Introducción al Inglés con Fines Académicos. Lic. Prof. Adriana Fernández; Lic. Prof.

Maricel
Pierella

Introduction to Written and Spoken Discourse

(Summary for Academic Purposes only)

Discourse Analysis examines how stretches of language, considered in their full textual,
social and psychological context, become meaningful and unified for their users. It is of
great importance to language teachers because it draws attention to the skills needed to
achieve successful communication. Any type of language in use, language for
communication is called Discourse. Discourse can be anything: from a grunt to a simple
expletive, through short conversations and notes to a novel or a lengthy legal case. What
matters is not just its conformity to rules, but the fact that it communicates and is
recognized by its receivers as coherent. This leads us to the disturbing conclusion that there
is a degree of subjectivity in identifying a stretch of language as discourse – it may be
meaningful and thus communicate to one person in a way which another person does not
have the necessary knowledge to make sense of – yet, in practice, we find that discourse is
usually perceived as such by groups, rather than individuals.

For a stretch of language to be meaningful, the sender of the message must make sure that
the kinds of rules that operate within sentences also operate between them. Put another
way, the grammar does not stop with a full stop. To recognize a stretch of language as
unified and meaningful, readers or listeners should recognize the rules that operate within
and between sentences as well as employ knowledge – of the world, of the speaker, or the
social convention, of what is going on around them as they read or listen – in order to make
sense of the language they are encountering.

When we give or receive a linguistic message, we pay attention to many other factors apart
from the language itself. If we are face to face with the person sending the message, then
we notice what they are doing with their face, eyes and body while speaking: maybe they
smiled, or shook their fist, or looked away. In a spoken message we notice the quality of
their voice as well: maybe the speaker’s voice was shaking, or they had a particular accent,
or hesitated. These are called paralinguistic features of a spoken message, which are
sometimes lost if we write the message down. However, they may also exist in written
messages, where we may be influenced by handwriting or typography, drawings or layout
or by whether the message is in an expensive book or a scrap of paper.

In language use, we are influenced by the situation in which we receive the message, by our
cultural and social relationship with the participants, by what we know and what we assume
the sender knows. We almost always have some sort of knowledge about the senders or
the receivers of the discourse. Sometimes, our knowledge is general or limited, sometimes
Introducción al Inglés con Fines Académicos. Lic. Prof. Adriana Fernández; Lic. Prof. Maricel
Pierella

we can say very little about the identity of the receiver; still, we make assumptions or form
hypothesis. This means we NEED to know, simply because we want to make our
communication more effective. In other words, we are influenced by the situation, by the
context. Discourse which underestimates the degree of existing knowledge becomes boring
to the audience; discourse which overestimates it becomes incomprehensible.

This can be applied to both writing and speech. There are, however, certain assumptions
about spoken or written language that mustn’t always be taken for granted.

It is said that spoken language usually happens on time and must therefore be produced
and processed “on line”. There is no going back and changing or re-structuring our words
as in writing. There is often no time to pause and think and while we are talking or listening,
we cannot stand back and view our discourse in spatial terms. However, there are many
types of speech that are planned in advance or structured (e.g. meetings); some are
intermediate cases between writing and speech (e.g. plays: spoken language which is read
or learnt from a script); some are based on written notes (e.g. political speeches).

As for speech, we can now record it and go back and analyse it later. Therefore, the
traditional assumption about the written-spoken division is brought to pieces. Even more
so, there is a further distinction within the spoken language: one-way speech (lecture,
speech) and two-way speech (dialogue, conversation), i.e. speech with a higher or lower
degree of reciprocity.

In spite of the fact that there are so many irregularities about the traditional spoken-written
categorization, they each have their own conventions that must be looked at and respected
if we want to belong to a certain speech community. Knowing a language does not only
mean knowing about it but knowing how to use it in different situations, where, to whom,
with which purpose and why.

References:

Cook, Guy. 1989. Discourse. OUP