Chapter 9
A corpus-based analysis of genre-specific multi-word combinations
Minutes in English and Spanish
English and Spanish minutes both contain two vocabulary sets, one that codifies the ‘field’ and belongs in a given content area, and another that codifies the discursive practices of the genre ‘minutes’. This paper sets out to explore which multi-word combinations can be identified as genre- and step-specific, and what correspondences can be identified across languages. The study draws on an English–Spanish comparable corpus of meeting minutes, tagged on the rhetorical level. A comparable corpus browser with a basic statistic feature has been used to obtain step subcorpora and WordSmith Tools was used to obtain n-grams within rhetorical steps in each language. N-grams were classified as genre-specific, step-specific, field-related, function-word combination or noise. Empirical findings show that for each rhetorical move, irrespective of text ‘field’, a number of n-grams have become readily associated in each of the languages. Since word choice is determined by genre-bound expectations and by context, selections across languages are not obvious and correspondences show different grams and number of grams.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Background
-
3.Material and method
- 3.1Corpus-based move analysis: The rhetorical structure of minutes of meetings
- 3.2Materials: The corpus
- 3.3N-grams
- 4.Results and discussion
- 4.1Discussion n-grams
- 4.1.1Discussion n-grams: English
- 4.1.2Discussion n-grams: Spanish
- 4.1.3Discussion n-grams: English–Spanish comparison
- 4.2Adjourn n-grams
- 4.2.1Adjourn n-grams: English
- 4.2.2Adjourn n-grams: Spanish
- 4.2.3Adjourn n-grams: English–Spanish comparison
- 4.3N-grams: Adjourn–Discussion comparison
- 5.Conclusion
-
Acknowledgements
-
Notes
-
References
-
Appendix
References (46)
References
Ahmad, Khurshid & Rogers, Margaret. 2001. Corpus linguistics and terminology extraction. In Handbook of Terminology Management, Vol. 2: Application-Oriented Terminology Management, Sue E. Wright & Budin Gerhard (eds), 725–760. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Altenberg, Bengt. 1998. On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In Phraseology: Theory, Analysis, and Applications, Anthony Paul Cowie (ed.), 101–122. Oxford: OUP.
Anthony, Laurence. 2014. AntConc (Version 3.4.3) [Computer Software]. Tokyo: Waseda University. <[URL]>
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.
Bhatia, Vijay K. 2004. Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London: Continuum.
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Biber, Douglas, Conrad, Susan & Cortes, Viviana. 2004.
If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics 25(3): 371–405.
Bowker, Janet. 2012. From ‘Communities of Practice’ to ‘Communities of Learning’: Interdiscursivity in Changing Corporate Priorities. In Researching Discourse in Business Genres, Paul Gillaerts, Elizabeth de Groot, Sylvain Dieltjens, Priscilla Heynderickx and Geert Jacobs (eds), 115–138. Bern: Peter Lang.
Bowker, Lynne. 2015. Terminology and translation. In Handbook of Terminology, Hendrik J. Kockaert & Frieda Steurs (eds), 304–323. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Connor, Ulla. 2000. Variation in rhetorical moves in grant proposals of US humanists and scientists. Text and Talk 20(1): 1–28.
Cortes, Viviana. 2004. Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes 23(4): 397–423.
Cortes, Viviana. 2013.
The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 12(1): 33–43.
Crossley, Scott. 2007. A chronotopic approach to genre analysis: An exploratory study. English for Specific Purposes 26(1): 4–24.
Ding, Huiling. 2007. Genre analysis of personal statements: Analysis of moves in application essays to medical and dental schools. English for Specific Purposes 26(3): 368–392.
Ebeling, Jarle & Ebeling, Signe Oksefjell. 2013. Patterns in Contrast [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 58]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Gries, Stefan T. 2008. Phraseology and linguistic theory. In Phraseology: An Interdisciplinary Perspective, Sylviane Granger & Fanny Meunier (eds), 3–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Handford, Michael. 2010. The Language of Business Meetings. Cambridge: CUP.
Henry, Alex & Roseberry, Robert L. 2001. A narrow-angled corpus analysis of moves and strategies of the genre: ‘Letter of application’. English for Specific Purposes 20(2): 153–167.
Hunston, Susan. 2002. Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: CUP.
Hyland, Ken. 2004. Genre and Second Language Writing. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, Ken. 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes 27(1): 4–21.
Kageura, Kyo. 2015. Terminology and Lexicography. In Handbook of Terminology, Hendrik J. Kockaert & Frieda Steurs (eds), 45–59. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kashiha, Hadi & Heng, Chan Swee. 2014. Structural analysis of lexical bundles in university lectures of politics and chemistry. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 3(1): 224–230.
Kwan, Becky S. C. 2006. The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics. English for Specific Purposes 25(1): 30–55.
Paltridge, Brian. 1994. Genre analysis and the identification of textual boundaries. Applied Linguistics 15(3): 288–299.
Rabadán, Rosa & Izquierdo, Marlén. 2012. Designing writing materials for the business English language class. In Intercultural Inspirations for Language Education: Spaces for Understanding, Ilona Semrádová (ed.), 46–55. Hradec Králové: University of Hradec Králové.
Rabadán, Rosa, Pizarro, Isabel & Izquierdo, Marlén. 2013a. Generador de actas de reuniones en lengua inglesa (GARE). <[URL]>
Rabadán, Rosa, Pizarro, Isabel & Izquierdo, Marlén. 2013b. C-GARE corpus <[URL]> (14 December 2015).
Samraj, Betty. 2014. Move structure. In Pragmatics of Discourse, Klaus P. Schneider & Anne Barron (eds), 385–406. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Scott, Mike. 2008. WordSmith tools (Version 5) [Computer Software]. Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software. <[URL]>
Swales, John M. 1981. Aspects of Article Introductions. Birmingham: The University of Aton, Language Studies Unit.
Swales, John M. 1990. Genre analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP.
Swales, John M. 2004. Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge: CUP.
Tardy, Christine M. & Swales, John M. 2014. Genre analysis. In Pragmatics of Discourse, Klaus P. Schneider & Anne Barron (eds), 165–188. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Wolfe, Joanna. 2006. Meeting minutes as a rhetorical genre: Discrepancies between professional writing textbooks and workplace practice tutorial. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 49(4): 354–364.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Rabadán, Rosa, Isabel Pizarro & Hugo Sanjurjo-González
Ramón, Noelia & Belén Labrador
2018.
Selling cheese online.
Terminology. International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Issues in Specialized Communication 24:2
► pp. 210 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 september 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.