Empirical Data Analysis: The Email Corpus

  • Anna Danielewicz-Betz


This chapter addresses the issue of empirical data in the exploration of primary business communication and reports on the findings of the critical, socio-pragmatic, lexico-grammatical and content/quantitative analyses (including keywords, most-frequent terms and clusters) of an email corpus compiled mostly from the emails originating in the Sales divisions of three global IT corporations. In particular, managerial discourse and internal power relations are critically analysed, along with the results of the coding process of the entire corpus. Attention is devoted to directives in managerial discourse and to urgency, bad news and other representative codes that point to key drivers in the internal and external communication of Sales. Top keywords from the corpus are discussed and compared with the selected reference corpora.


  1. Alvesson, M., & Karreman, D. (2000). Varieties of discourse: On the study of organizations through discourse analysis. Human Relations, 53(9), 1125–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (2002). Identity regulation as organizational control: Producing the appropriate individual. Journal of Management Studies, 39(5), 619–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alvesson, M., & Willmott, H. (2012). Making sense of management: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  4. Amernic, J., & Craig, R. (2006). CEO speak. The language of corporate leadership. Montreal/Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Argyris, C. (2002). Double-loop learning, teaching, and research. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(2), 206–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Austin, J. L. (1962). How to do things with words. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  7. Biebricher, T. (2005). Selbstkritik der Moderne: Foucault und Habermas im Vergleich (Frankfurter Beiträge zur Soziologie und Sozialphilosophie, Vol. 7). Frankfurt am Main: Campus Verlag.Google Scholar
  8. Bousfield, D. (2008). Impoliteness in interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bousfield, D., & Locher, M. (2008). Impoliteness in language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  10. Bowker, J. (2013). BELF (business English as a lingua franca) and intercultural issues: Rapport management in consulting and training encounters in international and local settings. In M.P. Escoubas-Benveniste & S. Di Vito (Eds.). Quale plurilingualismo per quale ambito lavorativomultilingue? (pp. 107-132). Rome: Università di Roma.Google Scholar
  11. Broadfoot, K., Deetz, S., & Anderson, D. (2004). Multi-levelled, multi-method approaches in organizational discourse. In D. Grant, C. Hardy, C. Oswick & L. Putnam (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational discourse (pp. 193–211). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Brown, R., & Gilman, A. (1960). The pronouns of power and solidarity. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 253–276). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. Casey, C. (1995). Work, self, and society: After industrialism. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Chiapello, E., & Fairclough, N. (2002). Understanding the new management ideology: A transdisciplinary contribution from critical discourse analysis and new sociology of capitalism. Discourse & Society, 13(2), 185–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chilton, P. (2004). Analysing political discourse: Theory and practice. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking critical discourse analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Craven, A., & Potter, J. (2010). Directives: Entitlement and contingency in action. Discourse Studies, 12(4), 419–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Culpeper, J. (1996). Towards an anatomy of impoliteness. Journal of Pragmatics, 25(3), 349–367.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Curl, T., & Drew, P. (2008). Contingency and action: A comparison of Two forms of requesting. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 41(2), 129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Czerniawska, F. (1998). Corporate speak: The use of language in business. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  21. Dahl, R. A. (1957). The concept of power. Behavioral Science, 2(3), 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Deetz, S. (1995). Transforming communication, transforming business: Building responsive and responsible workplaces. New York: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  23. Deetz, S., & McClellan, J. G. (2009). Critical studies. In F. Bargiela-Chiappini (Ed.), The handbook of business discourse (pp. 119–131). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Drew, P., & Heritage, J. (1992). Analyzing talk at work: An introduction. In P. Drew & J. Heritage (Eds.), Talk at work (pp. 3–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. El-Sawad, A., Arnold, J., & Cohen, L. (2004). ‘Doublethink’: The prevalence and function of contradiction in accounts of organizational life. Human Relations, 57(9), 1179–1203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Ervin-Tripp, S. (1976). Is Sybil there? The structure of some American English directives. Language in Society, 5(01), 25–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London/New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  28. Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  29. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  30. Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 321–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Foucault, M. (1982). The subject and power. Critical Inquiry, 8(4), 777–795.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. French, J. R., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.), Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Oxford: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  33. Gee, J. P., Hull, G. A., & Lankshear, C. (1996). The new work order: Behind the language of the new capitalism. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  34. Gu, Y. (1990). Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 237–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Habermas, J. (1984, 1987). The theory of communicative action. Vols. 1 and 2. Boston: Beacon.Google Scholar
  36. Halbe, D. (2013). English in business meetings. Berlin: epubli Verlag.Google Scholar
  37. Handford, M. (2010). The language of business meetings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hanna, M. S., & Wilson, G. L. (1998). Communicating in business and professional settings (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  39. Harlow, L. L. (1990). Do they mean what they say? Sociopragmatic competence and second language learners. The Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 328–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Hart, C., & Lukeš, D. (2007). Introduction: Cognitive linguistics in critical discourse analysis. In C. Hart & D. Lukeš (Eds.), Cognitive linguistics in critical discourse analysis: Application and theory (pp. IX–XIII). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  41. Haugh, M. (2007). Emic conceptualisations of (im) politeness and face in Japanese: Implications for the discursive negotiation of second language learner identities. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(4), 657–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Havertake, H. (1984). Speech acts, speakers, and hearers. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  43. Hemp, P. (2009). Death by information overload. Harvard Business Review, 87(9), 83–89.Google Scholar
  44. Hill, L. A. (2003). Becoming a manager: How new managers master the challenges of leadership. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.Google Scholar
  45. Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M. (2003). Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  46. Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M. (2015). Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Iedema, R. (2003). Discourses of post-bureaucratic organization. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Iedema, R., Degeling, P., Braithwaite, J., & White, L. (2004). ‘It’s an interesting conversation I’m hearing’: The doctor as manager. Organization Studies, 25(1), 15–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jackson, H., & Stockwell, P. (1996). An introduction to the nature and functions of language. London: A&C Black.Google Scholar
  50. Koester, A. (2004). Relational sequences in workplace genres. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(8), 1405–1428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Koester, A. (2006). Investigating workplace discourse. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Koester, A. (2010). Workplace discourse. London: A&C Black.Google Scholar
  53. Koller, V. (2005). Critical discourse analysis and social cognition: Evidence from business media discourse. Discourse & Society, 16(2), 199–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Koller, V. (2012). How to analyse collective identity in discourse: Textual and contextual parameters. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines, 5(2), 19–38.Google Scholar
  55. Kong, K. C. (1998). Are simple business request letters really simple? A comparison of Chinese and English business request letters. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 18(1), 103–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kong, K. C. (2006). Accounts as a politeness strategy in the internal directive documents of a business firm in Hong Kong. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 16(1), 77–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of pragmatics (No. 30). Abingdon: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  58. Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  59. Marmaridou, S. (2011). Pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics. In W. Bublitz & N. Norrick (Eds.), Foundations of pragmatics (pp. 77–106). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  60. Marshan-Piekkari, R., Vaara, E., Tienari, J., & Säntti, R. (2005). Integration or disintegration? Human resource implications of a common corporate language decision in a cross-border merger. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 16(3), 330–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mautner, G. (2005). Time to get wired: Using web-based corpora in critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 16(6), 809–828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  63. Mumby, D. K. (1987). The political function of narrative in organizations. Communications Monographs, 54(2), 113–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mumby, D. K. (2007). Organizational communication. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of sociology (pp. 3290–3299). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  65. Mumby, D. K. (2013). Organizational communication: A critical approach. Los Angeles: Sage.Google Scholar
  66. Nelson, M. (2000). A corpus-based study of business English and business English teaching materials. PhD thesis, University of Manchaster, Manchaster.Google Scholar
  67. O’Halloran, K. (2003). Critical discourse analysis and language cognition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  68. Phillips, N., & Oswick, C. (2012). Organizational discourse: Domains, debates, and directions. The Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 435–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Poncini, G. (2002). Investigating discourse at business meetings with multicultural participation. IRAL, 40(4), 345–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Poncini, G. (2004). Communicating local elements to diverse audiences: Promotional materials for wineries. In M. Gotti & C. Candlin (Eds.), Intercultural aspects of specialized discourse (pp. 173–196). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  71. Pufahl Bax, I. (1986). How to assign work in an office: A comparison of spoken and written directives in American English. Journal of Pragmatics, 10(6), 673–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Putman, L. L. (2004). Discourse analysis: Mucking around with negotiation data. International Negotiation, 10(1), 17–32.Google Scholar
  73. Reinsch, N. L., Turner, J. W., & Tinsley, C. H. (2008). Multicommunicating: A practice whose time has come? Academy of Management Review, 33(2), 391–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Rogers, P. S. (2014). Management communication: Getting work done through people. In V. Bhatia & S. Bremner (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language and professional communication (pp. 165–192). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  75. Rogerson-Revell, P. (2007). Using English for international business: A European case study. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Salton, G., & Buckley, C. (1988). Term-weighting approaches in automatic text retrieval. Information Processing & Management, 24(5), 513–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Sarangi, S. K., & Slembrouck, S. (1992). Non-cooperation in communication: A reassessment of Gricean pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 17(2), 117–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2001). Discourse and intercultural communication. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 537–547). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  79. Scollon, R., Scollon, S. W., & Jones, R. H. (2011). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  80. Searle, J. R. (1969). Speech acts: An essay in the philosophy of language (Vol. 626). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Searle, J. R. (1979). Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Silver, C. (2015). QDA miner (with WordStat and Simstat). Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(4), 386–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Simpson, P., & Mayr, A. (2010). Language and power. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  84. Smeltzer, L. R., Glab, J., & Golen, S. (1983). Managerial communication: The merging of business communication, organizational communication, and management. Journal of Business Communication, 20(4), 71–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  86. Stubbs, M. (2001). Words and phrases: Corpus studies of lexical semantics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  87. Suchan, J., & Dulek, R. (1998). From text to context: An open systems approach to research in written business communication. Journal of Business Communication, 35(1), 87–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Tanaka, H. (2011). Politeness in a Japanese intra-organisational meeting: Honorifics and socio-dialectal code switching. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication, 21(1), 60–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4(2), 91–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Tribble, C. (2002). Corpora and corpus analysis: New windows on academic writing. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 131–149). Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  91. van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society, 4(2), 249–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. van Dijk, T. A. (2001). Multidisciplinary CDA: A plea for diversity. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 95–120). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  93. van Dijk, T. A. (2003). The discourse-knowledge interface. In G. Weiss & R. Wodak (Eds.), Critical discourse analysis. Theory and interdisciplinarity (pp. 85–109). Houndsmills: Palgrave-MacMillan.Google Scholar
  94. van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 62–85). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  95. van Leeuwen, T., & Wodak, R. (1999). Legitimizing immigration control: A discourse-historical analysis. Discourse Studies, 1(1), 83–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Vine, B. (2004). Modal verbs in New Zealand English directives. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 3(3), 205–220.Google Scholar
  97. Watson, T. J. (1994). In search of management: Culture, chaos and control in managerial work. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  98. Watson, T. J. (2001). In search of management: Culture, chaos and control in managerial work. Boston: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
  99. Watts, R. J. (2003). Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Wu, H. C., Luk, R. W. P., Wong, K. F., & Kwok, K. L. (2008). Interpreting tf-idf term weights as making relevance decisions. ACM Transactions on Information Systems (TOIS), 26(3), Article No. 13.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anna Danielewicz-Betz
    • 1
  1. 1.Ludwig-Maximilians UniversityMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations