Interpersonality and cultureAn approach to the movie review Genre

  1. Ivorra Pérez, Francisco Miguel
Revue:
Odisea: Revista de estudios ingleses

ISSN: 1578-3820

Année de publication: 2016

Número: 17

Pages: 159-183

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAccès ouvert editor

D'autres publications dans: Odisea: Revista de estudios ingleses

Résumé

This paper investigates the impact of cultural values on the interactional metadiscourse (Hyland and Tse 2004) used in movie reviews drawn from two digital newspapers: the Peninsular-Spanish El País and the British The Guardian. Specifically, the influence of Hall’s (1976) “context dependence” and Hofstede’s (1991) “individualism index” is surveyed. The findings reveal similarities for both corpora due to genre constraints, but cultural differences are also found. The implication of the study is to raise awareness of the importance of interpersonal metadiscourse as a persuasive linguistic element in the teaching and learning of L2 writing skills.

Références bibliographiques

  • BENNET, M. J. 1998. “Intercultural communication: a current perspective”. Basic Concepts of Intercultural Communication. Selected Readings. Ed. J.M. BENNET. Yarmouth, Maine, USA: Intercultural Press, Inc. 1–34.
  • BHATIA, VIJAY K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings London: Longman.
  • BLUM–KULKA, S., J. HOUSE, and G. KASPER. 1989. Cross–Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
  • BROWN, P. and S. LEVINSON. 1987. Politeness. Some Universals in Language Use Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • CAILLAT, Z. and B. MUELLER. 1996. “The influence of culture on American and British advertising: an exploratory comparison of beer advertising”. Journal of Advertising Research, 36/3: 79–88.
  • CARRETERO, M. 2014. “The role of authorial voice in professional and non–professional reviews of films: an English–Spanish contrastive study of engagement”. Dialogicity in Written Specialised Genres. Eds. L. GIL–SALOM and C. SOLER– MONREAL. The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 55–68.
  • CLARK, T. 1990. “International marketing and national character: a review and proposal for an integrative theory”. Journal of Marketing, 50: 66–79.
  • CLYNE, M. 1994. Intercultural Communication at Work. Cultural values in Discourse USA: Cambridge University Press.
  • CONNOR, U., E. NAGELHOUT and W. ROZYCKI. 2008. Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • CRISMORE, A. 1989. Talking with Readers: Metadiscourse as Rhetorical Act. New York: Peter Lang.
  • CRISMORE, A., R. MARKANNEN and M. STEFFENSEN. 1993. “Metadiscourse in persuasive writing. A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students”. Written Communication, 10/1: 39–71.
  • DAFOUZ–MILNE, E. 2003. “Metadiscourse revisited: a contrastive study of persuasive writing in professional discourse”. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense, 11: 29–52.
  • DAFOUZ–MILNE, E. 2006. “Estudio de los marcadores interpersonales en el comentario periodístico: estrategias para la identificación autor–lector en el texto”. Resla, 19: 67–82.
  • DE MOOIJ, M. 2000. “The future is predictable for international marketers: converging incomes lead to diverging consumer behavior”. International Marketing Review, 17/2: 103–113.
  • DÍAZ–PÉREZ, F.J. 2003. La Cortesía verbal en inglés y en español. Actos de habla y pragmática intercultural Jaén: Publicaciones de la Universidad de Jaén
  • GARCÍA, F. 1985. Cómo escribir para la prensa. Madrid: Ibérico Europea de Ediciones.
  • GARCÍA–YESTE, M. A. 2013. “Press advertisement for food in Spain: cultural orientations and communicative style”. Ibérica, 26: 195–216.
  • GIBSON, R. 2000. Intercultural Business Communication Oxford: Oxford UP
  • GIL, L., C. SOLER and K. STUART. 2004. TextWorks. Valencia. Departamento de Idiomas.
  • GIMÉNEZ–MORENO, R. and H. SKORCZYNSKA. 2013. “Business communication across three European cultures: A contrastive analysis of British, Spanish and Polish email writing”. Ibérica, 26: 77–98.
  • GIOVANNINI, A., E. MARTÍN, M. RODRÍGUEZ and T. SIMÓN. 1996. Profesor en acción 1: el proceso de aprendizaje. Madrid: Edelsa.
  • GRICE, P. 1975. “Logic and conversation.” Syntax and Semantics: Speech Acts Eds P. COLE and J. MORGAN. New York: Academic. 45–47
  • GUILLÉN–NIETO, V. 2005. “The invisible face of culture: why do Spanish toy manufacturers believe the British are most peculiar in business?” Thistles: A Homage to Brian Hughes. Eds. J. MATEO and F. YUS. Universidad de Alicante: Departamento de Filología Inglesa. 95–127.
  • GUILLÉN–NIETO, V. 2013. “Intercultural business pragmatics: The case of the business letter of introduction”. Research Trends in Intercultural Pragmatics. Eds. I. KECSKES and J. ROMERO–TRILLO. Berlín: Mouton De Gruyter. 395–420.
  • HALL, E. T. 1959. The Silent Language. New York: Doubleday.
  • HALL, E. T. 1966. The Hidden Dimension. New York: Doubleday.
  • HALL, E. T. 1976. Beyond Culture. New York: Anchor.
  • HALLIDAY, M. 1975. “Language as social semiotic: towards a general sociolinguistic theory”. The First LACUS Forum. Eds. A. MAKKAI and V. BECKER. Columbia: Hornbeam Press. 17–46.
  • HAMPDEN–TURNER, CH. and F. TROMPENAARS. 2000. Buiding Cross–Cultural Competence. How to Create Wealth from Conflicting Values. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons, Ltd.
  • HOFSTEDE, G. 1991. Culture and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London: Profile Books.
  • HOLLIDAY, A. 1999. “Small cultures”. Applied Linguistics, 20/2: 237–264.
  • HOUSE, J. and G. KASPER. 1981. “Politeness markers in English and German”. Conversational Routine. Eds. F. COULMAS. The Hague: Mouton. 157–185.
  • HYLAND, K. 1998. “Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse”. Journal of Pragmatics, 30: 437–55
  • HYLAND, K. 1999. “Talking to students: metadiscourse in introductory coursebooks”. English for Specific Purposes, 18/1: 3–26.
  • HYLAND, K. and T. POLLY. 2004. “Metadiscourse in academic writing: a reappraisal”. Applied Linguistics, 25/2: 156–177.
  • IVORRA–PÉREZ. 2012. “Reaching to intercultural rhetoric: teaching cultural values to students of English in their writing compositions” Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the European Association of Specific Purposes (AELFE), 27–35.
  • IVORRA–PÉREZ. 2014. “Cultural values and their correlation with interactional metadiscourse strategies in Spanish and US business websites”. Atlantis, 36/2: 73–95.
  • IVORRA–PÉREZ. 2015. “The impact of cultural dimensions on the engagement markers of Spanish, British and US toy selling websites”. A Multidisciplinary Approach to Service Encounters. Eds. M.O. HERNÁNDEZ–LÓPEZ and L. FERNÁNDEZ–AMAYA. Leiden/Boston: Brill. 141–163.
  • JUNQUEIRA, L. and V. CORTÉS. 2014. “Metadiscourse in book reviews in English and Brazilian Portuguese: a corpus–based analysis”. Rhetoric, Professional Communication and Globalization, 6: 88–109.
  • KAPLAN, R.B. 1966. “Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education”. Language Learning, 16/1: 1–20.
  • KLUCKHON, F.R. and F.Z. STRODBECK. 1961. Variations in Value Orientations Wesport, CT: Greenwood Press.
  • LEWIS, R. D. 1996. When Cultures Collide: Managing Successfully across Cultures USA: Nicholas Brealey International.
  • LOUKIANENKO–WOLFE, M. 2008. “Different culture–different discourses. Rhetorical patterns of business letters by English and Russian speakers”. Contrastive Rhetoric. Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric. Eds. U. COONOR, E. NAGELHOUT and W. ROZYCKI. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 87–121.
  • MÁRQUEZ–REITER, R. 2000. “Politeness phenomena in British English and Uruguayan Spanish: the case of requests”. A Journal of English and American Studies, 18: 159–167.
  • MARTÍN, G. 1986. Curso de redacción. Madrid: Paraninfo. MAURANEN, A. 1993. Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Frankfrurtam Main: Peter Lang.
  • MORÁN, E. 1988. Géneros del periodismo de opinión Pamplona: Eunsa
  • MORENO, A. I. 1997. “Genre constraints across languages: causal metatext in Spanish and English Ras”. English for Specific Purposes, 16/3: 161–179.
  • MUR–DUEÑAS, P. 2010. “Attitude markers in business management research articles: a cross–cultural corpus–driven approach”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20/1: 50–72.
  • PRINCE, E., J. FRADER and Ch. BOSK. 1982. “On hedging in physician–physician discourse”. Proceedings of the Second Annual Delaware Symposium on Language Studies Eds. J. ROBERT and D. PIETRO. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood NJ: Ablex. 83–97.
  • PRYKARPATSKA, I. 2008. “Why are you so late?: cross–cultural pragmatic study of complaints in American English and Ukrainian”. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 21: 87–102.
  • SCOLLON, R. and S. SCOLLON. 1995. Intercultural Communication Oxford UK and Cambridge USA: Blackwell.
  • SCOLLON, R., S. WONG SCOLLON and R. H. JONES. 2012. Intercultural Communication. A Discourse Approach. Wiley–Blackwell.
  • SHOKOUHI, H. and A. TALATI. 2009. “Metadiscourse functions in English and Persian sociology articles: a study in contrastive rhetoric”. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 45/4: 549–568.
  • SPENCER–OATEY, H. 2008. Culturally Speaking: Culture, Communication and Politeness Theory. New York: Continuum.
  • SUAU–JIIMÉNEZ, F. and R. DOLÓN–HERRERO. 2007. “The importance of metadiscourse in the genre ‘Promotion of Touristic Services and Products’: differences in English and Spanish”. Languages for Specific Purposes: Searching for Common Solutions. Ed. D. GALOVÁ. Newcastle, UK: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
  • SUAU–JIMÉNEZ, F. 2010. La traducción especializada (en inglés y español en géneros de economía y empresa). Madrid: Arco/Libros, S.L.
  • SUAU–JIMÉNEZ, F. 2016. “What can the discursive construction of stance and engagement voices in traveller forums and tourism promotional websites bring to a cultural, cross–generic and disciplinary view of interpersonality?”. Ibérica, 31: 199–220.
  • SWALES, J. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  • USUNIER, J. and A. L. JULIE. 2005. Marketing across Cultures. Harlow: Pearson Education
  • VALERO–GARCÉS, C. 1996. “Contrastive ESP rhetoric: metatext in Spanish–English economic texts”. English for Specific Purposes, 15/4: 279–294.
  • VAN EK, J 1986 Objectives for Foreign Language Learning. Strasbourg: Council of Europe
  • VANDE–KOPPLE, W. 1985. “Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse”. College Composition and Communication, 36: 82–93.
  • VÁZQUEZ–ORTA, I. 1995. A Contrastive Study of Politeness Phenomena in England and Spain. Duisburg: University of Duisburg.
  • WALKER, D, W. THOMAS and J. SCHMITZ. 2003. Doing Business Internationally. The Guide to Cross–Cultural Success. New York: McGraw Hill.
  • WIERZBICKA, A. 1991. Cross–Cultural Pragmatics. The Semantics of Human Interaction. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • ZHANG, C. 2013. A Corpus–based Interactional Metadiscourse Analysis of Professional Movie Reviews in English. PhD Dissertation. http://www.dissertationtopic.net/doc/1878868
  • ZUO, Y. 2011. Metadiscourse in English Movie Reviews. PhD Dissertation. http://www.p–papers.com/19385.html
  • HOOPES, D. 1980. “Intercultural communication concepts and the psychology of intercultural experience”. Multicultural Education: A Cross–Cultural Training Approach. Ed. M. E. PUSCH. La Grange Park, IL: Intercultural Press.
La source de données: Dialnet