”. He writes that

applied linguists “need to be accountable in their choice and use of theories and

methods to the rigours and informed criticisms of their academy, and from related

academies from which they may need to borrow and adapt the tools necessary for

their work. /…/ However, applied linguists also owe accountability to the lay com-

munities which they also claim to serve. This they cannot convincingly do without

attending beyond the discourse of those communities to their perceived needs.”

(2004:19)

In the year of 2006, AL thus comprises studies relating to a wide range of

different settings and problem areas within society. To give an overview of all these

studies would be impossible, and I have therefore chosen to limit my account to a

few settings, within which important AL work has been carried out.

2. The educational setting

The educational setting is the traditional arena of AL studies, and it still occupies

an important place in the life of AILA, the International Association for Applied

Linguistics. The latest AILA congress, which was held in Madison, Wisconsin,

in 2005, included several strands relating to education: adult language learning,

learner autonomy in language learning, child language, contrastive analysis and

error analysis, educational technology and language learning, foreign language

teaching methodology and language learning, immersion education, language and

education in multilingual settings, language testing and evaluation, literacy, mother

tongue education, second language acquisition, evaluation assessment and testing.

As in other subareas, the borderline between applied and non-applied lin-

guistics is not easy to draw. This said, it must be stated that there are a quite strong

applied tradition in relation to classroom teaching and language learning in schools

and colleges. The researchers even urge teachers to carry out their own research.

The goal is better practice in the classroom, and the researcher wants to make the

teacher observe what is going on, to start a continuing research activity. Widdowson

(1990) discusses the theory and practice of language teaching. His idea is a medi-

ation process between theory and practice. The theoretical side should entail an

appraisal of principles, and the practical side an application of theories. He stresses



that the division of responsibilities between the researcher and the teacher does not

parallel the distinction between theory and practice. In accordance with such ideas,

Burton & Bartlett (2005) discuss the design and implementation of classroom-based

research in a practitioner research guide for teachers.

Other important borderlines relate to our analytical frameworks. For writing

and learning to write, Roz Ivani č (2004:225) distinguishes six discourses: a skills

discourse, a creativity discourse, a process discourse, a genre discourse, a social

practice discourse and a socio-political discourse. For each type of discourse, he

shows the consequences for the layer in the comprehensive view of language, the

beliefs about writing, the beliefs about learning to write, the approaches to the

teaching of writing, and the assessment criteria. A similar set of frameworks could

of course be applied to analysis of talk and learning to talk.

It is indeed diffi cult to give an overview of the whole educational setting (cf.

Encyclopedia of Language and Education 1997). My ambition here is more humbly

to point to a few trends.

2.1 Child language and early literacy

Much research has been devoted to early development of talking and writing skills.

One group of studies on child language acquisition is carried out within a cognitive

framework. The chapters in Bowerman & Levinson (2001) analyse how the pro-

cess of language acquisition interact with early cognitive development, Perkins &

Howard (2000) present studies on language acquisition in children whose language

learning capacity is in some way impaired. The interest in these studies is to fi nd

the universal features. The aim of the crosslinguistic comparisons is thus to show

the relative contributions to the development process made by the child’s innate

linguistic capacity and the specifi c properties of the language being acquired.

Other studies owe a debt to the developmental perspective of Piaget and

Vygotsky. Many studies have been devoted to literacy problems and to early

development of talking and writing skills ( Whitehead 1999 ). The earlier focus on

mother-child interaction ( Snow & Ferguson 1977 ; S ö derbergh 1977 ) has given way

to a more general focus on the role of the adults for the child’s literacy development

( Blum-Kulka & Snow 2002 ). The preschool child’s efforts to learn to write have

been focused on in many studies (e.g. Liberg 1990 ), as has the inter-relationship

between reading, writing, speaking and listening ( Corden 2000 ). The gradual and



differentiated acquisition of the skill to express oneself orally and to participate in

classroom conversation has been studied ( Barnes & Todd 1977 ; Myhill, Jones &

Hopper 2006 ). The focus is enlarged to cover talk also outside the classroom in

Maybin (2006) , where children in their own voices express the complexity, contra-

diction and ambiguity that constitute their lives and their identities.

2.2 Classroom interaction

Many studies have also focused on interaction in the classroom, both teacher-pupil

and pupil-pupil interaction. In the 1960s Bellack and his colleagues studied the lan-

guage of the classroom, describing educational activity as related to three interactive

moves: soliciting, responding and reacting ( Bellack et al. 1966 ). Sinclair & Coulthard

(1975 ) used the classroom situation as a step towards the development of a model

for discourse analysis. Their approach has been quite infl uential and their frame-

work has been elaborated to suit language classes ( L ö rscher 1983 ). The component

of classroom interaction that has most interested researchers is the exchange, that

is (teacher’s) initiative, (pupil’s) response and (teacher’s) feedback. This tripartite

structure is studied in depth by Mehan (1979 ) and found to be an organization prin-

ciple in classroom interaction. Mehan sees this structure as constitutive of the event

of a lesson, that is as constitutive of a social reality in interaction. He talks about a

‘constitutive ethnography’ of the classroom. The relationship between participation

in classroom interaction and constraints and affordances for creating equity in class-

rooms is analysed in Sahlstr ö m (1999 ). Participation is there demonstrated to rely on

the turn-taking systematics outlined in conversation analysis (CA).

An initiative-response analysis was developed and used for the study of dia-

logue processes in L2 lessons ( Linell et al 1988 ; Gustavsson 1988 ). Gardner & Wagner

(2004) uses CA (conversation analysis) to explore natural, casual talk between

speakers in a second language. Brouwer & Wagner (2004) propose methodologi-

cal procedures for the study of second language learning by bringing together two

frameworks: CA and the theory of situated learning.

2.3 Second and foreign language learning

A large group of studies have been devoted to problems relating to second language

acquisition. In the late 1950s and early 1960s a major concern was to determine



L1 infl uence on L2 learning and use. The predominant method was ‘contrastive

analysis’, that is L1 and L2 were compared and areas of similarity and difference

were identifi ed. Positive and negative transfer could be predicted as facilitation

or interference ( Weinreich 1953 ; Wardhaugh 1970 ). Another early approach was

known as the ‘study of errors’. ‘Morpheme studies’ focused on different types of

error, in order to establish an acquisition order, while ‘performance analysis’ used a

more varied approach, studying both correct and erroneous behavior. An overview

of second language learning theories is given in Mitchell & Myles (1998) , while

Gass & Selinker (2001) discuss the various approches taken to second language

aquisition, e.g. SLA and linguistics, Universal Grammar, interlanguage processes,

interlanguage in context, input, interaction and output, instructed second language

learning, non-language infl uences and the lexicon. They also present an integrated

view on SLA.

An interactional angle to second language acquisition is taken in Faerch &

Kasper (1985) , where the focus is on different communication strategies revealed

in communication. In the Vygotskian tradition more recent studies have focused

on second and foreign language learning through classroom interaction ( Hall &

Verplaetse 2000) .

A large number of studies have focused on immersion programmes in differ-

ent countries and on different languages ( Johnson & Swain 1997 ). The best known

study might be that on the French immersion programmes in Canada ( Swain &

Lapkin 1982 ), but there are also studies on English immersion programmes in

Sweden and Swedish immersion programmes in Finland.

A more recent focus is on the multicultural classroom. Hoosain & Salili

(2005) present studies on the role of language in multicultural education mainly

in North America but also in Hong Kong, Australia and Belarus (former part of

the Sovjet Union). The crosscultural perspective is also central for the volume on

foreign language research edited by de Bot et al (1991).

2.4 Teaching methodology and language testing

The question ‘Can language acquisition be altered by instruction?’ has been asked

and answered differently by many AL scholars. A variety of tools have been devel-

oped in order to facilitate learning, e.g. cognitively based thinking maps ( Hyerle

2004 ) and computer-mediated tools. The use of Internet for distance learning has



been studied during the last decade ( Egbert & Hanson-Smith 1999 ; Garrison, 2003 ;

Duffy & Kirkley 2004 ).

A relevant question that has come into focus is the role of language awareness

or consciousness in language learning, where awareness is related to intuitions or

implicit knowledge related to one’s own or others’ (implicit) knowledge ( James &

Garrett 1991 ). Another relevant question relates to the role of explicit genre knowl-

edge for the gradual maturity of the text writer. Characteristic of the genre discourse,

e.g. in Australia, is the idea that writing is best learnt from explicit instruction

( Christie 1987 ; Martin et al 1994 ). Also discourse analysis has found its way into

educational practice. Shohamy (1990) , indeed, fi nds it necessary to stress that dis-

course analysis ought to be considered in language testing, and Riggenbach (1990)

claims that discourse analysis should be integrated in spoken language instruction, a

claim that is also put forward in Brown & Yule (1983) , amongst others.

2.5 Schooling and society

Basil Bernstein’s work (1971, 1973) on the importance of class and early socializa-

tion has, although criticized by many, served as a basis for a great deal of research

with a sociological perspective. Reading and writing, language learning and teach-

ing have been studied from a sociolinguistic angle (see Stubbs 1980 ; Pride 1979 ;

Wenger 1998) . Attitudes and motivation, for instance, are considered to play impor-

tant roles in second language learning ( Gardner 1985 ). The most recent trend within

the sociological tradition is related to a growing awareness of the importance of

language socialization and literacy in bilingual and multilingual societies. Many

studies deal with these issues with a variety of foci, e.g. the family and schooling

( Bayley & Schecter 2003 ; Martin-Jones & Jones 2000 ; Barton & Tusting 2005) .

In this context, I would also like to mention a few studies of schools as societal

institutions. Bourdieu & Passeron (1970) , Lundgren (1972) and Gale & Densmore

(2000) view schools as educational systems, which reproduce the social structure

and the established order. Power and identity is also a topic in Heller (1999) .

The critical perspective is also central in Kramsch (1993, 2004 ). In the chap-

ter “Looking for a third place”, she writes: “The language that is being learned can

be used both to maintain traditional social practice, and to bring about change in

the very practice that brought about this learning.” (2004: 233). The sociopoliti-

cal explanations and consequences have been developed in approaches known as



‘Critical Literacy’ or ‘Critical Language Awareness’ ( Fairclough 1992 ; Janks 2000 ;

Gee 1996 ; Ivani č 2004) .

3. The economic-technical setting

Research exploring the uniqueness and variation of texts for specifi c purposes has a

long tradition within AL as has research directed towards the improvement of writ-

ten documents. This early interest in the text produced were followed by an interest

in the writing process and in the intertwinement of text and talk in the professions.

In the last few decades the main focus has been on discourse in organizations, and

the term Professional Discourse has gradually come to replace LSP, Language for

specifi c purposes , to name the subarea.

3.1 Improving written documents

The plain language movement fl ourished in the 1970s and early 1980s. The idea

was to formulate strategies and rules for users which would improve different

kinds of documents. Perhaps the most widespread and enduring result of this move-

ment was what were called readability formulae . Based on a mechanistic view of

reading and comprehension, formulae were developed which could measure the

diffi culty — readability — of texts. Most of them counted word and sentence length.

The theoretical basis for these formulae is very weak, but they owe their popularity

to their simplicity.

The plain language movement is much more than these formulae, however,

and some work has been done under this umbrella which is of good theoretical stan-

dard. Basing their studies on psycholinguistics and cognitive psychology, Linda

Flower and John Hayes managed to give their document design work a theoretical

orientation. They conducted experiments with readers and writers, and came to

develop their famous writing model ( Hayes & Flower 1980 ).

Instructional science was also used as a basis for document design work,

for example in Europe. Instructional research centres on the development of

procedures for optimizing learning in specifi c situations. Its aim is to estab-

lish rules that specify the most effective way of attaining knowledge or master-

ing skills. Another fi eld which has contributed to document design work is that of



‘human factors’. Here, methods and techniques are developed for the application of

experimental procedures in real-life situations.

The plain language movement has not ceased to exist, although its focus has

shifted. Studies are oriented towards text linguistics and rhetoric with the goal of

improving instructions, guidelines and technical reports, fi nding adequate strategies

for the drafting of sales promotion letters and job applications, and also popularizing

diffi cult documents. The development of The Journal of Business Communication,

the fi rst number of which appeared already in 1963, refl ects this change, as does

the newly merged journal Information Design Journal + Document Design . A good

example of its broad application is also Shuy (1998) , where a number of tools for

communicating more clearly in government and business settings are given.

3.2 Studies of discourse in organizations

Numerous studies have been devoted to the analysis of writing in non-academic

settings. These studies border in many cases on work on organization within sociol-

ogy. The relationship between organizational structure and culture, hierarchy and

writing activities is elucidated in a variety of studies, using methods ranging from

pure survey to ethnographic observation and sociolinguistic analysis. The collec-

tive character of writing at work is shown in Winsor (1989) , and its close connec-

tion with spoken discourse in Gunnarsson (1997b) .

These studies could be seen as precursors to the research on discourse in

organizations and institutions which will be dealt with under this heading. With a

theoretical orientation towards sociology and organization/network theory, social

constructivism, critical linguistics, ethnography and conversation analysis, these

studies on organization try to grasp and understand problem areas relating to the

complexity and diversity of communication in the professions. The aim is not

mainly to describe differences relating to the various professions as to fi nd macro-

and micro structures in professional discourse as such. In many ways these studies

can be seen as pointing towards the future.

The relationship between organizational structure and culture, hierarchy and

writing activities have earlier been elucidated in a variety of studies, using methods

ranging from pure survey to ethnographic observation ( Odell & Goswani 1986 ;

Spilka 1993 ). What characterizes the work within this area is its close connection to

sociolinguistics and to work on organizations within sociology ( Bargiela-Chiappini

2004 ).



Gunnarsson (2005a) gives an account of research related to different types of

organizations. In one study the writing activities of a local government offi ce were

analysed in relation to its internal structure – hierarchies, clusters, role patterns – as

well as to the external networks to which the actors-writers belong. Within this

workplace, complexity was found to be related to the roles played by the writer,

the network structure and also the intertwinement of spoken and written discourse.

Complexity was also found central within larger organizations, which were the

focus of a contrastive study. Banks and structural engineering companies were

studied in three countries: Germany, UK and Sweden. Based on interview data and

analyses of texts, the relationship between discourse, organizations, and national

cultures were explored. The organizational ideas and communicative policies of

each enterprise were found to matter for the structure of discourse at the same time

as national cultural patterns could be distinguished.

A current theme within studies of professional discourse is related to the

communicative practices within transnational companies. In Gunnarsson (2005a) ,

a study on the multilingual practices of a transnational company with its head offi ce

in Sweden is also discussed. The term parallell writing is used to describe the

practices established within the Electrolux group. This term relates to text writing

in different languages based on a common raw material, which is sent out from the

head offi ce in Stockholm. The selling offi ces throughout the world receive this raw

material, from which they can choose ideas and parts for the writing of customer

brochures in their respective language and for their respective group of customers.

The role of translating is thus minimized and mainly reserved for offi cial docu-

ments like annual reports ( J ä mtelid 2002 ).

In a globalized business world, many companies are forced to use English

lingua franca, ELF , as their corporate language. Currently there are a great number

of research focusing on this practice. Nickerson (1998) analysed ELF in email writ-

ing within an international company in the Netherlands, and Kankaanranta (2005)

analyses the use of ELF in email correspondence between Finns and Swedes.

4. Legal and bureaucratic settings

Within legal and bureaucratic settings, there are many problem areas that have come

to involve AL scholars. I will concentrate here on three areas: (1) comprehensibility



of legal and bureaucratic language and texts, (2) asymmetric interaction in court

proceedings and police interrogation, and (3) the use of linguistic knowledge in the

legal process, a fi eld often referred to as forensic linguistics .

4.1 Comprehensibility of legal and bureaucratic language

A good deal of work on the comprehensibility of legal language has been based on

the many descriptive studies of the characteristics of legislative language in terms

of vocabulary, syntax and textual patterns ( Mellinkoff 1963 ; Gustafsson 1984 ;

Kurzon 1986 ; Bhatia 1987 ; Hiltunen 1990) . Other studies have had a sociological

foundation, analyzing the functions of laws and other legal texts ( Danet 1980a ;

Gunnarsson 1984 ).

One problem area focused on relates to the comprehensibility of legal lan-

guage, that is, to the asymmetries in reading comprehension between lay people and

professionals. Being undertaken with the aim of facilitating reading and compre-

hension for the ordinary man or woman, these studies have come to clearly refl ect

the theoretical situation within psycholingustics. In the 1960s legislative texts were

analysed and assessed in relation to their readability, which involved a mechanical

way of analysing documents at a surface level. An analysis of jury instructions by

Charrow and Charrow (1979) represented a step forward. Their ideas for reform

derived from a number of linguistic factors. However, they were not based on any

theory of text comprehension or on a very inquisitive analysis of the societal func-

tion of the texts. The comprehensibility problem related to jury instructions is also

dealt with in Dumas (2000) .

Other studies have had a more theoretical foundation. On the basis of a

critique of previous research, Gunnarsson (1984) rejected the concern with lexis

or syntax, which went no further than memorization or the ability to paraphrase,

and developed a theory of functional comprehensibility focusing on perspective

and function orientation (implications for action). A similar approach was taken

by Austrian researchers, who also included in their model a socio-psychological

dimension relating to attitudes towards legal language and law text reading ( Pfeiffer

et al. 1987) . These studies view the reading of laws and text comprehension in

a societal framework. The individual’s reading and understanding of the text is

discussed in relation to the functions of laws in society. In Gunnarsson (1989)

the comprehensibility problem is discussed in relation to the law-making process.



The collective and negotiative character of the law-making process at different

stages militates against the idea of a reader-oriented text.

4.2 Asymmetries in court and police encounters

Courtroom proceedings and police encounters have been studied by linguists, soci-

ologists and ethnographers from a variety of perspectives. Studies have focused

on different types of content and argumentative features, in order to reveal how

utterances are part of a prior and anticipated context. Cross-examination, question-

answer patterns, topic progression and recycling, argumentative structure, and story

patterns have been analyzed. This research has emanated from different traditions,

ranging from speech act theory to an ethnomethodological tradition comprising

micro-analysis of varying elements in dialogue ( Atkinson & Drew 1979 ; Danet

1980b ; Danet & Bogoch 1980 ; Bennett & Feldman 1981) . Courtroom interaction

has also been studied using the technique of CA, conversation analysis, ( Atkinson

1992 ; Drew 1992 ; Philips 1992) . A focus on mediation in court from the perspec-

tive of intertextuality and interdiscursity is also to be found.

Another line of research has focused on the understanding and interpretation

of utterances. Within a sociolinguistic theoretical framework, experiments have

been carried out with different versions of utterances, in order to test powerful and

powerless speech, gender differences etc. in style, self-presentation, tone of voice

etc. ( O’Barr 1982 ; Adelsw ä rd et al. 1987 ; Conley & O’Barr 1998 ).

The pre-trial phase, that is the police interrogation, has also attracted AL

research. Cicourel (1968) analyzed the part played by police questioning in the

long bureaucratic judicial process. In this pioneering work, he studied the social

construction of ‘cases’, particularly the formation and transformation of the images

of young delinquents as the cases pass through the legal system (police, social work-

ers, probation offi cers, prosecutors, courts). Lynch (1982) studied argumentation

in pre-trial versus trial situations. J ö nsson (1988) focused on another problem

associated with the bureaucratic routine. Her interest was in the interplay between

police interrogation and the written police report, and she analyzed to what extent

police offi cers were infl uenced when interrogating suspects by the fact that they

were going to write a report. A more detailed analysis of the perspective-setting in

police interrogations is presented in Linell & J ö nsson (1991) .



Finally there are studies that examine the role and effectiveness of legal inter-

pretation. As well in police interrogations as in the court room, interpreters play

essential roles for the process ( Berk-Seligson 1990 , 2000 ).

4.3 Forensic linguistics

A different problem area is represented by what is termed forensic linguistics .

Linguists are directly involved in the legal process, used as expert witnesses and the

like. Taped conversations are analyzed and used as criminal evidence. Roger Shuy is

the linguist who has published most widely on this subject ( Shuy 1993 ). Linguists

have also been used in the identifi cation of speakers and of voices, and in the forensic

application of dialectology and of dialogue patterning. Overviews of studies within

the fi eld of forensic linguistics can be found in Kniffka (1990) and Levi (1994) .

A general approach to the role of language in courtroom interaction is taken

in Solan (1993) . Solan, who is a trained lawyer as well as a linguist, analyses in

revealing detail how a person trained in both legal and linguistic theory can illumi-

nate the critical question of how judges have approached the dilemmas of language

disputes and what the legal consequences have been.

In Gibbons (2003) the use of linguistic evidence in court proceedings and

police interrogations is exemplifi ed. Important contributions within this area has

been done by Roger Shuy (1993, 1997). An interesting use of linguistic analysis in

court is presented in Goodwin and Goodwin (1997) , which analyses the interplay

between linguistic and non-linguistic means in the construction of the court dis-

course in the famous Rodney King trial in Los Angeles in 1992.

5. The medical-social setting

Medical discourse has also been studied from a variety of angles. The problems that

arise between doctors and patients have been seen to a large extent as interactional,

and it has been assumed that it is possible to do something about them. The asym-

metries between doctor and patient have been analysed in various ways. Elliot

Mishler (1984) talked about the two different voices in doctor-patient interaction,

the voice of medicine and the voice of the life world, which represent different ways



of conceptualizing and understanding patients’ problems. The different perspectives

in medical interaction have been the concern of Aaron Cicourel, one of the founding

fathers of doctor-patient research. By means of a conversation analysis of extracts

from doctor-patient encounters he was able to reveal important sources of miscom-

munication ( Cicourel 1981) . Another method being used to grasp the different per-

spectives of patient and doctor is narratology, and there is a growing interest in the

study of patients’ narratives (cf. Hyd é n & Mishler 1999) .

Among the different medical specialities, psychiatric treatment has been of

particular interest to linguists. A well-known example is Labov & Fanshel’s work

on therapeutic discourse (1977). Neurotic and psychotic language is analyzed in

Wodak & Van de Craen (1987) . Interaction with aphasia and dementia sufferers has

also been studied, as well as talk to and about old people.

A more institutional approach to the study of discourse in the medical setting is

taken in Lalouschek et al. (1990) and Wodak (1997) . The actual discourse between the

medical actors, doctor, nurse, patient and relative, is analyzed in relation to a macro-

description of the institution as a working organization, comprising an analysis of

roles, routines and events. The research team found a clear relationship between the

setting, the physical and mental state of the professionals and the actual conversation.

The doctors’ behaviour towards the patients, for instance the length of the conversa-

tion, the tone and the degree of mutual understanding, varies with the degree of stress

and tension caused by the events occurring. The Wodak study was carried out within

the critical discourse analysis paradigm, and it has also found a direct application in

that the research team have based courses for doctors on their results.

In Sarangi and Roberts (1999) , several important analyses of discourse in

medical settings are presented and placed in their theoretical and methodological

framework. Discourse in medicine can be said to belong to the most vital subareas

within AL. One sign of this is the newly established journal Communication and

Medicine, another sign the section on Medical discourse in the second edition of

Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2005) .

6. The workplace

In recent decades, considerable interest has been devoted to interaction and

communication in workplaces. I use workplace in a very wide sense, covering insti-

tutions and organizations, as well as more traditional blue-collar workplaces.



6.1 Workplace interaction

The volume Talk at Work ( Drew & Heritage 1992 ) include studies of different work-

ing life settings — interviews, emergency calls, court proceedings, a hospital setting.

The analyses carried out within the interactional sociolinguistics and CA tradition,

thus focusing on the questioner, the answerer or the interplay between the two. A

more recent study on a medial encounter is found in Heritage & Lindstr ö m (1998) .

A broad range of methodologies are used for the analysis of the construction

of professional discourse in Gunnarsson, Linell & Nordberg (1997) , which include

studies on interaction at a variety of workplaces. The aim of Stubbe et al (2003)

is to compare different methodologies. The same data, one workplace interaction,

is analysed using the techniques of conversation analysis, interactional sociolin-

guistics, politeness theory, critical discourse analysis, and discursive pshychology.

Sarangi and Roberts (1999: 157) give a valuable theoretical perspective on the

dynamics of institutional and interactional orders in work-related discourse which

are likely to form a background for future studies on institutional discourse.

The sociological approach is a common denominator for the studies included

in Barton and Tusting (2005) , the aim of which are a description of the various

communities of practice within professional life. Holmes and Stubbe (2003) anal-

yse power and politeness in the workplace. A particular focus in workplace studies

has been on interaction involving immigrants with other mother tongue than the

dominant language at work ( Clyne, 1994 , Gunnarsson 2005c) .

6.2 Confl icts and negotiations

Encounters in working life have also been focused on from the perspective of

the complexity of the social and cultural dimensions involved. Special problems

relating to workplace interaction arise when accidents occur, in spite or because of

the interaction. In a Labovian tradition, Charlotte Linde (1988) has analyzed inter-

action in relation to authentic disasters. She discusses the role of politeness strate-

gies in aviation discourse. By means of a quantitative measurement of mitigation,

she analyzed discourse failure and success in data from eight aviation accidents and

also in data from fl ight simulator experiments.

Considerable practical interest attaches also to intercultural negotiations,

and many studies have focused on negotiations between individuals from differ-

ent cultures and with different mother tongues. Firth (1995) includes studies of



negotiations in intraorganizational encounters, in commodity trading, and in

professional-lay interactions. Negotiations are studied in the varied settings of

the doctor’s offi ce, the welfare bureau, the travel agency, the consumer helpline,

government, the university and business. Professional communication in interna-

tional settings is also dealt with in Pan et al (2002), where the focus is on the

communicative activities of telephone calls, resumés (or CV), presentations and

meetings.

6.3 Discourse and technology

Another subarea where there is much work in progress relates to the complex-

ity due to new technology. Since the 1990’s an increased number of studies have

focused on the use of fax, e-mail and other computor mediated genres for business

purposes ( Bargiela-Chiappini and Nickerson, 1999 ), and the multimodal charac-

ter of discourse is explored in a variety of professional interactions ( Le Vine and

Scollon, 2004 ; Norris and Jones, 2005 , Karlsson, 2005) . Meetings and negotiations

by means of video technique have been recorded and analysed as have interaction

in call centers ( Oliviera, 2004 ).

7. Science and the academic setting

The scientifi c arena can be seen as a special kind of workplace. It has, however,

followed a tradition of its own, a sociological-rhetorical tradition with a clear basis

in the sociology of science.

7.1 The sociological-rhetorical study of scientifi c discourse

Within the sociology of science tradition, several studies have been devoted to ana-

lyzing the role of texts in the establishing of scientifi c fact. The scientifi c fi eld is

seen as a workplace, a laboratory where social rules determine the establishing of

facts and the rank order of the scientist. Knorr-Cetina (1981) was one of the fi rst

to describe the writing up of results as a process of tinkering with facts rather than

a knowledge-guided search. Latour & Woolgar (1986) described the social



construction of scientifi c facts as an antagonistic struggle among scientists, leading

to a purposeful diminishing of the results of others and a levelling up — to a gener-

alized level — of one’s own results.

Bazerman (1988) studied the rise of modern forms of scientifi c communi-

cation, focusing on the historical emergence of the experimental article. A social

constructivist approach in relation to written texts is also found in Myers (1990) ,

which deals with the writing of biologists, and in Bazerman & Paradis (1991) ,

which examines the important role played by texts in profession-building. Textual

forms and defi nitions are found to impose structure on human activity and help to

shape versions of reality. Texts are shown to play powerful roles in staging the daily

actions of individuals, and to be important factors in the rise of action.

7.2 The study of academic genres and writing

Writing at college and university level and the different academic genres of writing

have attracted the attention of many researchers. As within the educational area,

much research has been steered by the practical need to improve the teaching of

writing in the college classroom. The Freshman Writing Program in the US, which

means that academic writing is being taught to all college students, has led to a large

number of studies on genres and on the writing process. The development within

this fi eld owe a debt to Bakhtin, Leontev and Vygotsky, as well as to Bazerman and

other researchers within the sociology of science (7.1).

Linda Flower, who has produced numerous books and articles on the writing

process, stresses in one of them ( Flower 1994 ) the negotiative character of writ-

ing in a truly Bakhtinian sense. Within the American writing tradition, it is also

common to see learning to write as an adaptation to the academic discourse commu-

nity in a sociological tradition. In Johns (1997), for instance, learners are assumed

to acquire literacy in particular social contexts, thus developing “socioliterate com-

petence” through exposure to the genres specifi c to those contexts.

Within the American writing tradition, the learner’s adjustment to the

academic discourse community is focused on from a sociological angle (e.g.

MacDonald 1994 ). Typical of this group of researchers, working in the competi-

tive society of the US, is their interest in rhetorical (persuading) patterns ( Swales,

1990 ; Berkenkotter and Huckin, 1995 ). The European tradition, on the other

hand, builds more on a text linguistic tradition, with a close analysis of large



text corpora at different levels: pragmatic, referential-cohesive, thematic, and

cognitive ( Schr ö der 1991 , Gunnarsson, Melander & N ä slund 1994 , Gunnarsson

2005b) . As a third approach to writing, I would like to distinguish the systemic

grammar approach, which in particular has been infl uential in Australia ( Halliday

& Martin, 1993 ; Martin & Rose 2003 ).

Candlin & Hyland (1999) give research accounts of academic and profes-

sional texts emphasising the role of cultural and institutional practices in the con-

struction and interpretations of these. In Hyland (2003) a complex methodogical

framework is used to describe social interactions in academic writing, including

praise and criticism, citation and intertextuality. power and authority and the con-

struction of expertise. The complexity of academic discourse is also shown in

R ä is ä nen (1998) , which explores the conference practice and its system of inter-

related genres in engineering. R ä isanen’s study is based on observations, interviews

and text analysis. Ethnographic methodology is also used by Swales (1998) for the

study of the textography in academic settings.

Academic genres have also been studied from a cross-cultural angle, with

the aim of revealing differences and improving L2 writing. The contrastive rheto-

ric tradition, which has been infl uenced by the pioneering work of Kaplan in the

1960s, has led to many important studies on differences between the writing of

scholars with different language backgrounds. In most cases, the basis for compari-

son has been the English language and the Anglo-American culture ( Kaplan, 1966 ;

Purves 1988 , Connor, 1996) . A more European basis in found in Mauranen (1993) ,

Melander et al (1997) , and in Dahl (2003) .

7.3 Spoken discourse within academia

Also spoken discourse within academia has been studied, though much less than

written discourse. I would like to bring up three approaches to academic talk.

Firstly, I would like to mention a study which shows the discursive intertwinement

of the verbal and non-verbal. Ochs (1994) analyses how physicists are constructing

knowledge through talk and visual representations. Secondly, I wish to mention

some studies focusing on gender and power. The construction of female subordina-

tion through academic classroom and seminar discourse is dealt with in Bergvall

(1996) and in Gunnarsson (2002) . A third approach to academic talk focuses on the



language choice. Mauranen (2005) analyses the use of English Lingua Franca in

spoken discourse among academics in Finland.

8. Conclusion

Applied linguistics encompasses a wide range of studies, and this article has not

been able to give more than a brief idea of all the research going on. Many areas

have not been mentioned, such as work on communication with blind and deaf

people, on interaction with the disabled, on bilingualism, and on the whole fi eld of

language planning. Rather than attempting to cover everything, my aim has been to

give an overview of broader developments within AL. I have stressed the dynamic

and expansive character of AL research, a fi eld in which collaboration cuts across

disciplines and where theories and methods are involved in the search for an under-

standing of problems relating to language and discourse. The narrower view of

applied linguistics as an area dealing with the application of linguistic theories to

language teaching is most certainly no longer valid.

References

ADELSW Ä RD, V. et al. (1987) The unequal distribution of interactional space dominance and control in courtroom interaction. Text 7: 313–346.

ATKINSON, J. M. (1992) Displaying neutrality. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (eds.): 199–211 . ATKINSON, J. M. & P. DREW (1979) Order in court. The organization of verbal interaction in

judicial settings. Macmillan. BARGIELA-CHIAPPINI, F. (2004) Language at work: Meeting the challenge of inter-disciplinarity.

In C. Gouveia et al. (eds.) Discourse, communication and the enterprise. Linguistic perspectives : 3–16. University of Lisbon.

BARGIELA-CHIAPPINI, F. & C. NICKERSON (eds.) (1999) Writing business: Genres, media and discourses . Longman.

BARNES, D. & F. TODD (eds.) (1977) Communication and learning in small groups . Routledge & Kegan Paul.

BARTON, D. & K. TUSTING (eds.) (2005) Beyond Communities of practice. Language, power, and social context, Cambridge University Press.

BAZERMAN, C. (1988) Shaping written knowledge . Madison. BAZERMAN, C. & J. PARADIS (eds.) (1991) Textual dynamics of the professions . University of

Wisconsin Press.



BAYLEY, R. & S. R. SCHECTER (eds.) (2003) Language socialization in bilingual and multilingual societies. Multilingual Matters.

BELLACK, A. A. et al. (1966) The language of the classroom . Teachers College Press. BENNETT, W. L. & M. S. FELDMAN (1981) Reconstructing reality in the courtroom . Tavistock. BERGVALL, V. L. (1996) Constructing and enacting gender through discourse: Negotiating multiple

roles as female engineering students. In V.L. Bergvall et al. (eds.) Rethinking language and gen-der research: Theory and practice : 173–201. Longman.

BERKENKOTTER, C. & T. N. HUCKIN (1995) Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication. Cognition/Culture/Power. Lawrence Erlbaum.

BERK-SELIGSON, S. (1990) The bilingual courtroom: court interpreters in the judicial process . University of Chicago Press.

—— (2000) Interpreting for the police: Issues in pre-trial phases of the judicial process. Forensic Linguistics 7: 212–237.

BERNSTEIN, B. B. (1971) Class, codes and control , vol. 1. Routledge & Kegan Paul. —— (1973) Class, codes and control, vol. 2. Routledge & Kegan Paul. BHATIA, V. K. (1987) Analyzing genre . Longman. BLUM-KULKA, S. & C. E. SNOW (2002) Talking to adults. The contribution of multiparty dis-

course to language acquisition . Lawrence Erlbaum. DE BOT, K., R. B. GINSBERG & C. KRAMSCH (eds.) (1981) Foreign language research in cross-

cultural perspective . John Benjamins. BOURDIEU, P. & J. -C. PASSERON (1970) La reproduction . Minuit. BOWERMAN, M. & S. C. LEVINSON (2001) Language acquisition and conceptual development.

Cambridge University Press. BROUWER, C. E. & J. WAGNER (2004) Developmental issues in second language conversation.

Journal of Applied Linguistics 1(1): 29–47. BURTON, D. & S. BARTLETT (2005) Practitioner research for teachers . Paul Chapman

Publishing. BROWN, G. & G. YULE (1983) Teaching the spoken language . Cambridge University Press. BYGATE, M. (2004) Some current trends in applied linguistics: Towards a generic view. AILA Review

17: 6–22. CANDLIN, C. & K. HYLAND (eds.) (1999) Writing: Texts, Processes and Practices . Longman. CANDLIN, C. N. & S. SARANGI (2004) Making applied linguistics matter. Journal of Applied

Linguistics 1(1): 1–8 CHARROW, R. P. & V. R. CHARROW (1979) Making legal language understandable. Columbia Law

Review 79: 1306–1374. CHRISTIE, F. (1987) Genres as choice. In I. Reid (ed.) The Place of Genre in Learning. Current

Debates : 22–34 . Geelong. CICOUREL, A. V. (1968) The social organization of juvenile justice . Wiley. —— (1981) Language and medicine. In C. A. Ferguson & S. B. Heath (eds.) Language in the USA :

407–429. Cambridge University Press. CLYNE, M. (1987) Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts. Journal of Pragmatics

11: 211–241. —— (1994) Inter-cultural communication at work. Cultural values in discourse . Cambridge

University Press. CONLEY, J. & W. O’BARR (1998) Just words: law, language and power . University of Chicago

Press.



CONNOR, U. (1996) Contrastive rhetoric. Cross-cultural aspects of second-language writing. Cambridge University Press.

CONNOR, U. & R. B. KAPLAN (eds.) (1987) Writing across languages . Addison-Wesley. CORDER, S. P. (1973) Introducing applied linguistics . Penguin Books. CORDEN, R. (2000) Literacy and learning through talk. Strategies for the primary classroom . Open

University Press. CRYSTAL, D. (1981) The scope of applied linguistics. Directions in applied linguistics . Academic

Press. DAHL, T. (2003) Metadiscourse in research articles. In K. Fløttum & F. Rastier (eds.) Academic

discourse. Multidisciplinary approaches : 120–138. Novus. DANET, B. (1980a) Language in the legal process. Law & Society Review 14: 447–564. —— (1980b) ‘Baby’ or ‘fetus’? Semiotica 32: 187–219. DANET, B. & B. BOGOCH (1980) Fixed fi ght or free-for-all? British Journal of Law & Society 7:

38–60. DREW, P. (1992) Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination. In P. Drew & J. Heritage

(eds.): 470–520. DREW, P. & J. HERITAGE (eds.) (1992) Talk at work . Cambridge University Press. DUFFY, T. M. & J. R. KIRKLEY (eds.) (2004) Learner-centered theory and practice in distance

education; cases from higher education . Lawrence Erlbaum. DUMAS, B. (2000) U.S. pattern jury instructions: Problems and proposals. Forensic Linguistics 7:

49–71. EGBERT, J. & E. HANSON-SMITH (eds.) (1999) CALL environments: research, practice, and criti-

cal issues . TESOL. Encyclopedia of Language and Education (1997) General editor D. Corson. Kluwer. Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2005) (2nd edition) General editor K. Brown. Elsevier. FAERCH, C. & G. KASPER (eds.) (1985) Strategies in interlanguage communication. Longman. FAIRCLOUGH, N. (1992) Critical Language Awareness . Longman. FIRTH, A. (ed.) (1995) The discourse of negotiation . Pergamon. FLOWER, L. (1994) The construction of negotiated meaning . Southern Illinois University Press. GALE, T. & K. DENSMORE (2000) Just schooling. Explorations in the cultural politics of teaching .

Open University Press. GARDNER, R. C. (1985) Social psychology and second-language learning . Edward Arnold. GARDNER, R. C. & J. WAGNER (eds.) (2004) Second Language Conversations. Advances in

Applied Linguistics. Continuum. GARRISON, D. R. (2003) E-learning in the 21st century: a framework for research and practice .

RoutledgeFalmer. GASS, S. M. & SELINKER, L. (2001) Second Language Acquisition. An Introductory Course.

Second edition. Lawrence Erlbaum. GEE, J. (1996) [1990] Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses . Falmer. GIBBONS, J. (2003) Forensic linguistics. An introduction to language in the justice system .

Blackwell. GOODWIN, C. (1994) Professional vision. American Anthropologists 93(3): 606–633. GOODWIN, C. & M. H. GOODWIN (1997) Contested vision: the discursive constitution of Rodney

King. In B. -L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell & B. Nordberg (eds.): 292–316. GUNNARSSON, B. -L. (1984) Functional comprehensibility of legislative texts. Text 4(1/3): 71–105. —— (1989) Text comprehensibility and the writing process. Written communication 6: 86–107.



—— (1995a) Applied Linguistics. In J. Verschueren et al. (eds.) Handbook of Pragmatics. Manual : 45–54. John Benjamins.

—— (1995b) Studies of language for specifi c purposes - a biased view of a rich reality. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 5(1):111–134

—— (1997a) Applied Discourse Analysis. In T. van Dijk (ed.) Discourse Studies. A Multidisciplinary Introduction. 2. Discourse as Social Interaction : 285–312. Sage

—— (1997b) The writing process from a sociolinguistic viewpoint. Written Communication 14(2): 139–188.

—— (2002) Academic women in the male university fi eld. Communicative practices at postgraduate seminars. In B. Baron & H. Kotthoff (eds.) Gender in Interaction. Perspectives on feminity and masculinity in ethnography and discourse : 247–281. John Benjamins.

—— (2005a) The Organization of Enterprise Discourse. In A. Trosborg & P. E. Flyvholm Jørgensen (eds.) Business Discourse. Texts and Contexts : 83–109. Peter Lang.

—— (2005b) Medical Discourse: Sociohistorical Construction. In Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd edition), vol. 7: 709–716. Elsevier.

—— (ed.) (2005c) The Immigrant and the Workplace . Uppsala universitet. GUNNARSSON, B. -L., B. MELANDER & H. N Ä SLUND (1994) LSP in a historical perspective.

In M. Brekke et al (eds.) Applications and Implications of Current LSP Research II: 878–915. Fagbokforlaget.

GUNNARSSON, B. -L., P. LINELL & B. NORDBERG (1997) The construction of professional discourse . Longman.

GUSTAFSSON, M. (1984) The syntactic features of binomial expressions in legal English. Text 4: 123–142.

GUSTAVSSON, L. (1988) Language taught and language used . Link ö ping Studies in Arts and Science 18.

HALL, J. K. & L. S. VERPLAETSE (2000) Second and Foreign Language Learning through class-room interaction . Lawrence Erlbaum.

HALLIDAY, M. A. K. & J. R. MARTIN (1993) Writing science: literacy and discursive power . Falmer.

HAYES, J. R. & L. FLOWER (1980) Identifying the organization of writing processes. In L. W. Gregg & E. R. Steinberg (eds.) Cognitive processes in writing : 3–30. Erlbaum.

HELLER, M. (1999) Linguistic minorities and modernity. A sociolinguistic ethnography . Addison Wesley Longman.

HERITAGE, J. & A. LINDSTR Ö M (1998) Motherhood, medicine and morality. Scenes from a medi-cal encounter. Research on language and social interaction 31(3/4): 397–438.

HILTUNEN, R. (1990) Chapters on legal English . Suomalainen Tiedekatemia. HOLMES, J. & M. STUBBE (2003) Power and politeness in the workplace. A sociolinguistic analy-

sis of talk at work . Pearson Education. HOOSAIN, R. & F. SALILI (2005) Language in Multicultural Education . Information Age

Publishing. HYD É N, L. & E. MISHLER (1999) Language and medicine. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics

19:174–192. HYERLE, D. (ed.) (2004) Student successes with thinking maps. School-based research, results, and

models for achievement using visual tools . Corwin Press. HYLAND, K. (2003) Disciplinary discourses. Social interactions in academic writing . The University

of Michigan Press.



IVANI Č , R. (2004) Discourses of writing and learning to write. Language and Education 18(3): 220–245.

JAMES, C. (1993) What is applied linguistics? International Journal of Applied Linguistics 3: 17–32. JAMES, C. & P. GARRETT (1991) Language awareness in the classroom . Longman. J Ä MTELID, K. (2002) Texter och skrivande i en internationaliserad aff ä rsv ä rld. Flerspr å kig text-

produktion vid ett svenskt storf ö retag. Almqvist & Wiksell International. JANKS, H. (2000) Domination, access, diversity and design: A synthesis model for critical literacy

education. Educational Review 52(2): 175–86. JOHNS, A. M. (1997) Text, role, and context. Developing academic literacies . Cambridge University

Press. JOHNSON, R. K. & M. SWAIN (eds.) (1997) Immersion Education: International Perspectives .

Cambridge University Press. J Ö NSSON, L. (1988) Polisf ö rh ö ret som kommunikationssituation (Studies in Communication 23).

Link ö ping University. KANKAANRANTA, A. (2005) “Hej Seppo, could you pls comment on this! Internal email com-

munication in lingua franca English in a multinational company . Centre for Applied Language Studies, University of Jyv ä skyl ä .

KAPLAN, R. E. (1966) Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning 16: 1–20.

—— (1990) On applied linguistics and discourse analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 11: 199–204.

KARLSSON, A. -M. (2005) Goods, services and the role of written discourse. In B.-L. Gunnarsson (ed.) Communication in the Workplace : 91–104. Uppsala University.

KNIFFKA, H. (ed.) (1990) Texte zu Theorie und Praxis forensischer Linguistik . Niemeyer. KNORR-CETINA, K. (1981) The manufacture of knowledge . Pergamon Press. KRAMSCH, C. (2004) Context and Culture in Language Teaching . Oxford University Press.

[1st edition 1993]. KURZON, D. (1986) It is hereby performed . John Benjamins. LABOV, W. & D. FANSHEL (1977) Therapeutic discourse . Academic Press. LALOUSCHEK, J., F. MENZ & R. WODAK (1990) Alltag in der Ambulanz . Narr. LATOUR, B. & S. WOOLGAR (1986) Laboratory life. Princeton University Press. LEVI, J. N. (1994) Language and law . American Bar Association. LEVINE, P. & R. SCOLLON (eds.) (2004) Discourse and Technology. Multimodal Discourse

Analysis . Georgetown University Press. LIBERG, C. (1990) Learning to read and write . Uppsala University. LINDE, C. (1988) The quantitative study of communicative success. Language in Society 17: 375–399. LINELL, P. et al. (1988) Interactional dominance in dyadic communication. Linguistics 26(3):

415–424. LINELL, P. & L. J Ö NSSON (1991) Suspect stories. In I. Markov á & K. Foppa (eds.) Asymmetries in

dialogue : 75–100. Harvester Wheatsheaf. L Ö RSCHER, W. (1983) Linguistische Beschreibung und Analyse von Fremdsprachenunterricht als

Diskurse . Narr. LUNDGREN, U. P. (1972) Frame factors and the teaching process . Almqvist & Wiksell. LYNCH, M. E. (1982) Closure and disclosure in pre-trail argument. Human Studies 5: 285–318. MACDONALD, S. P. (1994) Professional academic writing in the humanities and social sciences .

Southern Illinois University Press.



MALMBERG, B. (1981) Applied linguistics. Studia Linguistica 35(1/2): 7–14. MARTIN, J., F. CHRISTIE & J. ROTHERY (1994) Social processes in education. A Reply to Sawyer

and Watson (and others). In B. Stierer & J. Maybin (eds.) Language, Literacy and Learning in Education Practice : 232–257 . Multilingual Matters.

MARTIN, J. R. & D. ROSE (2003) Working with discourse: meaning beyond the clause . Continuum.

MARTIN-JONES, M. & K. JONES (2000) Multilingual literacies. Reading and writing different worlds . John Benjamins.

MAURANEN, A. (1993) Cultural differences in academic rhetoric . Peter Lang. —— (2005) Speaking academics. In I. B ä cklund et al. (eds.) Text i arbete/Text at work . Uppsala

universitet. MAYBIN, J. (2006) Children’s voices. Talk, knowledge and identity . Palgrave Macmillan.. MEHAN, H. (1979) Learning lessons . Harvard University Press. MELANDER, B., J. SWALES & K. FREDRICKSON (1997) Journal abstracts from three academic

fi elds in the United States and Sweden: National or disciplinary proclivities? In A. Duszak (ed.) Culture and Style of Academic Discourse : 251–272. Mouton de Gruyter.

MELLINKOFF, D. (1963) The language of the law . Little. MISHLER, E. G. (1984) The discourse of medicine . Ablex. MITCHELL, R. & F. MYLES (1998) Second Language Learning Theories . Arnold. MYERS, G. (1990) Writing biology. Texts in the social construction of scientifi c knowledge. The

University of Wisconsin Press. MYHILL, D., S. JONES & R. HOPPER (2006) Talking, listening, learning. Effective talk in the pri-

mary classroom . Open University Press. NICKERSON, C. (1998) Corporate Culture and the Use of Written English Within British Subsidiaries

in The Netherlands. English for Specifi c Purposes 17(3): 281–294. NORRIS, S. & R. H. JONES (2005) Discourse in action. Introducing mediated discourse analysis .

Routledge. O’BARR, W. M. (1982) Linguistic evidence . Academic Press. OCHS, E. (1994) Interpretive journeys. How physicists talk and travel through graphic space.

Confi gurations 2(1): 151–171. ODELL, L. & D. GOSWAMI (eds.) (1986) Writing in Nonacademic Settings . The Guilford Press. OLIVIERA, M. C. L. (2004) Language, technology and modernity. A study on interaction in a Call

Center. In C. Gouveia et al. (eds.) Discourse, Communication and the Enterprise. Linguistic Perspectives : 65–78. University of Lisbon.

PAN, Y., S. W. SCOLLON & R. SCOLLON (2002) Professional Communication in International Settings . Blackwell.

PERKINS, M. & S. HOWARD (2000) New Directions in Language Development and Disorders. Kluwer.

PFEIFFER, O., E. STROUHAL & R. WODAK (1987) Recht auf Sprache . Orac. PHILIPS, S. U. (1992) The routinization of repair in courtroom discourse. In A. Duranti & C. Goodwin

(eds.) Rethinking context : 311–334. Cambridge University Press. PRIDE, J. B. (ed.) (1979) Sociolinguistic aspects of language learning and teaching . Oxford

University Press. PURVES, A. C. (ed.) (1988) Writing across languages and cultures . Sage. RIGGENBACH, H. (1990) Discourse analysis and spoken language instruction . ARAL 11:

152–163.



R Ä IS Ä NEN, C. (1998) The conference forum as a system of genres. A sociocultural study of aca-demic conference practices in automotive crash-safety engineering . G ö teborg University.

SAHLSTR Ö M, F. (1999) Up the Hill Backwards. On interactional constraints and affordances for equity-constitution in the classrooms of the Swedish comprehensive school. Uppsala University.

SARANGI, S. & C. ROBERTS (eds.) (1999) Talk, work and institutional order. discourse in medical, mediation and management settings . Mouton de Gruyter.

SCHR Ö DER, H. (ed.) (1991) Subject-oriented texts . Mouton de Gruyter. SELIGER, H. W. & E. SHOHAMY (1989) Second-language research methods . Oxford University

Press. SHOHAMY, E. (1990) Discourse analysis in language testing. ARAL 11: 115–132. SHUY, R. W. (1993) Language crimes. The use and abuse of language evidence in the courtroom .

Blackwell. —— (1997) Ten unanswered questions about Miranda. Forensic Linguistics 4: 175–196. —— (1998) Bureaucratic Language in Government and Business . Georgetown University Press. SINCLAIR, J. M. & R. M. COULTHARD (1975) Towards an analysis of discourse . Oxford University

Press. SNOW, C. E. & C. A. FERGUSON (eds.) (1977) Talking to children . Cambridge University Press. S Ö DERBERGH, R. (1977) Reading in early childhood . Georgetown University Press. SOLAN, L. (1993) The language of judges . University of Chicago Press. SPILKA, R. (ed.) (1993) Writing in the Workplace. New Research Perspectives . Illinois University

Press. SRIDHAR, S. N. (1993) What are applied linguistics? International Journal of Applied Linguistics

3: 3–16. STUBBE, M., C. LANE, J. HILDER, E. VINE, B. VINE, M. MARRA, J. HOLMES & A.

WEATHERALL (2003) Multiple discourse analyses of a workplace interaction. Discourse Studies 5(3): 351–388.

STUBBS, M. (1980) Language and literacy . Routledge & Kegan Paul. SWAIN, M. & S. LAPKIN (1982) Evaluating Bilingual Education: A Canadian Case Study.

Multilingual Matters. SWALES, J. M. (1990) Genre analysis . Cambridge University Press. —— (1998) Other fl oors, other voices: a textography of a small university building . Erlbaum. TRUDGILL, P. (1984) Introduction. In P. Trudgill (ed.) Applied sociolinguistics : 1–6. Academic

Press. WARDHAUGH, R. (1970) The contrastive analysis hypothesis. TESOL Quarterly 4: 123–130. WEINREICH, U. (1953) Languages in contact . Publications of the Linguistic Circle of New York 1. WENGER, E. (1998) Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity . Cambridge

University Press. WHITEHEAD, M. (1999) Supporting language and literacy development in the early years. Open

University Press. WIDDOWSON, H. G. (1990) Aspects of language teaching . Oxford University Press. WINSOR, D. A. (1989) An engineer’s writing and the corporate construction of knowledge. Written

Communication 6: 270–285. WODAK, R. (1997) Critical discourse analysis and the study of doctor-patient interaction. In

B. -L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell & B. Nordberg (eds.): 173–200. WODAK, R. & P. Van de CRAEN (eds.) (1987) Neurotic and psychotic language behaviour .

Multilingual Matters.

john benjamins publishing company - diva portal208075/fulltext01.pdf · has expanded to include...

Documents