Cover not available
Article published In:
Transdisciplinarity in Applied Linguistics
Edited by Daniel Perrin and Claire Kramsch
[AILA Review 31] 2018
► pp. 53–80

On, for, and with practitioners

A transdisciplinary approach to text production in real-life settings

| Zurich University of Applied Sciences
This article explains how research “on” practitioners can be turned into research “for and with” practitioners (Cameron, Frazer, Rampton, & Richardson, 1992, p. 22) by including these practitioners in the research teams. Methodologically, it draws on two decades of multimethod research and knowledge transformation at the interface of applied linguistics and transdisciplinary action research on professional communication (Perrin, 2013). Empirically, it is based on large corpora of data collected in multilingual and multicultural workplaces. First, the article outlines transdisciplinary action research as a theoretical framework that enables researchers and practitioners to collaboratively develop sustainable solutions to real-world problems in which language use in general and text production in particular play a substantial role (Section 1). Then, Progression Analysis is explained as a multimethod approach to investigate text production practices in natural environments such as workplaces (Section 2). Examples from four domains (education, finance, translation, and journalism) illustrate what value transdisciplinary collaboration between academic researchers and practitioners can add to knowledge generation in applied linguistics (Section 3). For the case of journalism in increasingly global contexts, in-depth analyses offer step-by-step understanding of the trajectory from a real-world problem to a sustainable solution (Section 4). The article concludes by suggesting empirically-based measures for research that contribute to the development of both theory and practice in applied linguistics (Section 5).
Keywords: transdisciplinarity, education, translation, journalism, finance
Article outline
  • 1.Applied linguistics and transdisciplinarity
  • 2.The multi-method approach of Progression Analysis
    • 2.1Ethnographic observation and interviews
    • 2.2Computer recording
    • 2.3Cue-based retrospective verbal protocol
  • 3.Examples from four domains of writing
    • 3.1 myMoment: Tracking writing behavior to improve teacher education
    • 3.2Nationalbank: Analyzing financial analysts’ recommendations for investors
    • 3.3Capturing Translation Processes: Revealing translators’ use of resources
    • 3.4Idée suisse: Investigating collaborative and multimodal newswriting
  • 4.An exemplary trajectory from the problem to the solution
    • 4.1The collaborative text production practices
    • 4.2The strategies beyond situated activity
    • 4.3The emerging solution
  • 5.Conclusion: Mediating the relationship between disciplines and real-life domains
    • 5.1The trans- measures
    • 5.2The action measures
    • 5.3The research measures
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 12 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00013.per
References (66)
References
Agar, M. H. (2010). On the ethnographic part of the mix. A multi-genre tale of the field. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 286–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arber, A. (1964). The mind and the eye. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice. Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Bergman, M. M., Eberle, T. S., Flick, U., Förster, T., Horber, E., Maeder, C., … Widmer, J. (2010). A statement on the meaning, quality assessment, and teaching of qualitative research methods. Bern: Swiss Academy for Humanities and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. H. (2015). Transdisciplinarity. A review of its origins, development, and current issues. Journal of Research Practice, 11(1).Google Scholar
Brunsson, N. (2002). The organization of hypocrisy. Talk, decisions and actions in organizations (2nd ed.). Oslo: Abstrakt forlag / Copenhagen Business School Press.Google Scholar
Burns, A. (2016). Action research. In J. D. Brown & C. Coombe (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to research in language teaching and learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cameron, D., Frazer, E., Rampton, B., & Richardson, K. (1992). Researching language. Issues of power and method. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Campbell, K. S. (1995). Coherence, continuity and cohesion. Theoretical foundations for document design. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, interdisciplinarity, and transdisciplinarity in health research, services, education, and policy. 1. Definitions, objectives, and evidence of effectiveness. Clinical Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351–364.Google Scholar
Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2016). Say more and be more coherent. How text elaboration and cohesion can increase writing quality. Journal of Writing Research, 7(3), 351–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, A. (2007). An introduction to applied linguistics. From practice to theory (2 ed.). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Souza, L. M. M. (2017). Epistemic diversity, lazy reason, and ethical translation in postcolonial contexts. The case of Indigenous educational policy in Brazil. In C. Kerfoot & K. Hyltenstam (Eds.), Entangled discourses. South-north orders of visibility (pp. 189–208). New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Denzin, N. K. (2010). Moments, mixed methods, and paradigm dialogs. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(419), 419–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehrensberger-Dow, M., & Perrin, D. (2009). Capturing translation processes to access metalinguistic awareness. Across Languages and Cultures, 10(2), 275–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Applying a newswriting research approach to translation. Target, 25(1), 77–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fürer, M. (2018). Modeling, scaling and sequencing writing phases of Swiss television journalists. (PhD dissertation), University of Bern, Bern.Google Scholar
Gibbons, M. (1994). The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Gnach, A., Wiesner, E., Bertschi-Kaufmann, A., & Perrin, D. (2007). Children’s writing processes when using computers. Insights based on combining analyses of product and process. Research in Comparative and International Education, 2(1), 13–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gravengaard, G. (2018). Transforming knowledge. Cooperation with journalism’s stakeholders. In C. Cotter & D. Perrin (Eds.), Handbook of language and media (pp. 489–504). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Guiso, L., & Viviano, E. (2013). How much can financial literacy help? Review of finance, 19(4), 1347–1382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guo, Y., & Beckett, G. H. (2007). The hegemony of English as global language. Reclaiming local knowledge and culture in China. Convergence, 40(1–2), 117–132.Google Scholar
Gustavsen, B. (2006). Theory and practice. The mediating discourse Handbook of action research (pp. 17–26). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Habermas, J. (1973). Theory and practice. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Hammersley, M. (2004). Action research. A contradiction in terms? Oxford Review of Education, 30(2), 165–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harcup, T. (2012). Questioning the ‘bleeding obvious’. What’s the point of researching journalism? Journalism, 13(1), 21–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirsch Hadorn, G., Biber-Klemm, S., Grossenbacher-Mansuy, W., Hoffmann-Riem, H., Joyce, D., Pohl, C., … Zemp, E. (2008). The emergence of transdisciplinarity as a form of research. In H. Hoffmann-Riem, S. Biber-Klemm, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, G. Hirsch Hadorn, D. Joye, C. Pohl, U. Wiesmann & E. Zemp (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 19–39). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jantsch, E. (1970). Inter- and transdisciplinary university. Systems approach to education and innovation. Policy Sciences, 1(4), 403–428. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jones, D., & Stubbe, M. (2004). Communication and the reflective practitioner. A shared perspective from sociolinguistics and organisational communication. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 185–211. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kemmis, S. (1988). Action research. In J. P. Keeves (Ed.), Educational research methodology and measurement. An international handbook (pp. 42–49). Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Klein, J. T. (2008). Education. In H. Hoffmann-Riem, S. Biber-Klemm, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, G. Hirsch Hadorn, D. Joye, C. Pohl, U. Wiesmann & E. Zemp (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 399–410). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kramsch, C. (2015). Applied linguistics. A theory of the practice. Applied Linguistics, 36(4), 454–465. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kühl, S. (2008). Coaching und Supervision. Zur personenorientierten Beratung in Organisationen. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
Kumaravadivelu, B. (2016). The decolonial option in English teaching: Can the subaltern act? TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 66–85. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leavy, P. (2011). Essentials of transdisciplinary research. Using problemcentered methodologies. Walnut Creek: Left Coast.Google Scholar
Loughran, T., & McDonald, B. D. (2014). Measuring readability in financial disclosures. Journal of Finance, 69(4), 1643–1671. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Makoni, S. (2003). Review of A Davies, An introduction to applied linguistics, From practice to theory, and A Pennycook, Critical applied linguistics, A critical introduction. Applied Linguistics, 24(1), 130–137.Google Scholar
Massey, G., & Ehrensberger-Dow, M. (2011). Technical and instrumental competence in the translator’s workplace. Using process research to identify educational and ergonomic needs. ILCEA Revue, (14). [URL]. DOI logo
Matsuhashi, A. (1987). Revising the text and altering the plan. In A. Matsuhashi (Ed.), Writing in real time. Modeling text production processes (pp. 197–223). Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
McNamara, T. (2010). Personal communication, Brisbane, 2010–07–05.Google Scholar
Morales, M. M. (2017). Creating the transdisciplinary individual. Guiding principles rooted in studio pedagogy. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 6(1), 28–42.Google Scholar
Padmanabhan, M. (2018). Introduction. Transdisciplinarity for sustainability. In M. Padmanabhan (Ed.), Transdisciplinary research and sustainability. Collaboration, innovation and transformation (pp. 1–32). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Palmieri, R., Perrin, D., & Whitehouse, M. (2018). Introduction: The pragmatics of financial communication. Part 1: From sources to the public sphere. International Journal of Business Communication, 54(4), 127–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pascale, R. T., Sternin, J., & Sternin, M. (2010). The power of positive deviance. How unlikely innovators solve the world’s toughest problems. Boston: Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
Pasmore, W. (2006). Action reserach in the workplace. The socio-technical perspective Handbook of action research (pp. 38–48). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2010). Language as a local practice. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, D. (2003). Progression Analysis (PA). Investigating writing strategies at the workplace. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(6), 907–921. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Language policy, tacit knowledge, and institutional learning. The case of the Swiss national broadcast company. Current Issues in Language Planning, 4(2), 331–348. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). The linguistics of newswriting. Amsterdam et al.: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Perrin, D., & Wildi, M. (2012). Modeling writing phases. In M. Torrance, D. Alamargot, M. Castello, F. Ganier, O. Kruse, A. Mangen, L. Tolchinsky & L. Van Waes (Eds.), Learning to write effectively. Current trends in European research (pp. 395–398). Bingley: Emerald. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pohl, C., Kerkhoff, L., Hirsch Hadorn, G., & Bammer, G. (2008). Integration. In H. Hoffmann-Riem, S. Biber-Klemm, W. Grossenbacher-Mansuy, G. Hirsch Hadorn, D. Joye, C. Pohl, U. Wiesmann & E. Zemp (Eds.), Handbook of transdisciplinary research (pp. 411–424). Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. Garden City NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2006). Introduction. Inquiry and participation in search of a world worthy of human aspiration. In P. Reason & H. Bradbury (Eds.), Handbook of action research. Participative inquiry & practice (pp. 2–14). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Roberts, C. (1997). “There’s nothing so practical as some good theories”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 66–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rooney, P. (2011). The marginalization of feminist epistemology and what that reveals about epistemology ‘proper’. In H. E. Grasswick (Ed.), Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science. Power in knowledge (pp. 3–24). Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scholz, R. W., & Steiner, G. (2015). The real type and ideal type of transdisciplinary processes. Part II. What constraints and obstacles do we meet in practice? Sustainability Science, 101, 653–671. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, R., Scollon, S. W., & Jones, R. H. (2012). Intercultural Communication. A Discourse Approach (3 ed.). Cambridge: Wiley.Google Scholar
Severinson-Eklundh, K., & Kollberg, P. (1996). Computer tools for tracing the writing process. From keystroke records to S-notation. In G. Rijlaarsdam, H. Van den Bergh & M. Couzijn (Eds.), Current research in writing. Theories, models and methodology (pp. 526–541). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
Spreitzer, G. M., & Sonenshein, S. (2004). Toward the construct definition of positive deviance. American Behavioral Scientist, 47(6), 828–847. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stokols, D. (2006). Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38(1), 63–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Training the next generation of transdisciplinarians. In M. O’Rourke, S. Crowley, S. D. Eigenbrode & J. D. Wulfhorst (Eds.), Enhancing communication and collaboration in interdisciplinary research. Los Angeles: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, M. (2017). Financial analysts and their role in financial communication and investor relations. In A. V. Laskin (Ed.), Handbook of Financial Communication and Investor Relations (pp. 117–126). New York: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitehouse, M., & Perrin, D. (2015). Comprehensibility and comprehensiveness of financial analysts’ reports. Studies in Communication Sciences, 15(1), 111–119. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, H. G. (2001). Coming to terms with reality: Applied linguistics in perspective. AILA Review, 141, 2–17.Google Scholar
(2006). Applied linguistics and interdisciplinarity. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 93–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zampa, M., & Perrin, D. (2016). Arguing with oneself. The writing process as an argumentative soliloquy. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 5(1), 9–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Ryan, Jonathon
2024. The big global issues: Applied linguists and transdisciplinarity beyond SLA. International Journal of Applied Linguistics DOI logo
Haapanen, Lauri
2022. Problematising the restoration of trust through transparency: Focusing on quoting. Journalism 23:4 ► pp. 875 ff. DOI logo
Fujio, Misa
2021. Transdisciplinarity in Japanese business communication. AILA Review 34:1 ► pp. 79 ff. DOI logo
Fujio, Misa
2024. New Opportunities for Japanese Universities to Internationalize Communication Courses. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 54:2 ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Graf, Eva-Maria & Frédérick Dionne
2021. ‘Knowing that’, ‘knowing why’ and ‘knowing how’. AILA Review 34:1 ► pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
Matic, Igor, Gianni De Nardi & Felix Steiner
2021. Analysing and optimising Informed Consent in cooperation with ethics committees and medical researchers. AILA Review 34:1 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo
Merminod, Gilles
2020. Narrative analysis applied to text production. AILA Review 33 ► pp. 104 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.