Scarica investigation specialized discourse e più Sintesi del corso in PDF di Lingua Inglese solo su Docsity!
Investigating Specialized Discourse Interest in specialized discourse dates back to the early decades of linguistic investigation. In 1920-1930 the scholars of the Prague school looked at the “functional style” which characterises scientific and technical discourse. Firstly they had a conservative approach (they used to separate this discourse from everyday life because it was at a lower level). They gave a difference between specialized and general discourse: there are differences at all levels and they manifest in different ways both quantitatively and qualitatively. Studies on the concept of register tried to identify the morphosyntactic, lexical and stylistic features that characterise specialized discourse. The transition from an uncontextual view of language (Chomskyan) to the view of it as a flexible means of communication employed in different situations placed the study of specialized discourse. These studies led to several taxonomies and typologies focusing on the link between the receiver and the type of communicative or social relationships established, while highlighting the syncronic varieties shaped by geographic, social or situational factors. Register analysis turned its attention to the autonomy of specialized discourse compared to general language and to the description of any feature that diverges from common language. On the other hand it has also helped to shift the researchers focus from a chiefly statistical-quantitative to a qualitative one, which takes into account also the discourse in which the peculiarities of specialized texts are embedded. Many times in linguistic investigationphenomena that were thought to be distinctive of specialized discourse turned out not to be so or often linguists have assigned to specialized discourse features that do not qualify the mas subsystems but as varieties stemming from other factors within their sociolinguistic setting. (ex. Omission of contracted forms p.19) it is important to make no confusion between the distinctive element of SD and features due to other factors. However it is difficult to attribute a linguistic peculiarity to a single originating factor because the communicative situation combines several contextual factors; this has led to the identification of a textual genre for each specialized language in order to distinguish different genres within a specialized language. (tabella pagina 20) The issue of terminology An important aspect of specialized discourse is the term used to define its object. The choice of terminology is central because of the close link between term and referent which also reflects different ways of looking at language from a theoretical standpoint. Sometimes it has been compared to “restricted code” but the two terms are not interchangeable because specialized discourse exploits the language code in a far more creative and varied way. The term “special language” was used but it denotes languages with special rules and symbols deviating from a general language. (ex. Code Q for telecommunication sectors but is non-linguistic). Therefore this term can’t be used because SD is distinguished from general language just fot its quantitatively- greater and pragmatically more specific use of such conventions. The term “microlanguage” is also inappropriate because it refers to a microcosm lacking the expressive richness of standard language. We use the term Specialized discourse because it reflects the specialist use of a language in contexts which are tipical of specialized community, stretching across the academic, professional and technical areas of knowledge and practice. This perspective stresses the type of user, the domain of use and the special application of language in that setting, three factors necessary for specialized discourse to develop. Halliday, Gregory and Carrol classify all registers according to three parameters: mode, tenor and field and subordinate them to its topic. However the choice of a SD is not determined just by its topic, many times the topic is the same but it is expressed in different ways (pag24) depending on the speaker. The multi-dimensional nature of specialized discourse There is a clear distinction between different specialized languages. Specific use does not necessarily imply the presence of exclusive rules but it calls for appropriate analytical tools and caution is needed whenever the features observed in one specialized language are extended to the others. There is a distinction to be made that cuts across each specialized language determining its level of specialisation. The presence of a
specialist does not implicate the use of a SD. There are three different situations in which a specialist may address a topic relating to his profession. A- when the expert adresses other specialists to debate issues within his disciplinary field. he can use a specialized discourse if the addresses share the same amount of knowledge. B- when specialists address non-specialist to explain notions pertaining to their discipline. The meaning of specialized lexis is illustrated whenever it ocurs for the first time. (ex. Academic textbooks) C- when a specialist provides information of a technical nature mainly through everyday lexis. The purpose is to reach out a wider audience. These three situations lend to three levels of specificity in language use called by Widdowson scientific expostition (A), scientific instruction (B) and scientific journalism (C). Only the first two involve a truly specialist use of language. Some authors talk about a fourth level, the formalisation or condensation into formulae. However this level relies on non-verbal language. The constant presence of non-verbal elements in specialized texts led Widdowson to speculate that they form the deep stucture of such texts, on the assumption that they are universal and independent of any single language. It is difficult to accept this view (pagina 28 schema) General features of specialized discourse There are two significant contributions to the understanding of specialized discourse. Hoffmann provides a long list of the desirable qualities of specialized discourse in eleven points:
- Exactitude, simplicity and clarity
- Objectivity
- Abstractness
- Generalization
- Density of information
- Brevity or laconism
- Emotional neutrality
- Unambiguousness
- Impersonality
- Logical consistency
- Use of defined technical terms, symbols and figures. This list offers a concise overview of the different points highlighted by various scholars. Not all criteria are applicable to all specialized languages, there are some inconsistencies: the need for clarity may conflict with simplicity etc. and Hoffmann never clarified which criteria become dominant in a situation of conflict. The issue is taken up by Sager who hypothesise three main criteria governing the choices made in specialized discourse based on the model of Weaver and Shannon’s linguistic theory. The three criteria are: economy, precision and appropriateness. THey are considerated interdependent, the maximum communicative effectiveness is achieved when all the three are satisfied. If a conflict arises between the first two, the third become decisive because it is seen as the measure of the effectiveness of the intention as it is expressed and understood in a message and at the same time it arbitrates between precision and economy. CHAPTER 2 The chapter analyses the main lexical features of specialized discourse.
Conservatism One of the main principles of scientists in 17/18 century was to redefine specialized concepts with new ones to achieve a greater monoreferentiality. This is not a characteristic of all the fields of knowledge. Sometimes there is the fear that new terms may led to ambiguity, old formulae are preferred because of their century-old history and highly codified universally accepted interpretations. This happens in legal language where there is a reverence for tradition due to its close link with the ancient practice of using special formulae. Conservatism is also a characteristic of business language where some terms have not been replaced because their meaning is crystallised. Reforming legal discourse Legal discourse has often been criticised for its “prolixity, tautologies” (Bacon) or “extreme unintelligibility” (Bentham) and even in literary works that often convey a negative view of legal argumentation. Lawyers have been criticized also in many famous works. (esempi pagina 42, Utopia di More and Gulliver’s travels). The need for reform in legal language is due to the interpretative difficulties of statues and circulars which target non only specialists but also general public. In the 1970s this need gave rise in the United States to the Plain English Movement , whose efforts to obtain a reform in legal language convinced the president Jimmy Carter to issue guidelines for the use of “clear and simple English” in all governments regulations and then also in public and private organisations (banks etc). Several guidelines have been drawn up to make public documents easy to read and interpret. But in the legal language changes have been few and far between, archaic forms survived because the standardized formulae are seen as a convenient smokescreen for lawmakers but it is also though that it is because more conservatism leads to more precision that means that people won’t have to go to court to resolve problems in contracts. Another more ideological reason is due to the preference of lawyers for obscure language in order to have more power over ordinary citizens, relying on exclusive access to the significance of laws etc. Ambiguity in specialized discourse Surveys of the literature on specialized discourse have permitted to identify the main criteria which influence the creation of specific terminology but has also highlighted some exceptions to those principles. For example for monoreferentiality; in many cases there is some ambiguity or polysemy that are sometimes a case but sometimes planned by the author that is against the monoreferential type of language because of its excessive rigidness. This linguistic view, called methodological, is for example the one of Keynes, that says that formalized language can’t be used for theoretical matters because the univocal reference of a term don’t permit to give words different meanings in different contexts. So this language can be used just in those disciplines in which theoretical discussion does not call for multiple definitions of the concepts they employ. The continuous conceptual changes require a more flexible expressive system allowing for a constant redefinition. That is why Keynes accused the symbolic-mathematic language of causing confusion. The confusion does not derive from the specialized discourse that is typical of the positivistic sciences but from the fact that it is used for a science that is non positivistic, as Economics. The matter is to divide sciences into exact and moral ones. Keynes, in his choice of everyday language, adopts the tripartite division of Malthus of language in three types of language each following the three main research fields: mathematical sciences, natural sciences and moral sciences. In the latter the use a person makes of a term determines the meaning that he attributes to it, this “nominal” definition confers the author’s personal value of the term, which is then to be adopted by the interlocutor to interpret the text. It is also important for the author to use his terms in a consistent way, using a clear redefinition throughout the whole text. Imprecision in specialized discourse Sometimes even specialized discourse is characterized by imprecision. This is present above all in legal language, where terms are to a certain extent referentially fuzzy, in particular, many times adjectives can be interpret in a subjective, if not arbitrary, way.
Redundancy in specialized discourse Some specialized languages are redundant, due to the superfluous use of some lexical items, violating in this way the principle of conciseness. This happens above all in legal language (for examples the use of two interchangeable terms for the same concept as false and untrue ) in some cases the two terms are coupled from two different languages however sometimes the lexical doubling involves the same one. Another case of redundancy is the repetition of a concept through its negated opposite, as in the expression within and not exceeding two months. As Marita Gustafsson says, English is a language with a lot of binomials above all in legal language, sometimes it is for the sake of precision but sometimes doubling-up serves for no specific purpose. Sometimes the reason is diachronic: words that now are synonymous could be semantically distinct in the past. Lexical doubling in the past was very common in tautological titles because it also functions as an enhancer of perlocutory force. “to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth” this is an example of redundancy in legal language that is also very common nowadays. Semantic instability Another important feature, but not always present, is the stability of meaning. Terms undergo many semantic trasformations due to cultural innovation and evolving social usage and each variation in the meaning does not always entail variation in its form. (example word purchase. Past: the acquisition of something through forse Present: acquisition by payment) Sometimes we can understand when the change occurred but that is not always possible. The presence of new meanings which can eventually replace existing ones may lead to ambiguity, because the two may overlap in actual use. The relationship with general language Semantic evolution very often originates from the specialization of word meanings in the general language. The specialization of words borrowed from everyday language was very intense during the 17th^ and 18tj centuries, when rapid technological and scientific developments made it necessary to establish specific lexis from separate disciplines and phenomena. It also happened that the specialization process has produced new lexemes alongside existing ones which are no longer appropriate. (example healing, treatment and therapy) For increased referential specialization and terminological contrast with general language, the preferred option is to use Latin or Greek. Hughes, identifies five generation of borrowings from classical languages.
- The first phase (from the roman occupation of England) chiefly concerned Latin and his influence.
- The second phase (6-7th) above all religious terminology.
- The third phase of classical borrowings (Renaissance) For Hughes the classical borrowings of the last two centuries belong to a fifth phase, as they preserve their original inflection and spelling to the point of appearing perfectly “foreign” to native English speakers. These borrowings are also likely to agglutinate, ex. Otorhinolaryngolory. Many classical-rooted terms have produced hybrid prefixes and suffixes that are widely used in specialized languages (kilo, auto, mega) within this category there is a group of so called combining forms that are combinable, in fact their union produces compounds. Metaphor in specialized discourse Another way to create terms from general language in specialized discourse is metaphorization. It is important especially for the purpose of catachresis (the putting of new senses into old words) that has got a lot of advantages: -terminological transparency: produced by referring new concepts to pre-existing items within the interlocutor’s semantic repertoire.
Many times the omission is that of articles or prepositions in order to make the text more compact. (ex. Italian manuals) Expressive conciseness Apart from the omission of phrasal elements, there are other linguistic devices which make the sentence denser. These cases, in specialized texts, do not always follow rules restricted to specialized languages but are also present in general language. We will study this case: linguistic strategies of English in specialized texts used to make the sentence lighter, used also in general language. One is the use of adjectives obtained by means of affixation to substitute relative clauses. (ex. Workable metal= metal which can be worked). Prefixes and suffixes usually have got a precise semantic value that led the decoder to interpret their communicative function. Another example is the omission of the subject and auxiliary pf a passive form (pieces of iron left in the rain become rusty= pieces of iron which are left in the rain become rusty). Leggere tutti esempi (ex.p. 69) Premodification In the process of relative clause reduction we can see a frequent switch from postmodification to premodification, above all in English where the right-to-left construction shortens sentences and makes the phrase especially dense and where the syntactic rules allow several adjectival uses of phrasal elements. An aspect of the right-to-left construction is nominal adjectivation: the use of a noun to specify another with an adjectival function, this specification can cover such features as the material of which an item is made (ferrite core, paper tape), its use ect. Often, compounds made of two nouns became subsequently one word; this is a feature that occurs more frequently in specialized languages with longer compounds. Specialists prefer to use nominal adjectivation because it makes exposition denser and attaches great semantic weight to the compound. This is showed by the preference of using attributive nouns rather than adjectives. (ex. Gravity anomaly) As Herzog’s analysis confirms the maximum items that a compound can comprise is 6, due to the human mind’s limited capacity and also to the major interpretative challenge in decoding a long compound. The decodification of a word based on this division: (((block fill.in) ( data control)) process) is due not only to syntactic rules but also on the personal knowledge of the semantic value of each word and on the knowledge of the topic. Ex small car factory can be interpret in two ways, we use the hyphen (-) to avoid ambiguities. Premodification, despite its potential for ambiguity, is very common in SD because the transition from post to premodification permits the creation of complex sentences, shorter and more compact. Moreover ambiguity many times is subjective, it’s often apparent rather than real. Another advantage is its potential for concept formation, the combination of two or more words often creates new concepts, adding new meaning and new uses. Nominalization Another common syntactic phenomenon of different specialized languages is nominalization, that is the use of a noun instead of a verb to convey concepts relating to actions or processes, the so called “grammatical metaphor”. The preference for nominalized forms leads to higher nominal density in specialized texts, in which there is the 44% of words that are nouns. Despite of this nominalization is present also in general language. The greater use of nominalization is not just due to the need for greater conciseness because sometimes there is a clear preference for nominalization even if using just the verb allows to have fewer lexical items. Moreover by favouring the reintroduction of concepts in thematic position it allows an easier flow of information from new to given, facilitating text development and greater cohesion. (es. Pag 79) Commenting on the nominalization process observed in Darwin’s Origin of species, Halliday identified that using nominalization gives the opportunity to confer greater objectivity to the author’s view. Bhatia, in dealing with legal discourse, has found that the pervasiveness of nominalization leads to a loss of verbal value, infact the verb often is weakened and functions as copula. The preferred verb in this cases is to be,
that is the one used as linkage between nominal and adjectival phrases, which in turn derive form syntactic transformation of verbs with a strong semantic content. Non copulative verbs are often replaced by adjectival forms joined by a copulative verb, there is an analogy found by Gerbert with this structure and equations, as in these latter the two parts of a phrase are interchangeable. Lexical density One consequence of frequent nominalization and other premodifying devices is increased lexical density. Lexical density is high in written text where the discourse is planned carefully and with less redundancy. A style closer to spoken language would make the text less compact. (pagina 82 es) Sentence complexity One consequence of nominalization is the simplification of the surface structure of sentences minimized into simple patterns of the type NOUN PHRASE+ VERB+ NOUN PHRASE, where noun phrases are very complex and verb is made of a copulative verb. This means that specialized languages are simpler in the surface structure but the lexical density makes interpretation more difficult. English specialized languages usually avoid subordination (ex. In Butler’s specialized corpus subordinate clauses just 25%) and prefer coordination as we can see by many studies but this does not mean that texts are simple. Instead sentences have usually a high number of non-finite forms. (ex pag. 84) Sentence length Another features that complicates comprehension of specialized discourse is sentence length. Sentences are longer than in general language above all in legal texts due to the high number of items required to minimize ambiguity in fact each mention is supported by specification that clarify its identity. (appendix 2 example page 85) Use of verb tenses Among others specialist Barber has found a prevalence of verb tenses in his corpus of English scientific texts, above all of ten tenses:
- Present simple active
- Present simple passive
- Future simple active
- Present perfect passive
- Present perfect active
- Past simple active
- Past simple passive
- Future simple passive
- Present progressive active
- Imperative The present indicative tense is the most present in specialized texts even if it is important to remember that the text on which data are base is from Barber’s corpus, that contains scientific texts where there is a high number of description, observation etc. The high use of present is due to the text’s communicative purpose. The use of different verb tenses, as found by Lackstom, Selinker and Trimble, varies according to the degree of generality attributed by authors to the phenomena considered. When generality is high it is better to use simple present, while present perfect when generality is low. The past is also used whenever a single operation in the past is set against a state of permanent use. L,S and T assumpted that verb forms are
framework and helps in increasing textual cohesion. It is very common in common language but not so much in specialized texts above all in legal texts where it is substitute with repetition because there is the need for maximum clarity. However often there is the excessive use of lexical repetition even when it is not necessary, for example when the text employs anaphorical referential elements. (ex. Pag.105) This happens above all in legal language. Many times textual items are used in SD to clarify or specify the relationship between parts of a sentence or to illustrate textual organization. (ex.pag.107) Use of conjunctions Conjunctions are used to add cohesion but also for a pragmatic function which clarifies the purpose of the sentence that follows. For example after on the other hand, however one expects a sentence semantically opposed to the previous one etc.This is used in legal language, that strongly emphasizes the pragmatic function of connectives by making meaning more transparent through inclusion in the surface form of a lexeme denoting their illocutionary value. (ex.pag.108) Thematic sequence Some studies of specialized discourse focus on the thematic structure: the sequence of thematic items (introducing topic or theme) and rhematic items (containing what is said about the theme). This division overlaps with the distinction between given (an item of info known to the addressee) and new (info that is not found in the preceding context) The given often is the theme that in unmarked sentences is generally their topic and occurs initially. Each new theme refers back to the previous rheme, this makes the text cohesive and coherent. Text genres There is usually a close link between the type of specialized text and its structure which in turn implies a number of correlations between the conceptual, rhetorical and linguistic features of the text type itself. Genre provides not only the conventional framework but also affects all the other textual features and constrains their conceptual and rhetorical development that determines the linguistic choices made, moreover the conventional use of genres create expectations among the audience. IN the years, different text types have arisen, in 1600/1700 there was a growth of scientific newspapers and experimental essays, and every year new text types are added to the list. One of the latest is the executive summary, where the main points required for decision making are written, used in the economic world where time needs to be economized. Another text form is the abstract(the summary of an article published in a journal or a paper presented at a conference), that provides the reader with a short summary that shows whether a topic is relevant and worth the time required to read the whole article. This type of texts permit to save time. Specialists can learn how to follow norms for each type of texts through training and in specialized texts such conditions are followed very closely. An example is the textual formation of English legal texts, nowadays it is more common to divide a contract into numbered sections with more punctuation and spaces between sections but in many instances the same devices are omitted or occur occasionally. This is due to a custom established before the invention of printing: writing across each line from margin to margin, without any punctuation , to avoid alterations of the original meaning. As we can see in the appendix of this book, its second text followed the standard layout of English which separates different section in separate blocks. This is typical of english legal documents and differs from general language and other texts where everything is divided into paragraphs. The paragraph is not only a conceptual unit but performs a pragmatic function. Physical layout is important because it improves comprehension of textual organization and makes the meaning easier to decode. Trimble says that many times in SD the conceptual and physical dimension don’t match for example often the main point is expressed in one paragraph and investigated in the following one. Van Dijk showed that different textual genres usually follow a codified pattern: INTRODUCTION-PROBLEM-EXPERIMENT-CONCLUSIONS. The pattern of course changes depending on the text type and many times even a section can be divided into other sections. The quality of textual
organization facilitates comprehension but also the pragmatic function of each section: informative, evaluative etc. --------- The close interrelation between epistemological and textual aspects is a common trait of SD and makes its realization highly codified.----- Textual Organisation Studies on textual organization highlight different parts and their contribution to the overall pattern. Swales analyses the different parts of scientific articles and identifies a general structure of their introductory section that he calls CARS (Create a Research Space) Model. (schema pagina 118) Different analysts have then studied the introduction section and have created their analytical structures. Hepworth for example in his one highlighs the binary pattern on which the text is mainly based (pagina 119 schema) Speech acts Being able to profile certain speech acts parts of a text, specialized or not, is not simple; language often serves different purposes and any attempt to assign a single illocutionary meaning to a text is an unacceptable simplification. The range of speech acts is similar in S or NS texts but in legal texts there is the class of performatives that occurs more because in these ones the wording of text is crucial in fact the value of a legal act is based on the use of a specific formula. (ex. Wedding) Argumentative patterns In SD the argumentative pattern is very important, in fact to achieve the perlocutionary effect the text must be organized according to a compositional plan designed to serve a given thesis. The argumentative models can be different even if there is a prevalent structure followed in SD. (pagina 131) This structure is made of different stages: after analyzing and observing data (D), the author identifies the problem (P), suggests a solution (S), through logical argumentation (A) supported by adequate proof(W) he reaches a conclusion (C) and affirms it with a certain degree of certainty. This model allows for a certain degree of subjectivity. In every science the role of evidence depends on the use of language, in fact phenomena acquire fact-like status by consensus and consensus is achieved by rhetorical persuasion. Authors always use their linguistic skills to create consensus, often by weakening other theories presenting everything in a pro-aut-contra progression to take the reader to his own conclusions. The author presents other theories highlighting their logical inconsistency and inaccuracy. Criticism is a very important feature that can be expressed directly or indirectly with forms such as “someone, the majority” etc, the author sometimes appeals directly to the reader using the third person. Sometimes indeed he chooses not to mention him for fear that he might regard this as a threat to face. However the best writer is the one that don’t use the deontic modality (verbs like shall, will, should) but a neutral tone giving the reader the impression of not being conditioned at all. This means that a writer won’t use a deontic modality because it puts the reader under an obligation. The two modals used for this are can and must. The argumentative process consists of a process of reduction of uncertainty. (pagina 136) Linear structure and heuristic methods There is a close link between the author’s language and his heuristic method that we can see above all in the text’s drafting plan which is organized according to the discipline’s theoretical foundations. The emotive force of specialized texts SD is usually seen as objective text with limited emotional involvement because the author have to convince readers relying just on the evidences. This line has been followed for over the last four centuries, however, in the last years the persuasive element of argumentation in SD has been reconsidered. The aim of a SD therefore is to convince through demonstration but also through persuasive argumentation using also figurative and emotive language. An example can be Kenyes’ text where he uses a very harsh and polemic tone and even irony in order to have an immediate impact on the reader and to present his work in a figurative and connotative language as a reaction against the current theory. (p143) Moreover even if he
resources of the native tongue, either to give a specialized meaning to an existing word or to form a new one, or borrowing a similar term from a foreign language. In adopting the loan, the translator usually adapted the word that he was borrowing to the morphological features of the receiving language. Moreover, once a loan had been introduced, it was frequently used as a root from which further words could be formed by means of affixation.
- The opaqueness of language The use of latine forms was massive, although sometimes it was felt to be excessive and unjustified. Robert Recorde points out how people with a limited cultural background often misquote scientific terms because they find them too difficult to pronounce, understand and remember. Borrowers defend their practice by pointing out that the strangeness of loans only lasts for a short period, after which people become familiar with such terms. The writer is aware of the difficulties of interpretation that readers might meet when they encounter the new terms. Therefore he often tries to help in the form of paraphrase or synonym when they firs appear in the text. On other occasions the opaqueness of latinate forms is reduced by means of a glossary provided by the publisher at the end of the book whit an explanation of the new terms.
- The transparency of language The complex operation of creating a new terminology adopted other criteria, mainly based on the pragmatic principle of maximum transparency. The specialist created terms in such way that their form clearly reflected the concept to which it referred. These transparent terms were usually obtained by means of the juxtaposition of words already existing. This process of compounding was particularly favoured by the brevity of English words.
- The conciseness of language Sentences should be as concise ad possible with no space given to unnecessary details. The criteria of economy and directness of reference stand out conspicuously, with particular emphasis on the strict relationship that must exist between signans and signatum, which was to be established one-to-one. This principle of monoreferentiality was seen ad fundamental in specialize literature, as a strict relationship between word and referent would leave no possibility for connotation or other indirect meaning. That is why in several scientific treatises of this period we find a strong condemnation of metaphors, which were seen as deceitful devices. The eloquence is considered and unnecessary obstacle to clear and concise expression. The proposal made in 1664 to create a British Academy “to improve the English tongue, and particularly for philosophical purposes”. The latter proposal implied the use of languages other than English, either natural or artificial. Bacon suggested a language similar to Chinese in which “there are in use certain real characters, not nominal; characters which represent neither letters nor words, but things and notions”. This use of “real characters” would not only have the advantage of being more precise, but could also be employed at an international level.
- The evolution of the syntax of scientific English. Sentences are quite long, whit very lengthy noun phrases preceding and following the verb. Moreover, the verb started assuming the copular function usual in modern scientific English, where the verb merely links the very long nominal phrases coming before and after it. Each sentence was structurally simple, with few or no subordinate clauses, complying with the modern preference for coordination rather than subordination in sentence structure. There is also a preference for the use of nouns deriving from verbs.
The increase of use of nominalization was part of gradual tendency towards a loss of importance of the verb, compensated by a growth of importance of the noun. This process of nominalization enabled scientists to include more information in the same sentence and guaranteed a better flow of discourse. We can also find a tendency towards depersonalization, in fact, chose the more objective and impersonal style is typical of modern scientific texts. Cap VI: The origins of the experimental essay The experimental essay originated in the Early Modern English period as a result of a complex process of scientific evolution which determined the need for a new expository genre. The innovative characteristic of this new text type derived from the great importance attributed to the experimental process.
- Brevity One important characteristic of the experimental essay is shorter length compared with that of a treatise or a dialogue. The brevity of form is not meant to lead to an over-concise treatment of the subject. On the contrary, experiments are reported very fully, and even the slightest detail is described in order to explain the procedures followed but also all the equipment and the time required for each experiment. Other reason is to enable readers to understand the report clearly, to enable them to come to appropriate conclusion and also to repeat the same experiment in their own laboratories. This also permit the transformation of personal result into facts widely accepted by the scientific world.
- Lack of assertiveness There is no need for the author to arrive at define conclusions or to systematise the results obtained; the data are to be reported as they are observed without the writer being required to accompany them with hypotheses or comments.
- Perspicuity Authors should adopt a “philosophical” rather than a “rhetorical” style, that is a style which does not coincide with the traditional way of writing, typical of literary and philosophical works. Boyle: “rather clear and significant, than curiously adorned”. This is the reason why scientists condemn the use of metaphors. Boyle also condemns the habits that certain scientists have of using cryptic language so as not to make their discoveries comprehensible to their readers. He suggests a close relationship between the author’s clarity of language and his honesty behaviour. For example, he quotes alchemists, whom he accuses of using obscure language to mask the inaccuracies and unreliability of their principles.
- Simplicity of form Another feature of the language that guarantees maximum comprehension is the adoption of a plain style, which makes use of simple verb-forms and sentence-constructions. The voice commonly used is active, often putting the researcher in a thematic position and usually conferring on it the grammatical function of the subject. The active presence of the scientists is also used when the behaviour of the animal or object used in the experiment is being described in order to underline the fact that what is being narrated is not happening spontaneously but as a result of experimenter’s actions. On the contrary, the use of passive form is for those specific cases in which there are some unexpected results, in order to diminish the scientist’s responsibility. The shift from the active to the passive voice also underlines the passing from the active role of narration of events to the description of procedures that are becoming standardized in the experimenter’s repertoire or in that of scientists in general.
- Objectivity
Compounds often include more than two words, and group of three, four and even five words. Longer groups are not very common, as they may represent great difficult of comprehension. They are often simplified by means of a process of ellipsis ex. Alphabetic character string > alphabetic string. Another way of making compounds shorter is the blending of the various elements into single words. Ex. Bit
binary digit. The derivation of words from a colloquial register represent a distinguishing trait of the language of computer science.
- Acronymy and abbreviation The need to make group of words as concise as possible leads the computer specialists to create a great many acronyms. ASCII for American standard code for information interchange. Besides being shorter acronyms are also sometimes devised in such wat as to suggest a certain meaning or arouse special interest. Ex. BASIC standing for “beginners all-purpose symbolic instruction code” which is conceived so as to make the simplicity of the computer language immediately evident. Sometimes extra letters are used. Such extra letters are usually inserted so as to make acronym resemble a real word ex. ALGOL -> ALGOLrithmic language. In other cases the extra letters have the function of enabling the speaker to pronounce them more easily. Ex. COBOL -> Common Business Oriented language. Recent developments The analysis of recent terms used in the language of computer science testifies a far more limited number of loans from other language or other specialized languages. The use of derivation, in particular, of suffixation is more common. The most commonly used suffix is –ing, mainly used in the derivation of nouns from verbs to refer a particular process ex. Cyberizing. The tendency to make use of colloquial expressions is confirmed by the adoption of the suffix –ie, commonly employed to refer to newcomers to the field of computer science -> nettie. Among the prefixes, one of the most common is re-, denoting a repetition of a certain operation. Analogical derivation are also common ex. Off-line reader, a term coined on the semantic opposition between on and off. The process of derivation also makes use of combining forms. Ex internaut = one who explores or investigates. This term is transparent. An interesting example of abbreviation is cyber, from cybernetics. This word is frequently adopted as a combining form in the creation of new terms. Cyberchat, cybercrime ext. Another prefix is info-, but this one has lost popularity because could be considered inadequate for a precise reference, to computer science as it is not used exclusively in that field. Also because it’s is more traditional and not indicative of the innovativeness of this field. cap VIII: the language of popularisation The main factor that distinguishes a popularisation from a fully specialized text is the lack of discussion, in the former, of new scientific knowledge added to discipline’s conceptual base. The main criterion for distinguishing the two types of texts is the different audience targeted. Popularisation in fact addresses not an expert group within the discipline but an audience of non-specialitsts.
If we consider not only the audience but also the main purpose of the text we can distinguish two different levels of non-specialists texts: pedagogic texts and popularisations. Pedagogic text the former aim to provide students with the “secondary culture” expected among scholars in the discipline; specialized discourse is presented therefore in “disciplinary” terms, to equip the reader with the conceptual and terminological resources suited to the subject content; terminological features are addressed systematically, removing any ambiguity of the meaning of new expressions appearing in the discourse as a form of training for new specialists. Typical examples of such texts are undergraduate textbooks and instruction manuals. Popularisations popularizations target instead a wide reading public and deal with specialized topics in a language close to general discourse and to the layman’s everyday experience. The purpose here is chiefly informative and seeks to extend the reader’s knowledge rather than develop a secondary conceptual system. Typical forms of this type of discourse are popular scientific magazines, books published for a wide readership, videocassettes and specialized articles in daily newspapers. The illustration of process and phenomena is less technical. Popularisation and translation both of these involve the transformation of a source text in a derived text. The popularisation process is a kind of redrafting that does not alter the disciplinary content as much as its language, which needs to be remodelled to a suit a new target audience (with the use of metaphor, analogy ecc). Both process tend to produce an imperfect equivalence of the source text. Linguistic features of popularisation Halliday’s study of a text redrafted in a more concise and compact way, with far less lexical density, from a piece of legal writing. In this genre there is no explicit authorial reference, with the omission of such expressions as “I have called”, “I mean by this2 ecc. The lack of such expressions is no remarkable feature, however, because the prevalently informative nature of the genre implies less emphasis on the argumentative function. Definition in popularised texts The defining process is employed repeatedly in pedagogic texts because the author’s purpose is to illustrate systematically not only the conceptual but also the linguistic organisation within a given discipline. Terminological definition is not so pervasive in specialized discourse, where the meaning of certain expressions is taken for granted within the disciplinary community; definition is not very common even in popularisations, which involve a far more limited use of specialized lexis.
