Third parties without the express prior permission of Palgrave Macmillan
Download 72.04 Kb. Pdf ko'rish
|
Discourse and business communication An
New Approaches to Discourse and Business Communication
again, there is no guarantee that the simulated data mirror the authentic material that could not be accessed. In this sense, the use of simulated data can produce a mismatch between analytic expectations and the actual-time and -place functions of a business discourse, the kind of flaw anticipated (indirectly) as early as 1988 by scholars working in the applied tradition (Williams, 1988). 2 The problems that affect crystallization of the core concept of busi- ness discourse, as a prerequisite for defining its research agenda, lie also in the understandable disproportion between the (vast) amount of literature devoted to genres and sub-genres no longer promising a great deal in terms of characterizing or even typifying the princi- pal field (i.e. ‘business discourse’), and a much smaller coverage of those genres or other-than-generic factors which indeed make such a promise – for, apparently, many years to come. Consider the extensive research on negotiation, originally management-based and normative (e.g. Putnam and Jones, 1982; Donohue and Diez, 1985), and later essen- tially language-based (e.g. Firth, 1995; Ehlich and Wagner, 1995). The focus of these works is primarily on the spoken mode of communica- tion and analytic tools are applied and advocated accordingly, with a clear preference for conversation analysis (Firth, 1995). On the other hand, research in negotiations has yet to fully accommodate the rapidly growing importance of (mostly written) electronic communication – e-mail in particular (Louhiala-Salminen et al., 2005) – which goes a long way towards essentializing the major characteristics of the genre not only for today, but, conceivably, for the future as well. From this point, there is only a step to accept that the concept of ‘business discourse’ in general is likely to be viewed decreasingly through its genre-based typology and increasingly through its principal method of communi- cation, which will continue to demonstrate some stable and universal characteristics (structural efficiency, prevalence of content over form, flexibility with speed/frequency/place of interaction) – regardless of the genre. Yet, as of today, there does not seem to be enough literature that could warrant a fast way of defining business discourse along these lines and, indeed, it is the highly dynamic process of technological change that takes a lot of ‘blame’ for obstructing a clear vision of our research agenda. Does all this mean that we are currently unable to capture and high- light any regularities in business discourse that could successfully stand the test of time, thus indicating ways in which research methods could be systematized for the benefit of future studies? There seem to be some optimistic prospects, after all. April 14, 2009 11:52 MAC/RAMS Page-5 9781403_947369_02_cha01 PROOF Piotr Cap 5 Download 72.04 Kb. Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
Ma'lumotlar bazasi mualliflik huquqi bilan himoyalangan ©fayllar.org 2024
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling
ma'muriyatiga murojaat qiling