Abstract
The goal of this article is to look at the phenomenon of modern professional discourse from a functional-linguistic perspective to discuss key elements of verbal interaction that define rhetorical uniqueness of this type of communication and combine traditions, standards and conventional nature with enough freedom for speakers to express themselves and be creative in composing texts of their own. The authors sum up different approaches to the definition of professional communication, single out and describe major functional features of this type of verbal interaction: goal-setting, functional loading of professional communication, typical participants, chronotopos, forms of verbal behaviour, role and status relations, pragmatic conventions and standardisation, etiquette, functional differences between official and semi-official professional discourse, peculiarities of written communication. All the above mentioned functional features of modern professional discourse impose clear limitations on the speech arsenal available to people. Basic functional-linguistic analysis of discursive fragments reveals what aspects should be further elaborated on in terms of improving the process of speech strategic planning, selecting proper linguistic means to cause appropriate pragmatic impacts on listeners/readers, work out ways to increase rhetorical efficiency. As an example of complex research into particular professional discourse, the authors analyse most important issues of English and Russian academic communication as a subtype of professional discourse from various viewpoints.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Banks, I. (2007). The steep approach to garbadale. London: Abacus.
Bargiela-Chiappini, F. (2009). The handbook of business discourse. Edinburgh University Press.
Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C., & Planken, B. (2007). Business discourse. Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Basabe, N., & Ros, M. (2005). Cultural dimensions and social behavior correlates: Individualism-collectivism and power distance. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 18, 189–225.
de Beaugrande, R. (1997). The story of discourse analysis. In T. A. van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as structure and process. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction (Vol. 1, pp. 35–62). London: Thousand Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Chesnokova, O. (2017). Spanish communicative strategies in teaching of Spanish to Russian Students. In EDULEARN17 Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 10094–10101).
Cotton, D., Falvey D., & Kent, S. (2006). Market leader. New edition. Upper intermediate business English course book. London: Pearson Education Limited.
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a global language. Cambridge.
Danilenko, V. P. (1977). Russian terminology. Experience of linguistic description. Moscow: Nauka.
van Dijk, T. (1981). Studies in the pragmatics of discourse. The Hague: Mouton.
Dressler, B. (2011). Formation and evolution of the terminology of the subject area “Higher and postgraduate professional education”: Cognitive-derivational and sociocultural aspects: On the material of Russian and German languages. Ph.D. thesis. Krasnodar.
Garzone, G., & Ilie, C. (2007). The use of English in institutional and business settings. An intercultural perspective. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gillaerts, P., & Gotti, M. (2005). Genre variation in business letters. Bern: Peter Lang.
Goldberg, V. B. (2004). Description of structural semantic links as access to mental spaces. Questions of Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 150–165.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.
Karpovskaya, N. V. (2011). On the problem of pragmatic equivalence in translation. Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series “Linguistics”, 4, 98–104.
Khayutin, A. D. (1972). Term, terminology, nomenclature: Textbook. Samarkand.
Kubryakova, E. S. (1984). Current issues of modern semantics. Moscow: MGPII Publishing House.
Kupriyanova, M. E. (2013). On the problem of creating a specialized glossary of academic terms. Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series “Linguistics”, 4, 18–24.
Kupriyanova, M. E. (2014). On the problem of unifying the usage of higher education terms under conditions of the Bologna process. Bulletin of the Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series “Theory of language. Semiotics. Semantics”, 1, 159–164.
Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
Lees, G., & Thorne, T. (1996). English on business. Practical English for international executives. Chancerel International Publishers.
Leichik, V. M. (1981). Optimal length and optimal structure of the term. Questions of Linguistics, 2, 63–73.
Leichik, V. M. (2006). Terminology: Subject, methods, structure. Moscow: KomKniga.
Livnat, Z. (2012). Dialogue, science and academic writing. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Malyuga, E. N. (2015). Individual-oriented training in professional communication teaching. In ICERI2015 Proceedings. 8th International Conference of Education, Research and Innovation (pp. 4807–4811). Seville, Spain, IATED.
Malyuga, E. N., Krouglov, A., & Tomalin, B. (2018). Linguo-cultural competence as a cornerstone of translators’ performance in the domain of intercultural business communication. XLinguae. A European Scientific Language Journal (2), 566–582. http://www.xlinguae.eu/2018_11_02_46.html, https://doi.org/10.18355/xl.2018.11.02.46.
Malyuga, E., Litvinov, A., & Panicheva, E. (2016). Methods of effective teaching written communication. EDULEARN16 Proceedings (pp. 1967–1970). Barcelona: IATED.
Malyuga, E. N., & Orlova, S. N. (2018). Linguistic pragmatics of intercultural professional and business communication (Monograph). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68744-5.
Malyuga, E. N., & Ponomarenko, E. V. (2012). Distance teaching English for specific purposes (ESP). In L. Gomez Chova, A. Lopez Martinez, & I. Candel Torres (Eds.), Conference Proceedings of ICERI 2012: 5th international Conference on Education, Research and Innovation (pp. 4530–4536). Madrid: International Association of Technology, Education and Development, IATED.
Malyuga, E. N., & Ponomarenko, E. V. (2015). Effective ways of forming students’ communicative competence in interactive independent work. In EDULEARN15: 7th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (pp. 1397–1404).
Maurais, J. (2003). Towards a new global linguistic order? Languages in a Globalising World, 13–36.
Mechkovskaya, N. B. (2001). Social linguistics: A manual for students. Moscow: Aspect-Press.
Molnar, A. A. (2012). Features of formation of a terminology system of information technologies: On the material of the French language. Doctoral dissertation. Moscow.
Morris, C. W. (1938). Foundations of the theory of signs. Chicago.
Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The theory and practice of translation. Leiden: EJ Brill.
Ponomarenko, E. V. (2016). Functional properties of English discourse in terms of linguosynergetics. In SGEM2016 Conference Proceedings of 3rd International Multidisciplinary Scientific Conference on Social Sciences and Arts SGEM 2016 (Book 1, Vol. 3, pp. 355–362), www.sgemsocial.org, 24–31 August, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5593/sgemsocial2016/b13/s03.042.
Ponomarenko, E. V. (2017). Discourse functional relations revisited: Mastering causativity as means of communicative impact. EDULEARN17 Proceedings (pp. 4706–4712).
Ponomarenko, E. V., & Malyuga, E. N. (2015). Ironic rhetoric in business English courses from functional linguistics perspective. In EDULEARN15 Proceedings (pp. 1392–1396).
Savicheva, E., & Chesnokova, O. (2017). The role of universities in the modern world. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 144, 677–679.
Seglin, J. L. (2002). The AMA handbook of business letters. New York: AMACOM.
Shelov, S. D. (2010). Once again on the definition of the notion “term”. Bulletin of the Nizhny Novgorod University n.a. N. Lobachevsky, 4(2), 795–799.
Singelis, T. M., & Brown, W. J. (1995). Self and collectivist communication; linking culture to individual behaviour. Human Communication Research, 21(3), 354–389.
Superanskaya, A. V., Podolskaya, N. V., & Vasilieva, N. V. (1989). General terminology: Questions of theory. Moscow: Nauka.
Talbot, F. (2009). How to write effective business English. London: Kogan Page.
Tatarinov, V. A. (1994). History of domestic terminology. Classics of terminology: Essay and reader. Moscow: Moskovsky Litsei.
Tatarinov, V. A. (2006). General terminology studies: Encyclopedic dictionary. Russian Terminological Society RossTerm. Moscow: Moskovsky Litsei.
Vinogradov, S. N. (2005). The term as a means and object of description (on the basis of Russian linguistic terminology). Nizhny Novgorod.
Volodina, M. N. (1998). Cognitive-informational nature of the term and terminological nomination. Doctoral thesis. Moscow.
Weisberger, L. (2006). Everyone worth knowing. New York: Pocket Book.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Chesnokova, O.S., Khramchenko, D.S., Kupriyanova, M.E. (2020). Professional Discourse: Functional-Linguistic Perspective (Based on Academic Discourse). In: Malyuga, E. (eds) Functional Approach to Professional Discourse Exploration in Linguistics . Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9103-4_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9103-4_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-32-9102-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-32-9103-4
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)