Search

The purpose of the present study is to investigate, within the textual framework of "academic journalese", what happens to Danish and Finnish writers' English texts when edited by native English-speaking editors for publication on the World Wide Web. We use the term academic journalese to describe texts written by researchers or professionals with a background in research that are easily available to large audiences outside the academic world. By using rhetorical, text linguistic, and editorial concepts in the analysis, we have traced and identified the types of changes to which a number of texts have been subjected during editing to make them compatible with editorial requirements for the genre and standards for UK English. Comparisons between the edited and unedited versions of our corpus documents show that adjustments occur in both directions along the explicitness-implicitness dimension and are frequent in both Finnish and Danish texts. The results further suggest that certain features that have in previous studies emerged as typical of native Finnish writers' English texts, are shared by native Danish writers as well. (Contains 1 table.)

This paper proposes a set of new methods for intercultural rhetoric research that is context-sensitive and, in many instances, goes beyond mere text analysis. It considers changes in the field as intercultural rhetoric has moved from the EAP study of student essays to the study of writing in many disciplines and genres. New developments in text, genre, and corpus analyses are introduced to enable researchers and teachers in the field to consider these new writing products and processes in their specific contexts. It is emphasized that future intercultural rhetoric research continues using a variety of research tools to determine base line comparisons, with appropriate "tertia comparationes," to explain differences and similarities in written products, as well as in the activity of writing through a number of qualitative approaches. (Contains 1 table.)

Interactive discourse structuring is used to guide listeners through on-going speech and has been shown to have a positive effect on lecture comprehension, particularly in L2 settings. As mobility increases in the academic world, there are more opportunities for lecture events characterized not only by linguistic/cultural diversity, but also by unfamiliarity between lecturers and audiences. In these situations, interactive discourse structuring may have an especially important role. This study compares interactive discourse structuring used by guest lecturers (both L1 and L2) versus L1 classroom lecturers. Using corpus methodology, interactive discourse structuring was found to be most frequent among L2 guest lecturers, least frequent among L1 guest lecturers, with L1 classroom lecturers falling in the middle. The results suggest that linguistic/cultural diversity has more influence on discourse structuring than participant unfamiliarity. In addition, the analysis revealed other trends, particularly the very wide range of vocabulary used in discourse structuring expressions by all speakers. The findings can be implemented towards developing more authentic academic listening materials, as well as guidelines for both native and non-native guest lecturers who interact with international audiences. (Contains 2 tables.)

Interactive discourse structuring is used to guide listeners through on-going speech and has been shown to have a positive effect on lecture comprehension, particularly in L2 settings. As mobility increases in the academic world, there are more opportunities for lecture events characterized not only by linguistic/cultural diversity, but also by unfamiliarity between lecturers and audiences. In these situations, interactive discourse structuring may have an especially important role. This study compares interactive discourse structuring used by guest lecturers (both L1 and L2) versus L1 classroom lecturers. Using corpus methodology, interactive discourse structuring was found to be most frequent among L2 guest lecturers, least frequent among L1 guest lecturers, with L1 classroom lecturers falling in the middle. The results suggest that linguistic/cultural diversity has more influence on discourse structuring than participant unfamiliarity. In addition, the analysis revealed other trends, particularly the very wide range of vocabulary used in discourse structuring expressions by all speakers. The findings can be implemented towards developing more authentic academic listening materials, as well as guidelines for both native and non-native guest lecturers who interact with international audiences. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]