Cover not available
Article In:
Language, Context and Text
Vol. 6:2 (2024) ► pp.304–334

Theme as point of departure in English and Spanish academic writing and casual conversation

Towards a generalisation

ORCID logo | Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Spain
This paper describes and compares the realisations, functions and interrelations of Theme as point of departure (POD), i.e. Theme stripped of any reference to “what the clause is about”, in two languages — English and Spanish — and two genres — academic writing and casual conversation. The ultimate goal is to find out which POD characteristics are (a) generalisable across both genres and both languages; (b) generalisable across both genres (but language-dependent); (c) generalisable across both languages (but genre specific); and (d) genre-specific and language-specific. Among other things, the contrastive analysis reveals that POD is highly determined by metafunctional interplay, PODs in casual conversation reflecting the interpersonally-driven nature of this genre and cross-linguistic contrasts reflecting different pressures of interpersonal meaning on textual organisation.
Keywords: academic writing, casual conversation, contrastive, English/Spanish, point of departure, systemic functional linguistics, texture, theme
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Data and methodology
  • 3.The view from below
  • 4.The view from above
  • 5.The view from roundabout
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Author queries
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (71)
References
Alarcos Llorach, Emilio. 1987. Estudios de gramática funcional del español (3rd edition). Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Andreau, Laura. 2020. Verbos derivados de saber y decir como marcadores discursivos en fragmentos descriptivos de la conversación coloquial. In Lucas Gagliardi, Dolores Álvarez Garriga & Lucía Zanfardini (coords.), Punto de encuentro: Estudios sobre el lenguaje, 211–232. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata.Google Scholar
Arús-Hita, Jorge. 2002a. A contrastive look at Theme as point of departure in English and Spanish academic writing. English Text Construction 15(1). 1–29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002b. Theme as point of departure in English and Spanish casual conversation: A contrastive study. Language, Context and Text 4(2). 197–226.Google Scholar
Arús-Hita, Jorge, Tom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady. 2019. Looking into Theme: three kinds of thematic meaning. Paper delivered at the 29th European systemic functional linguistics conference. Universidad Politécnica de Leiria, Portugal, 3–5 July.
Banks, David. 2008. The development of scientific writing. Linguistic features and historical context. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
. 2017. The extent to which the passive voice is used in the scientific journal article, 1985–2015. Functional Linguistics 4(12). 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, Tom. 2016. Phasal dynamism and the unfolding of meaning as text. In Ben Clarke & Jorge Arús-Hita (eds.), The dynamicity of communication below, around and above the clause, special issue of English Text Construction 9(1). 143–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 2014. A generic view of academic discourse. In John Flowerdew (ed.), Academic discourse, 31–49. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 2006. University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written genres. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bowen, Neil & Nathan Thomas. 2020. Manipulating texture and cohesion in academic writing: A keystroke logging study. Journal of Second Language Writing 501. 100773. DOI logo (26 December, 2023.)Google Scholar
Briz Gómez, Antonio. 2001. El español coloquial en la conversación. Barcelona: Ariel.Google Scholar
Camps, Ana & Monserrat Castelló. 2013. La escritura académica en la universidad. Revista de Docencia Universitaria 11(1). 17–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davies, Mark. 2004. BYU-BNC. (Based on the British National Corpus from Oxford University Press). [URL] (26 December, 2023.)
Diwakar Grandhi, Rama Satya. 2018. Every new beginning comes from some other beginning’s end. Weblog. [URL] (11 April, 2024.)
Eggins, Suzanne & Diana Slade. 1997. Analysing casual conversation. London: Cassell.Google Scholar
Fang, Zhihui. 2021. Demystifying academic writing: Genres, moves, skills, and strategies. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferrari, Carolina. 2020. Metáforas gramaticales y tipos textuales en la conversación coloquial. In Lucas Gagliardi, Dolores Álvarez Garriga & Lucía Zanfardini (coords.), Punto de encuentro: Estudios sobre el lenguaje, 171–192. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata.Google Scholar
Flores Figueroa, Claudia. 2005. Análisis sistémico-funcional de la estructura de conversaciones en inglés y en español. MA thesis. Universidad de Chile.
Flowerdew, John. 2014. Academic discourse. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordillo-Alfonso, Adriana. 2017. La escritura científica: Una revisión temática. Signo y Pensamiento 36(71). 54–66.Google Scholar
Granato, Luisa. 2020. Introducción a la interacción verbal. In Lucas Gagliardi, Dolores Álvarez Garriga & Lucía Zanfardini (coords.), Punto de encuentro: Estudios sobre el lenguaje, 67–94. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata.Google Scholar
Granato, Luisa & Guillermina Piatti. 2010. Some remarks on thematic and information structure in casual conversation. In Proceedings of V coloquio argentino de la IADA, 157–168. La Plata, Argentina.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 1985. An introduction to functional grammar (1st edition). London: Arnold.Google Scholar
1996. On grammar and grammatics. In Ruqaiya Hasan, Carmel Cloran & David Butt (eds.), Functional descriptions: Theory into practice, 1–38. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & J. R. Martin. 2003. Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2009. Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken & Marina Bondi (eds.). 2006. Academic discourse across disciplines [ Linguistic insights. Studies in linguistics and communication, vol. 42]. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ignatieva, Natalia. 2008. Descripción sistémico-funcional de la escritura académica estudiantil en español. Núcleo 251. 173–195.Google Scholar
Ignatieva, Natalia, Daniel Rodríguez Vergara, Victoria Zamudio Jasso & Guillermo Jiménez Sánchez. 2023. ¿Cómo escriben los estudiantes universitarios en las humanidades? Un estudio sistémico funcional de la escritura académica. Mexico: UNAM.Google Scholar
Knight, Naomi K. 2010. Laughing our bonds off: Conversational humour in relation to affiliation. PhD dissertation. University of Sydney, Australia.
Laboratorio de Lingüística Informática. 1992. CORLEC, Corpus Oral de Referencia del Español Contemporáneo. Departamento de Lingüística, Lenguas Modernas, Lógica y Filosofía de la Ciencia, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.Google Scholar
Lavid, Julia, Jorge Arús-Hita & Juan R. Zamorano. 2010. Systemic functional grammar of Spanish: A contrastive study with English. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Leong, Alvin Ping. 2005. Talking themes: The thematic structure of talk. Discourse Studies 7(6). 701–732. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leong, Alvin Ping, Audrey Lin Lin Toh & Soo Fun Chin. 2018. Examining structure in scientific research articles: A study of thematic progression and thematic density. Written Communication 35(3). 286–314. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lucantonio, Damian. 2007. Developing diversity in oral communication. Bulletin of the University of Electro-Communications 20(1–2). 55–66.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 1992a. Theme, method of development and existentiality: The price of reply. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics 61. 147–184.Google Scholar
1992b. English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 1992. Interpreting the textual metafunction. In Martin Davies & Louise Ravelli (eds.), Advances in systemic linguistics: Recent theory and practice, 37–81. London & New York: Pinter.Google Scholar
1995. Lexicogrammatical cartography: English systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar
2004. Descriptive motives and generalisations. In Alice Caffarel, J. R. Martin & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen (eds.), Language typology: A functional perspective, 537–673. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. & Diana Slade. 2010. Analysing conversation. In Ruth Wodak, Barbara Johnstone & Paul Kerswill (eds.), The Sage handbook of sociolinguistics, 375–395. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore & Washington DC: SAGE.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony & Andrew Wilson. 2001. Corpus linguistics (2nd edition). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Montemayor-Borsinger, Ann. 2009. Tema: Una perspectiva funcional de la organización del discurso. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.Google Scholar
Moore, Nicholas. 2011. Modelling the flow of discourse in a corpus of written academic English. In Nicholas Groom (ed.), Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2011 Conference ‘Discourse and Corpus Linguistics’. [URL] (26 December, 2023.)
Moyano, Estela. 2016. Theme in English and Spanish: Different means of realisation for the same textual function. In Ben Clarke & Jorge Arús-Hita (eds.), The dynamicity of communication below, around and above the clause, special issue of English Text Construction 9(1). 190–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2021. La función de Tema en español: Sus medios de realización desde la perspectiva trinocular de la Lingüística Sistémico-Funcional. Revista Signos 56(106). 487–517. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Narbona Jiménez, Antonio. 2015. Sintaxis del español coloquial. Sevilla: Editorial Universidad de Sevilla. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Grady, Gerard. 2016. Given/New: what do the terms refer to? A first (small) step. In Ben Clarke & Jorge Arús-Hita (eds.), The dynamicity of communication below, around and above the clause, special issue of English Text Construction 9(1). 9–32.Google Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni (ed.). 2008. Géneros académicos y géneros profesionales. Accesos discursivos para saber y hacer. Valparaíso: Ediciones Universitarias de Valparaíso.Google Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni & Gina Burdiles (eds.). 2015. Leer y Escribir en contextos académicos y profesionales: géneros, corpus y métodos. Santiago: Ariel.Google Scholar
Pérez-Guerra, Javier. 2021. Theme as a proxy for register categorisation. In Elena Seoane & Douglas Biber (eds.), Corpus-based approaches to register variation, 85–110. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piatti, Guillermina. 2020. Oralidad y sintaxis. In Lucas Gagliardi, Dolores Álvarez Garriga & Lucía Zanfardini (coords.), Punto de encuentro: Estudios sobre el lenguaje, 121–153. La Plata: Universidad Nacional de La Plata.Google Scholar
Placci, Graciela & Andrea Garófolo. 2015. Análisis del discurso académico desde una perspectiva sistémico-funcional: Una propuesta didáctica para cursos disciplinares en la universidad. In Actas del Congreso Nacional Cátedra UNESCO Subsede Rosario: La lectura y la escritura en las sociedades del siglo XXI. [URL] (26 December, 2023.)
Quiroz, Beatriz. 2018. Negotiating interpersonal meanings in Spanish: Reasoning about mood. Functions of Language 25(1) (Special Issue on Interpersonal Meaning). 130–158.Google Scholar
Rodríguez Medina, María Jesús. 2002. Los anglicismos de frecuencia sintácticos en español: estudio empírico. RAEL. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 149–170.Google Scholar
Salager-Meyer, F., M. Ángeles Alcaraz Ariza & Nahirana Zambrano. 2003. The scimitar, the dagger and the glove: Intercultural differences in the rhetoric of criticism in Spanish, French and English medical discourse (1930–1995). English for Specific Purposes 221. 223–247. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silva-Corvalán, Carmen. 1981. The diffusion of Object-Verb agreement in Spanish. Papers in Romance 31. 163–176.Google Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne Marie. 2014. Systemic-functional approaches to discourse. In Klaus P. Schneider & Anne Barron (eds.), Pragmatics of discourse, 125–164. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slade, Diana. 1996. The texture of casual conversation in English. PhD dissertation. University of Sydney, Australia.
Taboada, María T. 2004. Building coherence and cohesion: Task-oriented dialogue in English and Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teich, Elke, Stefania Degaetano-Ortlieb, Peter Fankhauser, Hannah Kermes & Ekaterina Lapshinova-Koltunski. 2016. The linguistic construal of disciplinarity: A data-mining approach using register features. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67(7). 1668–1678. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Teruya, Kazuhiro. 2007. A systemic functional grammar of Japanese. London & New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Susan Thompson. 2009. Theme, subject and the unfolding of text. In Gail Forey and Geoff Thompson (eds.), Text type and texture, 45–69. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Valero-Garcés, Carmen. 1996. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes 15(4). 279–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Val.Es.Co. 1996[1994]. Corpus de Conversación Coloquial — Universidad de Valencia/ /Universidad de Alicante.Google Scholar
Vázquez, Graciela E. 2001. El discurso académico español: cuestiones preliminares de didactización a través de materiales multimedia y unidades didácticas para el autoaprendizaje. ELUA. Estudios de Lingüística, Anexo 11. 337–347. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ventola, Eija. 1979. The structure of casual conversation in English. Journal of Pragmatics 3(3–4). 267–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weil, Henri. 1844. De l’ordre des mots dans les langues anciennes comparées aux langues modernes. Paris: Didier Érudition.Google Scholar
Zárate Fabián, Mario Clemente. 2017. La escritura académica: Dificultades y necesidades en educación superior. Educación Superior 2(1). 46–54.Google Scholar