Un esquema utilizado en mis clases de Comentario de Textos Literarios Ingleses para explicar las diversas dimensiones o parámetros de análisis funcional del discurso: la relación entre interlocutores o 'tenor', el canal comunicativo, medio o 'modo', y la función interactivo-comunicativa o 'dominio'. 

Texto completo:

Dimensiones del discurso: Tenor, Mode, Domain

https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3745434 

 

Ibercampus (Nov. 16, 2020)

12 Pages Posted: 12 Feb 2021

José Angel García Landa

Universidad de Zaragoza

Date Written: 2010

Abstract

English abstract: 

Dimensions of Discourse: Tenor, Mode, Domain

A handout used in my course on Commentary of Literary Texts (English Studies) to explain the various parameters or dimensions of discourse from the perspective of functional analysis—addressee relationship or 'tenor', semiotic channel, medium, or 'mode', and interactional and communicative function or 'domain'.

Spanish abstract

Keywords: Discourse Analysis, Textual analysis, Functional linguistics, Semiotics, Communication,

Suggested Citation:

Garcia Landa, Jose Angel, "Dimensiones del discurso: Tenor, Mode, Domain (Dimensions of Discourse: Tenor, Mode, Domain)" (2010). Ibercampus (Nov. 16, 2020), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3745434

 

 

 
 

eJournal Classifications	Message
RCRN Subject Matter eJournals      Rhetorical Theory eJournal - CMBO          RCRN: Communities & Audience (Topic) - CMBO	Classification Under Review
RCRN Subject Matter eJournals      Writing Technologies eJournal - CMBO          RCRN: Design of Communication (Topic) - CMBO	Classification Under Review
RCRN Subject Matter eJournals      Rhetoric Educator: Communication, Composition, Rhetoric, & Writing eJournal - CMBO          RCRN: Other Rhetoric Educator: Communication, Composition, Rhetoric, & Writing (Topic) - CMBO	Classification Under Review
RCRN Subject Matter eJournals      Rhetorical Analysis eJournal - CMBO          RCRN: Textual Analysis (Topic) - CMBO	Classification Under Review

 

 

También en:

_____. "Dimensiones del Discurso." In García Landa, Vanity Fea 16 Nov. 2010.*

         http://vanityfea.blogspot.com/2010/11/dimensiones-del-discurso.html

         2010

_____. "Dimensiones del discurso: Tenor, Mode, Domain." Ibercampus (Vanity Fea) 16 Nov. 2020.*

         https://www.ibercampus.es/parametros-del-discurso-tenor-mode-domain-40339.htm

         2020

_____. "Dimensiones del discurso (Tenor, Mode, Domain)." Academia 30 Dec. 2020.*

https://www.academia.edu/44802358

         2020

_____. "Dimensiones del discurso (Tenor, Mode, Domain)." ResearchGate 15 Jan. 2021.*

         https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348522395

         2021

_____. "Dimensiones del discurso (Tenor, Mode, Domain)." Humanities Commons 12 Feb. 2021.*

         http://dx.doi.org/10.17613/0f6f-w854

         https://hcommons.org/deposits/item/hc:34447/

         2021

_____. "Dimensiones del discurso (Tenor, Mode, Domain). SSRN 12 Feb. 2021.*

         https://ssrn.com/abstract=3745434

         2021

         Rhetorical Theory eJournal 12 Feb. 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Rhetorical-Theory.html

         2021

         Writing Technologies eJournal 12 Feb. 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Writing-Technologies.html

         2021

Rhetoric Educator: Communication, Composition, Rhetoric & Writing eJournal 12 Feb. 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/RCRN-Educator.html

         2021

         Rhetorical Analysis eJournal 21 Feb. 2021.*

         https://www.ssrn.com/link/Rhetorical-Analysis.html

         2021

_____. "Dimensiones del Discurso: Tenor, Mode, Domain." In García Landa, Vanity Fea 25 April 2021.*

         https://vanityfea.blogspot.com/2021/04/dimensiones-del-discurso-tenor-mode.html

         2021

_____. "Dimensiones del Discurso: Tenor, Mode, Domain." Net Sight de José Angel García Landa 4 Jan. 2023.*

         https://personal.unizar.es/garciala/publicaciones/Dimensiones.pdf

         2024

—oOo—

Muere Halliday

Dear AEDEAN members:

It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of Prof. M.A.K Halliday. Michael Halliday died at the age of 93 on 15th April 2018 at the Uniting Wesley Heights Nursing Home in Manly, Sydney, Australia. He was at UCL from 1963 and 1971, first as the Director of the Communication Research Centre (1963-1965) and then as a Professor of Linguistics (1965-1971). After short stays in the US and Britain, he moved to Australia, where he founded the Department of Linguistics at the University of Sydney in 1976 and retired there in 1987.

Michael Halliday specialized in Chinese Linguistics and English Linguistics and did research on discourse analysis, intonation and grammar, among other fields, but he changed the study of Linguistics with the development of the theory of language known as Systemic Functional Linguistics, according to which language is a social semiotic system. Michael Halliday is well-known for the publication of An Introduction to Functional Grammar (1985), which has become a reference book of Linguistics. All his work has had a significant impact on sociolinguistics, applied linguistics, and language teaching and learning.

Cristina Suárez-Gómez, on behalf of the Executive Board

—oOo—

Functional Parameters of Discourse

—a handout:

Systemic functional approach, derived from M.A.K. Halliday; here mostly based on Roger T. Bell, Translation and Translating (Harlow: Longman, 1991; 5.3, pp. 84-96).

The uses of language in discourse are differentiated by:

- addressee relationship (or tenor)
- medium (or mode)
- function (or domain)

All marked by (lexical, syntactic, etc.) features—just like users’ dialects are also marked by specific features.


Tenor:

“Any sender of messages has a relationship with his or her receiver(s) and this relationship is reflected intentionally or unintentionally in the form the messages are given. It is precisely this ‘tone’ in written and spoken texts which is signalled mainly, in English, through syntactic choices by the tenor of discourse. The tenor consists of a number of overlapping and interacting scales or levels: formality, politeness, impersonality, and accessibility. Each of these will be considered in turn.”

Formality:
Care and attention given to the structuring of the message, reflecting degree of importance and “the extent in which (s)he considers it to be worthy of careful reading by the receiver” Markers: lexical, syntactic (left-branching, etc.),

Politeness:
“Politeness reflects the social distance in the addressee relationship between sender and receiver” 2 dimensions, horizontal (Intimacy or solidarity between speaker and hearer) and vertical (power relationships: status, seniority, authority). Consequences: on the modes of address, indirectness, etc.

Impersonality:
“Impersonality is a measure of the extent to which the producer of a text —speaker or writer— avoids reference to him/herself or to the hearer/reader. Such avoidance is far commoner in written than in spoken texts and, within written texts, in those in which the message—the cognitive content—is felt to be of greater importance than the participants in the exchange.” (e.g. the greater impersonality of bureaucratic or legal writing).

Accessibility:
“While formality reflects the attention the sender has given to the structuring of the text, accessibility shows the assumptions the sender has made about the knowledge he or she shares with the receiver; assumptions about the universe of discourse (…). The more the writer assumes is shared, the less needs to be made explicit in the surface structure of the text and the  more inaccessible the text becomes to the reader who lacks the assumed shared knowledge”
This is matter not only of words but of concepts (e.g. technical texts…).




Mode

Mode is concerned with features relative to the choice of channel which carries the signal. Features depend on the nature of the medium, not on the characteristics of the participants.

Channel limitation:
Single or multiple channels. (E.g.: Writing needs to be more explicit. Features which might be conveyed through tone or gesture in speech are often lexicalized).

Spontaneity
A continuum from the purely unpremeditated and spontaneous utterance, to “the utterance which is the result of a long period of deliberation, preplanning and editing of successive versions.” Unplanned speech uses pauses, fillers, etc. Writing more fluent and more complex syntactically, lexically, etc.

Participation
Contiuum from monologue to dialogue, with varying degrees of feedback. Anticipated participation may become a feature of writing (Simulated interaction, derived from real interaction). Participation status ranges from ratified interactants to overhearing, eavesdropping, etc.

Privateness
A matter of “the number of recipients intended for a particular text; the more addressees the less private” (overlapping with tenor).

Domain

“The domain of discourse is revealed by the choice of features of the code which indicate the role the text is playing in the activity of which it forms a part. (…) Dimensions of Domain: Function, Discipline, Genre (Move, Step)  Speech Act

Function: “Domain is intimately connected with function; in a narrow sense, the use of language to persuade, inform (or some other speech act) or, more broadly, in relation to some more general kind of meaning (e.g. an emotive function which stresses connotative meaning) or, in a very much broader sense, domain can refer to such macro-institutions of society as the family, friendship, education and so forth.”
E.g. models of the functions of language: cognitive-evaluative-affective, or Jakobson’s six function model based on the communicative process:

 

Context (or referent): referential
 

                                                                                        Contact or channel:  Phatic

Addresser:   Emotive or Expressive     ________    Message: poetic   ____________>    Addressee: Conative        

 

Code: Metalinguistic

Discipline: E.g. ESP, English for specific purposes; English for the humanities here.

Genre: E.g. academic lecture, academic essay, thesis, grant proposal

    Swales (Genre Analysis): Genres follow characteristic MOVES divided into STEPS

    In literature: 4 major genres (poetry, drama, prose and narrative fiction): historical forms, actually a work participates in a genre or uses generic conventions rather than belonging to a genre.

Speech act: Statement or constative utterance, instruction or order, promise, performative utterance, wordplay, joke, question, phatic repair, metalinguistic commentary… Cf. classifications of speech acts by Austin or Searle.   

_________

Some references:

 

On politeness:

Brown, Penelope, and Stephen Levinson. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1978. 1987. 2nd ed. 1994.

On speech acts:

Austin, J. L. How to Do Things with Words. Ed. J. O. Urmson. Oxford: Clarendon, 1962.

Searle, John R.  Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1979. 1985.

On indirectness (and on cognitive linguistics)

Pinker, Steven. The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature. New York: Viking, 2007.

On media studies:

Ong, Walter J. Orality and Literacy. (New Accents). London: Routledge, 2002.

McLuhan, Marshall. The Gutenberg Galaxy. Toronto: U of Toronto P, 1962. 

______

He escrito un comentario de libro de McLuhan aquí: Por la Galaxia Gutenberg (The Surfer's Guide).

_____

Sobre lingüística cognitiva, recomiendo a los estudiantes el libro de Steven Pinker, The Stuff of Thought. Aquí hay un extracto sobre lenguaje indirecto, en forma de animación:
http://vanityfea.blogspot.com/2011/02/pinker-on-indirection.html

Y una reseña del principio del mismo:
http://vanityfea.blogspot.com/2010/11/la-materia-y-la-forma-del-pensamiento.html
... y del final:
http://vanityfea.blogspot.com.es/2012/06/huyendo-de-la-caverna.html

________

Un libro de análisis del discurso recomendable (ver también "bibliografía específica") es el de John Paul Gee,  Discourse Analysis. También el importante libro de Michel Foucault El orden del discurso. Si leéis francés, aquí hay algunas notas al respecto. Si no leéis francés... es una buena idea leer francés, para los filólogos españoles.

CTLI