UNIVERSIDADE: F E D E R A L DE S A N T A C A T A R I N A P Û S - G R A D U A Ç S O EM I N GL ÊS E L I T E R A T U R A
C O R R E S P O N D E N T E
BRAZILIAN-PORTUGUESE AND BRIT ISH-ENGLISH SERVICE ENCOUNTERS: A CONTRASTIVE GENRE ANALYSIS
POR
JOSE MARCELO FREITAS DE LUNA
D i s à g r t a ç i' o s u b m e t i d a à Un i ver s i d a d e F e d e r a 1 d e S a n t a C a t a r i n a pa r a o b t e n ç ã o do grau de MESTRE EM LETRAS
F !... G R ï A N 0 P 0 LIS A G O S T O DE i 990
Es t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o foi j u lg ad a a d e q u a d a e a p r o v a d a em sua •Forma Final pe l o p r o g r a m a de P ó s - G r a d u a ç ã o em In gl ês pa ra a o b t e n ç ã o do gr au de MESTRE EM LETRAS 0 p e ã o In a 1 ê s e L i t e r a t u r a C o r r es p o n d e n t e
i
i
O R I E N T A D O R A 13 A N C A E X A M I N A D O R A : W S L ÜjLo Profa. Dra. B r a n c a T e l l e s R i b e i r o ___________¿ L j ã ______________________________ P r of » Dr. M a l c o l m C o u l t h a r d ______________________r v a ^ c ^ n Profa. Dra. C a r m e m R o s a C. C o u l t h a r di
I
I
Aos meus pais, a minha irma e à Ivone
AGRADECI MENTOS
A Ü o o r d e na ç ã o d e A p e r f e i c o aine n fc o d e Pes soa l d e Nivel S u p g r i o r (CAPES)j por ter s u b s i d i a d o me u s e s t u d o s no B r as il g na
I n g l a t er ra .
Ao Prof. José Lu is Meurer, pe la o r i e n t a ç ã o no p r o j e t o d e s t a p e s q u i s a .
A o P r o f . M a 1 c o 1 m C ouït I-. a r d , p e 1 o e s t í m u 1 o , i n t e r e s s e e or i ent aç ão na fase i n i c i al dest e t rabal h o .
Ao Prof. Mi k e Hoey , por ter t r a n s m i t i d o c o n h e c i m e n t o s
f u n d a m e n t a i s para a r e a l i z a ç ã o d e s t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o , p a r t i c i p a n d o co m o o ri en tador.
A Profa. B r a n c a T e l l e s Ribeiro, o r i e n t a d o r a d e s t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o , p o r s ua d e d i caçã o , o r i e n t a ç ão f i rme e o b j e tiva.
Ao a m i g o Walter Costa, pe l o a p o i o e incentivo.
Aos g e r e n t e s e f u n c i o n á r i o s da S t u d e n t s Travel A g e n c y CSTA) e da L l o y d s Che mis t em B i r m i n gh am , c o m o t a m b é m aos g e r e n t e s e
•Fuñe i onár i os da P 1 as at ur e Far mác ia Un i ver s i t ár i a em F l o r i a n ó p o l i s , pe la c o n t r i b u i ç ã o na p e s q u i s a de campo.
Aos a m i g o s Robert Done, Artur de S o u s a e M a r i a G1 i sel da, pe la c o l a b o r a ç ã o na e l a b o r a ç ã o f í si ca de s t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o .
A t o d o s aquel e s q u e g e n t. il e a n on i m a m e n t e f i z e r a m o c o r p u s d e s t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o .
ABSTRACT
v
Th is di s s e r t a t ion p r e s e n t s a n a n a 1 a s i a o F t h e g e n e r i c: s t r u c t u r e of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r te x t s w i t h i n and a c r o s s Rr i t i slv-Eng 1 i sh and B r a z i 1 i a n - P o r t u g u e s e . T h e h y p o t h e s i s
¡5
r e s0
n t e d i n t h i s r e s e a r c: h i s that a c o n t r a s t i v e study of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s in Brazil and in En g l a n d would reveal that th e s e social a c t i v i t i e s are c a r r i e d outf
0
1 1 o w i n g a d i f f e r e n t s e<1
u e n c i n g o -F g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e e 1 e m e n t s „ T h e s t u d a i s b a s e c! o n V e n t o 1 a ' s (1987) w o r k o n t h e0
r g a n i za t ion a n dl i n g u i s t i c r e a l i z a t i o n of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r texts,, V e n t o l a 's model was chose n as it tak es into acc oun t a ge ne ra l th eo ry of l a n g u a g e and context,,
T he dat a we r e ob t ai ne d f r o m a t o tal of e i g ht a te x t s
t a p e ■••• r e c o r d e d a t t h e p h a r in a c y / c h e in i s t a n d t It e t r a. v e 1 a g e
11
c i e s f o u n d o n t Ite c: a in p u s e s o f t h e F e d e r a 1 U n i v e r s i t y o f S a n t a C a t a r i n a( F 1 or i an opo 1 i s -• SC •••• Bra z il ) and The U n i v e r s i t y of B i r m i n g h a m ( B i r- in ing Ita m - E n g land) .
In the an aly sis , si mi la r e l e m e n t s are -Found in the s t r u c t u r e of almost all texts, d i f f e r i n g s o le ly in s e q u e n c i n g a c r o s s s i t u a t i o n s and lang ua ges . M a n i f e s t e d d i f f e r e n c e s are al s o di sc us se d, as be in g d e t e r m i n e d by cu lt u r a l r e a s o n s or by the internal o r g a n i z a t i o n
( 1 a a o u t ) o f t Ite 1 o c: a t i
0
ns.The c r o s s - c u l t u r a l e x a m i n a t i o n of the find ings s h o w s that the P h ar mac y an d c h em i st s i t uat i on p r esen t s c u 11 u r e - spec i fi c t ra i t s w h e r e a s the travel ag en cy s i t u a t i o n p r e s e n t s mo re un ve rs al f e at ur es .
RESUMO E s t a d i s s e r t a ç ã o a p r e s e n t a u m a a n á l i s e c o n t r a s t iva da e s t r u t u r a g e n é r i c a de t e x t o s de e n c o n t r o de se rv iç o, do I n gl és B r i t á n i c o e do P o r t u g u é s do B r a s i l . A h i p ó t e s e a p r e s e n t a d a no t r a b a l h o é a de que um e s t u d o c o n t r a s t ivo de e n c o n t r o s de s e r v i ç o no Brasil e na I n g l a t e r r a r e v e l a r i a que es s a s a t i v i d a d e s s o c i a i s s ã o r e a l i z a d a s por e s t r u t u r a s g e n é r i c a s c o m p o s t a s de e l e m e n t o s que s e g u e m s e q u ê n c i a s d i v e r s a s . 0 e s t u d o é b a s e a d o no t r a b a l h o de V e n t o l a ( Í987) s o b r e a o r g a n i z a ç ã o e r e a l i z a ç ã o l i n g u í s t i c a de t e x t o s de e n c o n t r o de
se rv i ç o . E s s e m o d e l o foi e s c o l h i d o por r e f l e t i r u m a t e o r i a ge ra l que r e l a c i o n a l í n g u a e co nt ext o.
Os ciados foram o b t i d o s de um total de o i t e n t a in t e r a ç õ e s
g r a v a d a s n a s f a r m á c i a s e a g ê n c i a s de v i a g e m l o c a l i z a d a s n o s c a m p i da U n i v e r s i d a d e Fe der al de Sa nt a C a t a r i n a ( F l o r i a n ó p o l i s - SC - Br as i 1 ), e da Un i ver s i d ad e de B i r mi ng h am (B i r m i n g h am - Ing 1 at er r a ). Na an ál is e, são e n c o n t r a d o s e l e m e n t o s s e m e l h a n t e s em qu a s e to d o s os textos, d i f e r e n c i a n d o - s e os e l e m e n t o s q u a n t o à s e q u ê n c i a , às s i t u a ç õ e s e às du a s línguas» D i f e r e n ç a s são e n c o n t r a d a s t a m b é m na e s t r u t u r a g e n é r i c a dos te xtos. A a n á l i s e d e m o n s t r a que ta i s
d i f e r e n ç a s são m o t i v a d a s por r a z õ e s c u l t u r a i s ou p e l a o r g a n i z a ç ã o interna layout - dos locai s o b s e r v a d o s . A a n á l i s e c o n t r a s t iva m o s t r a que as f a r m á c i a s a p r e s e n t a m c a r a c t e r í s t icas e s p e c í f i c a s de ca d a cu lt u r a , e n q u a n t o que as a g ê n c i a s de v i a g e m a p r e s e n t a m t r a ç o s ma i s u n i v e r s a i s .
T A B L E OF C O N T E N T S v i i A B S T R A C T ... ... ...v R E S U M O ...vi L I S T OF F I G U R E S ... ... x L I S T OF T A B L E S ... ... x i ABB R EV I AT I O N S ... . . x i i K E Y T O T R A N S C R I P T I O N C O N V E N T I O N S ... x i i i I N T R O D U C T I O N ... ... ... ... i C H A P T E R O N E - L i t e r a t u r e R e v i e w and D a t a D e s c r i p t i o n ... ,....4 i n i "** R e v i e w o f c h e L i t e r a t u r e > * g ■ n « * . . . . . . 4 1.1.1 - L a n g u a g e as Social S e m io t i c : S o m e B a s i c C o n c e p t s ... 4 1.1.2 - S t u d i e s on the S t r u c t u r e of S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r T e x t s . . . i<b 1.1 .3 - G e ne ri c S t r u c t u r e in S y s t e m i c L i n g u i s t i c s : Two A p p r o a c h e s ... ... ... ... . . .. 12 1.1.3.1 -• H a s a n ' s G e n e ri c S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l ... ... .12
1 . 1. 3. 2 - The Con not. at i ve S e m i o t i c s F r a m e w o r k : A S y n o p t i c S y s t e m of G e n r e ... ... 14
i .1.3., 2.1 - T h e Fl ow ch ar t: A D y n a m i c R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of G e n r e ... ...17
1.2 - Descr i pt i on of the Da t a and D a t a Col lect i on . . . .. . . . »24
C H A P T E R T W O - ON O P E N I N G S A N D C L O S I N G S ... 29
2.1 - The B r i t i s h C h em is t and th e B r a s i l i a n P h a r m a c y D a t a ... « . . .29
2.1.1 - The B r itish - C h e m i s t and the B r a z i 1 i a n - P h a r m a c y : The Con t ext of Sit uat i o n . . . 2 9 2 . 1 . 2 - The B r i t i s h Chemist: O p e n i n g s . . . ... ... 35
2 . 1 . 3 - The B r i t i s h Chemist: C l o s i n g s . ... ...39
2. 1 . 4 - The B r a s i l i a n Pharmac y: O p e n i n g s ... ... 42 2 . 1 . 5 - The B r a z i l i a n Ph ar mac y: C l o s i n g s ... . . . 4 5
2. 2 . 2 - The B r i t i s h Travel Agency: O p e n i n g s ... ... 56 2 « 2 - Th e 13 r i t i sh an d B r az i1 i an T r a v e 1 A g e n c y D a t a . . . ... . 49 2.2.1 - The B r i t i s h and the B r a s i l i a n Trav el A g en ci es : The
v i
i
i
2 . 2 . 4 ~ The Bras: i 1 i an Travel Agency: O p e n i n g s ... ... 63 2 . 2 . 5 - T h e B r a z i 1 i an T r a v e 1 Agency: C l o s i n g s
. . . 6 6
2.3 - C o n c l u s i o n ... ... ... 71C H A P T E R T H R E E - T H E F L O W C H A R T R E P R E S E N T A T I O N OF T H E C H E M I S T
A N D T H E P H A R M A C Y T E X T S
74
3 .1 • V en t o l a ' s F l o w c har t R ep r esen t a t i
0
n : Othe rChar ac: t er i st i c: s ... ... 74 3.2 The A c t u a l i z e d G e n e r i c S t r u c t u r e of the B r i t i s h Ch emi st
Dat a ... ... ... ... 77 3.3 - A c t u a l i z e d G e n e ri c S t r u c t u r e of the B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y
Dat a ... ... ... ...81 3.3.1 - The E l e m e n t s P r e - P a y and Ad vis e: T w o A s p e c t s of
the B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y D a t a ...
88
3.4 - The Fl ow c h a r t R e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of t h e P h a r m a c y and theCh em i st Text s ... ... . 94 3.4 .1 - The B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y Data: T h e M o d i f i e d
F 1 owe h a r t ... ... 95 3 . 4 . 2 - The B r i t i s h Ch em is t Data: The M o d i f i e d
FI owe hart . . ... 1 <07 3.5 - The Two F l o w c h a r t s Co nt r a s t iv e l y V i e w e d .. . . ... . .. . . 111 3.6 - C o n c l u s i o n ... . . . 114
C H A P T E R F O U R - T H E F L O W C H A R T R E P R E S E N T A T I O N O F T H E T R A V E L
A G E N C Y T E X T S 116
4.1 — The Brazil i a. n Travel Ag en cy D a t a . . . 1 1 6 4.1.1 - A c t u a l i z e d G e n e ri c S t r u c t u r e of the B r a z i l i a n Travel
Ag en cy Te XtSaaanann.n....nn.a.n...n..M.Raa.nn..an.a.nll7 4.2 - The B r i t i s h Travel Ag en cy D a t a . . ... . . . 1 3 1 4.2.1 - A c t u a l i z e d G e n e r i c S t r u c t u r e of t h e B r i t i s h Travel
4. 3 The M o d i f i e d Fl o w c h a r t : The B r i t i s h and The B r a z i l i a n Travel A g en cy Da ta C o n t r a s t iv e l y V i e w e d . . . ... . . . n « 1 *40 4 .4 - C o n c l u s i o n ... ... ... 148 C O N C L U S I O N , ... 150 A P P E N D I X : S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r D a t a ... 156 B I B L I O G R A P H Y ... ...
218
LIST OF FIGURES
1.. .1. - Generic: S t r u c t u r e E l e m e n t s of S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r T e x t s ... 18
Í.2 •- T h e F l o w c h a r t R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r
Cíen r e ... ... 20
2 n 1 "" The Layou t of the 13r i t i sh C h e m i st n . . * . . . « . . . « . . . ** « n 3Í
2.2 - The Layout of the B r a s i l i a n P h a r m a c y ... ...33
2.3 - T h e Layout of the 13r i t i sh Tr av el A g e n c y . . . . .. ... „ . » .52
2.4 -■ The Layout of the B r a z i l i a n Trave l A g e n c y ...54
3.Í The Fl ow c h a r t Re pr e s e n t at i on of t h e B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y
I n t e r a c t i o n s ... ... ... .101
3.2 - The Fl ow c h a r t R e p r e s e n t a t i o n of th e B r i t i s h Ch emi st
I n t er ac t i on ... 108
4.1 Th e Fl ow c h a r t Rep resen tat i on of t h e B r a z i l i a n and the
2 . 1 - The B r i t i s h C h em is t O p e n i n g s ... 38
2. 2 - T h © 13 r i t i sh Ch ein i st - C l os in gs . ... ... 4Í
2.3 -- The B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y - O p e n i n g s ... ... . . . . .4 4
2.4 - The 13 r az i 1 i an P h a r m a c y ~ Cl os i n g s . .. ... ... .. ... ... ... .. ... . 48
2.5 The B r i t i s h Travel Agen cy -• O p e n i n g s ... ... 60
2.6 •••• The B r i t i s h Trave l Agenc y - C l o s i n g s . . . 6 3
2.7 - The B r a z i l i a n Travel Agen cy - O p e n i n g s ... 66
2.8 - The B r a z i l i a n Trav el A g en cy C l o s i n g s .. .. . .. ... . » «70
3.1 •- B r i t i s h C h em is t Texts'- V a r i a t i o n s of the most
r e c u r r e n t Ge ne r i c St r u c t u r e . . „ . . . „ . . . « « . . . - » - 8 ®
3.2 - B r a z i l i a n P h a r m a c y Texts: V a r i a t i o s of the most
r e c u r r e n t Gene r ic S t r u c t u r e . . . 8 8
4.1 B r a z i l i a n Travel A g en cy Texts: V a r i a t i o n s of the
most r e c u r r e n t Gen er i c S t r u c t u r e . .131
4.2 - B r i t i s h Trav el A g en cy Texts: V a r i a t i o n s of the
most r e c u r r e n t Gen er ic S t r u c t u r e . . . 1 4 0
LIST QF TABLES
ABBREVIATIONS C: S: P : G . S. O.S. e 1. Ling. Real. N. V1 „ mo v e s GR AA SB S R P G H CL GB Cusí: orner Se rv er P h a r m a c i s t Gen er i c: Struct ur e
Gen eric St r u c tu r e e l e men t s L. i ngu i st i c Real i sat i on N o n - v e r b a l mo v e s Greet i n,g At t en dan ce A 11 oc at i on S e r v i c e Bid S e r V i ce Resol ut i on Pay G o o d s Ha nd o v e r C l o s in g G o o d B y e
KEY TO TRANSCRIPTION CONVENTIONS
/ a p a u s e of less than a seco nd
II C p a s s ] n o n - v e r b a l a c t i v i t y
(yes) = likel y w o r d i n g
( ) := w o r d i n g not p o s s i b l e to t r a n s c r i b e (pause) := a p a u s e l a st in g m o r e than a s e co nd on t h e ___ ” s p e a k e r d o e s not finish his u t t e r a n c C t h a n k s = s i m u l t a n e o u s s p e e c h
Ít h a n ks
? ~ y e s / n o q u e s t i o n r i s i n g intonation ~ p h r a s a l - f i nal fal lin g intonation ! :=: word or p h r a s e is an e x c l a m a t i o n
1NTRODUCTI ON
Re ce nt y e a r s h a v e seen w e l c o m e d e v e l o p m e n t s in l a n g u a g e
r e s e a r c h and l a n g u a g e te ac hin g. In F o r e i g n L a n g u a g e T e a c h i n g (FLT), t h e s e a d v a n c e s ha v e been c h a r a c t e r i z e d by a shift in l i n g u i s t i c r e s e a r c h to c o m m u n i c a t i v e interes ts in an at tem pt to come c l o s e r to the way l a n g u a g e is used in s o c i e t y . A l t h o u g h la ng u a g e t e a c h i n g
t h e o r y is p r o g r e s s i v e l y a c q u i r i n g a soc io l in g u is t ic p e r s p e c t i v e , the t e a c h i n g of s k i l l s still c o n c e n t r a t e s on the m i c r o - l e v e l . It is
ba s e d on d i f f e r e n c e s in sp ee ch act t y p e s r a t h e r than on a mo r e g l o b a l level in which spee ch ac t s a r e a s s o c i a t e d with t e x t s and t e x t s are, in turn, at ta c h e d to co nt e x t . Th i s d i s s e r t a t i o n is c o n c e r n e d with the in te ra c t i o n s wh ic h t a k e p l a c e at s e r v i c e l o c a t i o n s . My ma in o b j e c t i v e is to d e s c r i b e and co nt ra st the ov er a l l , globa l s t r u c t u r e s - 'generic s t r u c t u r e s ' - of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s in E n g l is h and in P o r t u g u e s e .
My interest in s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s d e r i v e s from the f e e l in g that in f o r m a t i o n about the s t r u c t u r e of such e s s e n t i a l e v e r y d a y
a c t i v i t i e s would p r o v e most us ef ul for FLT. In Fact, the s c a r c i t y of i n f o r m at io n on h o w to b e h a v e l i n g u i s t i c a l l y and n o n - 1 in g u i s t i cal 1 y in a d i f f e r e n t c u l t u r e still s u r r o u n d s t h e c o m m u n i c a t i v e a p p r o a c h e s to FLT. U n a w a r e n e s s of cu lt ur al d i f f e r e n c e s may lead l a n g u a g e
l e a r n e r s to e m b a r a s s i n g s i t u a t i o n s and to c o m m u n i c a t i o n b r e a k d o w n s in t h e ta rg et languag e. Ac co rd i n g l y , B l u m k u l k a (Í984) s t r e s s e s that:
as long as we do not k n o w m o r e about t h e wa y s in w h i c h c o m m u n i c a t i v e f u n c t i o n s are a c h i e v e d in d i f f e r e n t languages, (second lan g ua ge ) l e a r n e r s will of ten fail to a c h i e v e their c o m m u n i c a t i v e e n d s
in t h e target l a n g u a g e and n e i t h e r they nor the ir t e a c h e r s will re al ly u n d e r s t a n d why (p.47).
Th i s r e s e a r c h has been th us m o t i v a t e d by the h y p o t h e s i s that a c o n t r a s t i v e st ud y of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s in Br az il and in E n g l a n d wo ul d r e ve al that t h e s e social a c t i v i t i e s a r e not c a r r i e d out in the sa me way in s i m i l a r e n v i r o n m e n t s in t h e s e two co u n t r i e s .
S p e c i f i c a l l y , the present stu dy p u r s u e s a n s w e r s to t h e f o l 1ow i ng quest i o n s :
Í- Upon a s s u m i n g that th e r e is a g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e that u n d e r l i e s s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r te x t s (V en to la Í 9 8 7 ) , what s p e c i f i c g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e e l e m e n t s c h a r a c t e r i se e n c o u n t e r s in B r itis h - E n g 1 ish and Br a s i 1 i an -Po r tu gu es e?
2- Is the s e q u e n c e of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r e l e m e n t s s i m i la r or
d i f f e r e n t in t h e s e two l a n g u a g e s ? If t h e r e a r e d i f f e r e n c e s , what are they and un der wh ic h c o n d i t i o n s do they e m e r g e ?
3-- Can t h e s e s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s be r e p r e s e n t e d by an identical f l o w c h a r t ? What is the m e an in g of d i f f e r e n t fl ow cha rt
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s as well as sim i la r o n e s ? Wh ic h a r e the most fr equent 'decisions' and 'paths' taken in each l a n g u a g e ?
These? a r e s o m e of the majo r issues that will be d i s c u s s e d in this study. In the f o ll ow in g c h a p t e r s I will p r o c e e d as foll ow s. Ch a p te r o n e p r e s e n t s the t h e o r e t i c a l b a c k g r o u n d of the s t u d y » It r e p o r t s on p r e v i o u s s t u d i e s whic h h a v e dealt wi th s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r texts. It a l s o d e s c r i b e s the fl owc h ar t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n wh i c h is used as the model of a n a l y s i s of the data. F i n a l l y , it in tr od uc es the s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r da t a which are used in t h e st ud y. The a n a l y s i s of the da ta c o m p r i s e s th re e cha p te rs . C h a p t e r t w o lo oks at o p e n i n g s and c l o s i n g s of the s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s in four d i f f e r e n t c o n t e x t s . Cha p te r t h r e e d i s c u s s e s the a c t u a l i z e d g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e of the te xt s wh ic h w e r e r e c o r d e d at the p h a r m a c y and at the c h e m i s t . It al s o p r e s e n t s the two m o d i f i e d f l ow ch ar t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s of the
p h a r m a c y / ch em is t te xt s. C h a p t e r -Four p r e s e n t s the g e n e ri c structure: of the trave l ag en cy te x t s and thei r flowcha rt
r e p r e s e n t a t ions. T h e C o n c l u s i o n p r e s e n t s c o m m e n t s on the r e s u l t s o b t a i n e d in the study, t e a c h i n g im pl ic a t i o n s of t h e s e resu lts ,
l i m i t a t i o n s of th e st ud y and r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for further r e s e a r c h . An a p p e n d i x c o n t a i n i n g the da ta used in th i s st u d y is a l s o included
in th i s d i s s e r t a t i o n .
CHAPTER ONE
LITERATURE REVIEW AND DATA DESCRIPTION
1.1 - REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
1.1.1 - Language as Social Semiotic: Some Basic Concepts
The pre sen t study has been m o t i v a t e d by V e n t o l a 's (1987) work on t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and l i n g u i s t i c r e a l i z a t i o n of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r
in A u s t r a l i a . V e n t o l a s u g g e s t s that c o m m u n i c a t i v e s k i l l s - so far a p p r o a c h e d by t e x t b o o k s as s i n g l e s p e e c h a c t s or e x c h a n g e s •- s h o u l d be included w i th in a mo re c o m p r e h e n s i v e fr a m e w o r k . W i t h i n th i s
fr am ew or k , she ad ds that s k i l l s and s t r a t e g i e s a r e se en as
r e a l i z a t i o n s in a 'text', wh ich in turn is a verb al r e a l i z a t i o n of 'social p r o c e s s ' •- a u n i f i e d p i e c e of hu m a n in te ra ct io n w i t h i n a r e l e v a n t c u lt ur al and s i t u a t i o n a l c o n t e x t . An a p p r o a c h of t h i s kind must n e c e s s a r i l y be s u p p o r t e d by a t h e o r y wh ic h lo ok s at l a n g u a g e and c o n t ex t as s y s t e m a t i c a l l y and f u n c t i o n a l l y re la t e d . T h i s c o n t e x t u a l t h e o r y of l a n g u a g e is ba se d on M a l i n o w s k i 's (1923) and F i r t h ' s (1968) st ud ie s. W i t h i n th is theory, l a n g u a g e is seen as the r e a l i z a t i o n of so ci al a c t i v i t i e s c o n t e x t u a l l y and
c u l t u r a l l y bo un d e d . Th is th eo ry was d e v e l o p e d by H a l l i d a y w h o is p r o b a b l y the most important ling uis t w i t h i n t h i s t r a d i t i o n .
I shall n o w p r oc ee d to r e v i e w so m e of the c o n c e p t s of H a l l i d a y ' s t h eo ry of languag e. A c c o r d i n g to H a l l i d a y (1980), 'text" can be de fi ne d:
5
as la ng u a g e that is fu n c t i o n a l . . . l a n g u a g ethat is doing s o m e job in s o m e con t ex t ... It U t e x t D may be e i th er s p ok en or writ ten , or indeed in any ot he r m e d i u m of e x p r e s s i o n that we like to think of ( p . i <0 > .
H a l l i d a y (Í978) u s e s the t e r m 'social s e m i o t i c ' to re f e r to the total m e a n i n g pot e nt ia l p e o p l e ha v e as m e m b e r s of a so ci et y.
A c c o r d i n g to him, socia l s i t u a t i o n s or c o n t e x t s - s e m i o t i c
o r g a n i z a t i o n - may c o r r e l a t e s y s t e m a t i c a l l y with the l i n g u i s t i c s y s t e m . In other words, he s u g g e s t s that the t y p e s of 'meaning c h o i c e s ' from the l i n g u i s t i c s y s t e m can be p r e d i c t e d bas ed on our k n o w l e d g e of the s e m i o t i c v a r i a b l e s of the soci al c o n t e x t .
Hall i day (197EÎ) d i s t i n g u i s h e s th re e s i t u a t i o n a l v a r i a b l e s w h i c h a l l o w us to a s s o c i a t e the m e a n i n g s e x p r e s s e d in t e x t s wi th the
s i t u a t i o n s in which the i n t e r a c t a n t s are involved: field i n di ca te s th e t y p e of a c t i v i t y wh ic h t a k e s p l a c e in the si t u a t i o n ; mode r e f e r s to t h e cha n ne l for c o m m u n i c a t i o n in t h e si t u a t i o n ; and tenor s t a n d s
for t h e rolt? r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n in te ra ct an ts . F u r t h e r m o r e , he s u g g e s t s that each one of t h e s e s e m i o t i c v a r i a b l e s is a s s o c i a t e d with a s p e c i f i c c o m p o n e n t on the s e m a n t i c s t r a t u m and wi th s p e c i f i c s y s t e m s of the 1 e x i c o g r a m m a t i cal s t r a t u m of la ngu age . In ot her
words, by k n o w in g the v a l u e s of the s e m i o t i c v a r i a b l e s of th e social co nt ex t, it is p o s s i b l e to pr ed ic t the t y p e s of m e a n i n g c h o i c e s that will b e s e 1e c t ed from the l i n g u i s t i c s y s t e m .
A c c o r d i n g to H a l l i d a y (Í978), a s p e c i f i c text v a r i e t y -
register - t;an be p r e d i c t e d by the v a l u e s wh ic h are a s s i g n e d to the s i t u a t i o n a l va r i a b l e s . As a m a t t e r of fact, r e g i s t e r has been
t r a d i t i o n a l l y d e s c r i b e d as ‘p a r t i c u l a r f o r e g r o u n d e d
l e x i c o g r a m m a t i cal c h o i c e s ” <H al li da y et al Í964) and later as " f o r e g r o u n d e d c h o i c e s from the m e t a f u n c t i o n a l c o m p o n e n t s of the s e m a n t i c s t r a t u m ’ (ibid).
Baseei on Wall ¡day (ibid) and Ha s a n S Hall i day (i960) o n e can •Find in t e x t s whic h be lo ng to t h e s a m e r e g i s t e r the s a m e 'generic structure' ( H a l l i d a y ' s term) or the s a m e 'structure p o t e n t i a l '
( H a s a n ' s t e rm )- It is not e n t i r e l y cl e a r w h e t h e r th e s e t w o c o n c e p t s are s i m i l a r l y a p p r o a c h e d by Hall ¡day and Hasan . In -Fact, it s e e m s that g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e r e f e r s to the ac tu al s t r u c t u r e d e t e c t e d in texts, w h e r e a s s t r u c t u r e p o te nt ia l ai m s to identify the
p o s s i b i l i t i e s of v a r i a n c e s in text s t r u c t u r e . The te r m g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e will be used in th is p r e s en t st u d y for the s a k e of
c o h e r e n c e wi th V e n t o l a 's work as it will be d i s c u s s e d in the last part of t h i s ch ap te r. I will a l s o use the te r m g e n e ri c s t r u c t u r e to refer to t h e actua l ove ral l s t r u c t u r e of texts.
B e f o r e I p r o c e e d with a d i s c u s s i o n of g e n e ri c s t r u c t u r e in m o r e de ta il, it s e e m s ne ce s s a r y to c l a r i f y my own us e of the t e r m s
's tr uc tur e of tex t' and 'elements of text s t r u c t u r e ' . In H a l l i d a y & Ha sa n (i9 8 0 ), the e x p r e s s i o n s t r u c t u r e of a text is a p p r o a c h e d as
’the o v e r a l l st ru ct ure , the global s t r u c t u r e of the m e s s a g e Form' (p. .16)« A l t h o u g h this d e f i n i t i o n s e e m s to be just a m e r e p a r a p h r a s e of the t e r m 'structure of a text ', it ge t s s o m e h o w c l e a r e r wh en the te r m 'element' is rel a te d to text s t r u c t u r e - T h is is b e c a u s e t h e s t r u c t u r e of a text is c o n s t r u c t e d by e l e m e n t s which m a k e a c e r t a i n text s i m i l a r or dif f er en t when c o m p a r e d to a n o t h e r text. In t r y i n g to e x e m p l i f y ‘text s t r u c t u r e ’, Ha sa n (19650) r e f e r s to l i t e r a r y s t ud ie s, s a y i n g that:
The ea rl ie st known exam ple , if I am not mi st a k e n , is the A r i s t o t e l i a n d e f i n i t i o n of Greek t r a g ed y as ma de up of t h r e e elemen ts: th e be gi nn in g, the mi ddle, and the end ( p . 17).
In a p p l y i n g this e x a m p l e to the c o u r s e of b u y i n g and s e l l i n g in a s e r v i c e en c o u n t e r , it is not t o o a b s t r a c t or d i f f i c u l t to ima gin e that o n e h a s to go th ro ug h c e r t a i n s t a g e s in order to a c c o m p l i s h o n e ' s g o a l s . In other words, by e n t e r i n g a s e r v i c e area, a c u s t o m e r
is e x p e c t e d to ha v e a need and to c o n v e y it t h r o u g h a 'sale re qu es t ele m en t of the kind: 'Can I h a v e a „». p l e a s e ? ' . The s e r v e r ; in turn, is e x p e c t e d to a c k n o w l e d g e the c u s t o m e r by c o m p l y i n g with h i s / h e r re que st t h r o u g h a 'sale c o m p l i a n c e ' e l em en t, like: 'yes',
'here it is'. Th e s e text el em ent s, ad de d to othe r ones, gi v e s h a p e or 'text s t r u c t u r e ' to the social p r o c e s s of b u y i n g and s e l l i n g . Th is s t r u c t u r e will, in turn, d e f i n e the t e x t s as b e l o n g i n g to the s a m e 'Genre'„
In r e l a t i n g th es e e l e m e n t s to the m i c r o - l e v e l , that is, to the c o n v e r s a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e alone, it may be s t a t e d that an e l e m e n t is c o m p o s e d by m o v e s wh ich are s e q u e n c e d in a v a r i e t y of w a y s to
p r od uc e exc h an g e s . F o 11ow i n g the wor k by S i n c 1 a ir an d Colt h a r d (1975), V e n t o l a d e s c r i b e s a mo ve as an in te ra c t i o n a l term used to d e s c r i b e an act or a c o m b i n a t i o n of a c t s u n d e r s t o o d by t h e
p a r t i c i p a n t s as a c o n t r i b u t i o n to the i n te ra ct io n. An ex ch a n g e , in turn, is a p p r o a c h e d by V e n t o l a (Í987) as "a ba si c unit of so ci al
i n t e r a c t i o n ’ (p.97). Th er ef or e, g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e e l e m e n t s result e i th er from the r e a l i s a t i o n of a s i n g l e e x c h a n g e , like t h e G r e e t i n g element, or from the r e a l i s a t i o n of s e v e ra l exc h an ge s, like the S e r v i c e element, For instance.
An o t he r kind of ap pr o a c h to r e g i s t e r and g e n r e w i th in the S y s t e m i c F u n c t i o n a l framework is p r o p o s e d by M a rt in (1984, 1935). A c c o r d i n g to him, r e g i s t e r and g e n r e a r e both semi otic s y s t e m s r e a l i s e d by la ng u a g e whi ch in turn is a s p e c i a l kind of s e m io t ic s y s t e m co mp o s e d of di sc ou rs e, 1 e x i c o g r a m m a r and ph o n o l o g y . By
s e m i o t i c he m e a n s "s ys te ms that m a k e m e a n i n g s ’ (Martin 19 84 : 2 4 ) . The r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n genre, r e g i s t e r and l a n g u a g e is e x p r e s s e d in t e r m s of s e m i o t i c pl ane s. V e n t o l a (Í987) e x p r e s s e s this t y p e of r e l a t i o n s h i p as follows:
G e n r e will be seen as the p l a n e wh i c h o r g a n i s e s th e w a y s soci al e n c o u n t e r s u n f o l d as g e n e r i c s t r u c
-t a r e s in individual ins-tances. R e g i s -t e r is -the p l a ne wh ic h r e a l i z e s g e n r e by o r g a n i z i n g the a p p r o p r i a t e r e g i s t e r c h o i c e s in t e r m s of Field, Tenor and M o d e c h o i c e s at ea ch s t a g e of t h e u n f o l d i n g of the g e n e r i c st r u c t u r e . L a n g u a g e is the plan e
( t og et h er w i t h so m e n on -l i n g u i s t i c sy st eras ) wh i c It r e a l i s e s the h i g h e r - l e v e l c h o i c e s as linguistic: p at t er n i n g s in t ext s ( p « 5 ) »
In oth er words, by genre, Ma rt in and V e n t o l a mean a s e q u e n c e d an d g o a 1 o r i en t ed act i v i t y i n wh i ch speak er s of a cult ur e en gage, as
in, for example, b u y i n g m e d i ci ne s, w r i t i n g an arti cle , t a l k i n g to s o m e o n e on the phone, etc. In short, as M a r t i n (1984) s t a t e s
himself, " e v e r y t h i n g you do involves your p a r t i c i p a t i n g in one oí an other genre " (p.25) As s u g g e s t e d above, a g e n r e do es not h a v e s t r u c t u r e s of its own. Th er ef ore , in ord er for a ge nr e to be
r e a l i z e d it d P n :.ius on r e g i s t e r for its o r g a n i z a t i o n in t e r m s of the c o n t e x t u a l va r i a b l e s , and on la ng u a g e for its linguistic:
r e a l i z a t i o n . In othe r words, g e n r e can be ta ke n as a " p a r a s i t e - without r e g i s t e r and l a n g u a g e it could not s u r v i v e * (Martin
1984:25) .
The c o n c e p t s of r e g i s t e r and language, in their turn, are al s o a p p r o a c h e d by M a r t i n as s e m io t ic pl an es. S i m i l a r l y to genre , a
re gi s t e r is al s o seen by Ma rt in as a p a r a s i t e . In other words, it has no p h o n o l o g y of its own. T h e r ef or e, it e s t a b l i s h e s m e a n i n g by b o r r o w i n g the w o r d s and s t r u c t u r e s of the l a n g u a g e plane. L a n g u a g e then " f u n c t i o n s as the p h o n o l o g y of re g i s t e r , and both r e g i s t e r and
l a n g u a g e as the p h o n o l o g y of genre" (Martin 1 9 84 :2 5) . S u m m a r i z i n g , Ma rt in (Í985) s a y s that "these two s y s t e m s IIregister and g e n r e ] a r e what l-ljemslev r e f e r r e d to as c o n n o t a t i v e se m i o t i c s : s e m i o t i c s w h o s e e x p r e s s i o n p l a n e is a n o t h e r plan e" (p „ 2 4 9 ).
Th is p a r t i c u l a r model of language, r e g i s t e r and genre, as d e v e l o p e d by M a r t i n d i f f e r s to a c e r t a i n d e g r e e from that
a r t i c u l a t e d by H a l l i d a y . Firs tly , as d e s c r i b e d im me di at el y above, M a rt in v i e w s r e g i s t e r as a s e m io t ic s y s t em . D e s c r i b e d in t h i s way,
r e g i s t e r is a se mi o t i c s y s t e m in its own right, d i f f e r e n t from othe r s e m i o t i c s like language, music, games, etc. Th e r e f o r e , M a r t i n ' s view d i f f e r s from N e o -F i r t h i ans like l-iall i day, who tend to a p p r o a c h
r e g i s t e r as "an inter-level (cal led co nte xt ) r e l a t i n g l a n g u a g e to t h e r ea 1 wor Id" ( Mar t i n i 984 : 24 ) . T. n ot h er wor d s , r eg i st er i s
t r e a t e d wi th in th is t r a d i t i o n a l vi e w as a l a n g u a g e v a r i e t y wh ic h has to do with its uses in s i t u a t i o n s of d i f f e r e n t t y p e s (see, for
i n st an c e , Ha llid ay et al. í 9 6 4 , Ur e & E H i s i 9 7 7 ) . 13 es ides this, as s u g g e s t ed ear 1 ie r , the fr am ew or k d e v e l o p e d by Hall iday for
d e s c r i b i n g re gi s t e r m a k e s u s e of t h e t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s : Field, Mode and Tenor. Withi n th is fr ame w or k , th e s e v a r i a b l e s are c o n s i d e r e d to d e f i n e t It e c on t ext o f s i t uat i on an d d et e r m i n e t h e l i n g u i s t i c
p a t t e r n s of the te xt s p r o d u c e d in the a p p r o a c h e d co nt e x t .
A c c o r d i n g to the c o n n o t a t i v e framew ork , ho we v e r , t h e l i n g u i s t i c r e a l i z a t i o n s of a text are not the result of only one g e n e r a l c h o i c e for Field, Tenor and Mode. Instead, the g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e of a text
is v i e w e d as u n f o l d i n g with r e ga rd to d i f f e r e n t p o s s i b l e Field, T e no r and Mo d e op ti on s. Th i s can be e x e m p l i f i e d if one c o n s i d e r s p a r t i c i p a n t s duri ng the o p e n i n g of an int e ra ct io n. At t h i s stage, t h e Tenor r e l a t i o n s h i p might play a m o r e important ro l e than Fie ld or Mode, for instance. In ot her words, p a r t i c i p a n t s might feel at t h i s point more te mpt ed or o b l i g e d to greet or not to gr ee t b e c a u s e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p they ha v e got with one a n o t h e r (Tenor), r a th er than b e c a u s e of t h e in st i t u t i o n a l focus (Field).
As for the concept of genre, the d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n
Hal 1 ida y/Hasan framework and t h e c o n n o t a t i v e f r am ew or k p r o p o s e d by M a r t i n lies in the fact that in the former r e g i s t e r and g e n r e are tr e a t e d as li ng ui sti c a b s t r a c t i o n on the s e m a n t i c level. In M a r t i n ' s fr am e w o r k , on the other hand, r e g i s t e r and g e n r e are s e m i o t i c
In t h i s study, re gi ste r, g e n r e and l a n g u a g e will be v i e w e d as d e s c r i b e d by the c o n n o t a t i v e •Framework p r o p o s e d by M a r t i n (1985). In ot her words, they will be seen as sent i ot i c: p l a n e s whi ch c o m p r i s e soc i a 1 a c t i v i t i es o f our c u 11 ur e .
Now that I ha ve o u t l i n e d s o m e of the basic: c o n c e p t s wh i c h will be p r e s e n t t h r o u g h o u t my d i s c u s s i o n , I will r e v i e w so m e of the
p r e v i o u s w o r k s on the u n f o l d i n g of S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r texts.
1.1.2 - STUDIES ON THE STRUCTURE OF SERVICE ENCOUNTER TEXTS
One? of the first s t u d i e s on s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r g e n r e is the work of M i t c h e l l <1975). M i t c h e l l ' s work a i m s at finding out s y s t e m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h i p s b e t w ee n text and c o n t e x t in di st in ct but r e l a t e d genres: ma rk et auction, marke t t r a n s a c t i o n and shop t r a n s a c t i o n . Mi tc h e l l fi nd s e v i d e n c e at both le xic al and g r a m m a t i c a l l e v e l s for the d i f f e r e n t r e a l i z a t i o n s of s t a g i n g ( s e q u e n c e of e l e m e n t s ) in t h e s e s e r v i c e en c o u n t e r s . In ot he r words, a l t h o u g h he d o e s not a p p r o a c h text in te rm s of g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e s , M i t c h e l l ' s st udy r e v e a l s an authentic: c o n c er n wi th g e n r e t y po lo gy . In short, his st ud y can be taken as one of t h e first a t t e m p t s to d e f i n e h o w s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s are r e l a t e d to o n e a n o t h e r with r e g a r d to the
l i n g u i s t i c r e a l i z a t i o n of t h e s t a g i n g s of t h e social p r o c e s s .
A n o t h e r important st udy on s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s is c a r r i e d out by Me rr it (1976). In fact, Merr it wa s t h e o n e that co in ed t h e te r m
'Service E n c o u n t e r ' . She r e f e r s to it as:
an instance of f a c e - t o - f a c e in te ra ct io n b e t w ee n a se rve r who is 'of fi c ia ll y p o s t e d ' in so me s e r v i c e ar e a and a c u s t o m e r w h o is pr es en t in that s e r v i c e area, that i n t e r a c t i o n be in g o r i e n t e d to t h e s a t i s f a c t i o n of t h e c u s t o m e r ' s p r e s u m e d d e s i r e for so me s e r v i c e and t h e s e r v e r ' s o b l i g a t i o n to p r o v i d e that s e r v i c e ( 1 9 7 6 : 32 1) .
10
Merrit 's st u d y r e l i e s on an e t h n o m e t h o d o l o g i cal ap pr o a c h . It a i m s at id en ti fy in g s o m e ra ng e of r e c u r r i n g a c t i v i t y and "offer a t r e a t m e n t of s o m e p a t t e r n s of talk that oc cu r in s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s '
(.Í976- 3i5>. M o r e s p e c i f i c a l l y , Merrit is c o n c e r n e d with d i s c o u r s e s t r u c t u r e s of the kind 'question -answer' a d j a c e n c y pair in or de r to revea l t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e c o 1-¾ e r e n c e o f e v e r y d ay s o c i a 1
a c t i v i t i e s . Her a n a l y s i s then sh o w s the r e l a t i o n s h i p whic h e x i s t s b e t w e e n the q u e s t i o n - an sw er (q uestio n) p a t t e r n and the p r a g m a t i c
in t e r p r et at io n of the c u s t o m e r ' s re qu es t.
Two oth er s t u d i e s on s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s a r e a l s o wo rt h c o m m e n t i n g here: C o u p l a n d (1983) and B o w k e r (1983). They are both base d on S i n c l a i r and C o u l t h a r d ' s (1975) mode l of d i s c o u r s e
a n a l y s i s . C o u p l a n d ' s st udy on Travel A g e n c y in te ra c t i o n s r e v e a l s a s p e c i f i c interest in the t r a n s a c t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r texts. The s t r u c t u r e of an e n c o u n t e r as d e s c r i b e d in h i s work c o n s i s t s of o n e main t r a n s a c t i o n wh i c h f o l l o w s a b e g i n n i n g / m i d d l e / end s t r u c t u r e . S i m i l a r l y to C o u p l a n d ' s work, B o wk er 's st ud y on s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s (based on an e l a b o r a t i o n of S i n c l a i r and C o u l t h a r d 's 1975 model in tr od uc ed by E d m o n d s o n (1981)) a l s o p r e s e n t s the sa me b e g i n n i n g / m i d d l e / end st r u c t u r e . B o w k e r a l s o w o r k s with tr av el ag en cy i n t e r a c t i o n s c o n c e n t r a t i n g on the intera cti ona l or s t r a t e g i c m e a n i n g of t h e s e c o n v e r s a t i o n s . Bo wk er 's c o n c e r n is to e x a m i n e the actual c o n v e r s a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e used in e v e r y d a y s i t u a t i o n s in or d e r to p r o v i d e a b a s i s for c o m p a r i s o n with F L T m a t e r i a l .
Now that I h a v e b r i e fl y d i s c u s s e d s o m e w o r k s on the g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s ba se d on d i ff er en t v i e w s of language, let me r e c o n s i d e r the d i s c u s s i o n on s y s t e m i c l i n g u i s t i c s and t h e a p p r o a c h e s to s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r g e n r e d e v e l o p e d on t h i s bas i s .
12
1.1.3 - GENERIC STRUCTURE IN SYSTEMIC LINGUISTICS - TWOAPPROACHES
Two a p p r o a c h e s to r e g i s t e r and g e n r e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n ha v e e m e r g e d w i th in the s y s t e m i c - Functional fr a m e w o r k : H a s a n ' s s t r u c t u r e p o t e n t i a l s of g e n r e s and the c o n n o t a t ive s e m i o t i c s
fr am ew or k p r o p o s e d by a r e s e a r c h gr ou p at t h e U n i v e r s i t y of Sid ney . Here, I shall be only c o n c e r n e d with d e s c r i b i n g H a s a n ' s work on g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e and e x p l o r i n g the c o n n o t a t i v e s e m i o t i c s f r am ew or k wh ic h c o n s t i t u t e s the t h e o r e t i c a l f r am ew or k for th i s study.
1.1.3.1 - Hasan's Generic Structure Potential
As a l r e ad y m e n t io ne d, H a l l ¡ d a y (Í978) d o e s not a p p r o a c h the f o r m a l i z a t i o n of the ov er al l p a t t e r n i n g of g e n r e s . Hasan, on the other hand, do es th is in t e r m s of S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l s . For her the e l e m e n t s wh ic h oc cur wi th in one text a r e p r e d i c t e d by t h e c o n t e x t u a l c o n f i g u r a t i o n wh ic h is, in turn, ’the total set of' v a l u e s of the var i ab les IIF i e 1 d , T en or , Mod e II r e 1 evan t to an y on e g i ven oc casi on
...' (Hasan & H a l l i day 19 80: 20) . A c c o r d i n g to t h i s view, the t e x t s which b e lo ng to the s a m e g e n r e are r e p r e s e n t e d by a linear s c h e m a of S t r u c t u r e P o te nt ia l wh ich includes o b l i g a t o r y e l em en ts ; that is, e l e m e n t s which are g e n r e de fin i ng : " e l e m e n t s w h o s e presence? is es se n t i a l to any c o m p l e t e text e m b e d d e d in the c o n t e x t u a l
c o n f i g u r a t i o n under focus* (Hasan & H a l l i d a y 1980:21 ), and
o c c a s i o n a l l y so m e op ti on al el em en ts , w h o s e ' a p p l i c a b i l i t y can be wider than that of the s p e c i f i c g e n r e un de r focus" (Hasan & H a l l i d a y 1 9 8 0 : 2 6 ) .
As said ear 1 i e r , Has an r e p r e s e n t s t h e s t r u c t u r e of t e x t s
lin ea r ly . The e l e m e n t s h y p o t h e s i z e d by her and t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n they h a v e w i t h i n the S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n are d i s t r i b u t e d as follows:
[(<GREETING>.) (SALE IN I Tl ATI O N)~3 C(SALE ENQUIRY.)
(SALE REQUEST ~ SALE COMPLIANCE}] SALE ~ PURCHASE ~ PURCHASE CLOSURE (* FINIS)
(Ha ll i da y & Ha sa n 198 0: 27 ).
The S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l r e p r é s e n t â t ion can be read in t h i s way: The Rou nd b r a c k e t s ( ) indi ca te opt io n a l i t y .
The S q u a r e b r a c k e t s II II st and for mo bi l i t y . The dot . m e a n s a m o b i l e e l e m e n t .
The c u rv ed a r r o w s C ) s y m b o l i z e r e c u r s i v e n e s s .
As For re c u r s i o n , it can be of two types: s i m p l e and h o m o g e n e o u s . In a S i m p l e Re cu rs io n, an el eme nt r e c u r s wi th ou t any c o n s e q u e n c e for any othe r el em e n t . H o m o g e n e o u s R e c u r s i o n , on the ot he r hand, h a p p e n s from the r e c u r s i o n of o n e el em e n t . In th e S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l
r e p r e s e n t a t ion, th i s is sh ow n by e n c l o s i n g the r e l e v a n t e l e m e n t s in a cu rl y bracket < > as well as by a p p e n d i n g the a r r o w to the o u t s i d e part of the br ac ket .
The c ir cu nf le x " in di ca te s fixed s e q u e n c e of e l e m e n t s .
T h e S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l r e p r e s e n t ati on d i s p l a y s four important a s p e c t s of H a s a n ' s a p p r o a c h to text s t r u c t u r e . It first li s t s the o b l i g a t o r y e l e m e n t s which, a c c o r d i n g to Hasan, must oc cu r in t e x t s wh ic h b e lo ng to the g e n r e un der focus. S e co nd ly , it b r i n g s about the o p t i o n a l e l e m e n t s wh ic h a r e a l l o w e d to be r e a l i z e d in t e x t s of a s p e c i f i c genre. Fina lly , it d e s c r i b e s the s e q u e n c e of the e l e m e n t s as well as t h e s t a g e s w h e r e r e c u r s i o n is likely to oc cu r.
H a s a n ' s work on g e n r e t y p o l o g y d i f f e r s from the oth er p r e v i o u s a p p r o a c h e s to g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e of t e x t s b e c a u s e it is an a p p r o a c h wh i c h a c c o u n t s for text v a r i a t i o n . As she says:
T h e SP then is a p o w e r f u l a b s t r a c t i o n from whi ch can flow a l a r g e n u mb er of p o s s i b l e
14
text s t r u c t ur es , each o-f wh ic h may differ•From the o t h e r s in so m e re sp ec t, but all of w h i c h c o n f o r m to t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e SP
... (Hasan & H a l l i d a y 198 0 :2 9) .
In short , the S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n can be ta ke n as an important mo v e for the s y s t e m a t i z a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n t e x t s and c o nt ex ts . It a l s o p r o v e s to be very e f f e c t i v e in the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of te x t s in v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s .
1.1.3.2 - The Connotatlve Semiotics Framework: A Synoptic System of Genre
In s e c t i o n one of th is ch ap te r, the c o n c e p t s of genre, r e g i s t e r and lan?juage w e r e seen in the light of t h e c o n n o t a t i v e s e m i o t i c s f r a m e w o r k . As it was disc us sed , r e g i s t e r and g e n r e are bo t h s e m iot ic s y s t e m s wh i c h are re al iz ed by a n o t h e r kind of semi otic s y s t e m ■- the la n g u a g e . Ho wever, it has not yet been s p e c i f i e d how t h e g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e s e q u e n c e s are g e n e r a t e d on t h e g e n r e plane .
A c c o r d i n g to Marti n (1985), g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e o p e r a t e s in s y s t e m n e t w o r k s . Th es e s y s t e m n e t w o r k s d i s p l a y f e a t u r e s wh i c h
c a p t u r e s i m i l a r i t i e s in t e x t s of both s i m i l a r and sa me kin d. M a r t i n (1985) p u t s fo rward a net wor k r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of t h e s e r v i c e
e n c o u n t e r genre. The h y p o t h e s i s b e h i n d th is model is that t h e s e g e n e r i c s y s t e m s c a p t u r e the g e n e r i c c h o i c e s in a c e r t a i n c u l t u r e , d e f i n i n g , in th is way, the r e l a t e d n e s s am on g t e x t s in a g i v e n g e n r e by d e l i c a t e features.
Wh en c o n t r a s t i n g the c h a r a c t e r is t i c s of the ne two rk
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n with th ose of H a s a n ' s S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l , it c a n be n o t e d that M a r t i n ' s model s h a r e s with H a s a n ' s the c o n c ep t of text v a r i a t i o n . In other words, both r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s a l l o w a m o r e
f l e x i b l e n o t i o n of text s t r u c t u r e . Th i s is a c t u a l l y what
d i s t i n g u i s h e s t h e s e two f r a m e w o r k s from the oth er text a p p r o a c h e s p r e s e n t e d earl ier : M e r r i t ' s (1976), C o u p l a n d ' s (1983), and B o w k e r ' s
Howe ve r, r e p r e s e n t i n g g e ne ri c s t r u c t u r e of t e x t s as c h o i c e s in the s y s t e m n e tw or k se e m s to be mo r e a d e q u a t e to my study than
H a s a n ' s linear r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . The n e t w o r k and tl-.e c o r r e s p o n d ing r e a l i z a t i o n r u l e s pr op o s e d by M a r t i n (1985) a i m at d i s t i n g u i s h i n g one ge n r e from a n o t he r wh il e s h o w i n g the r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n them. Te x t s are c o n s i d e r e d eithe r the sa m e or d i f f e r e n t based on th eir shar ed fe at ure s. A text which h a p p e n s to p r e s en t an element not
included in a s e co nd text, has ma d e t h i s s e l e c t i o n at a m o r e d e l i c a t e fe at ur e in the ne tw ork . For example, an e l e m en t like S e r v i c e Bid see m s to be e x c l u s i v e l y a s s i g n e d to t e x t s wh ic h are c h a r a c t e r i z e d by the f e a t ur e c h o i c e 'not app oi n te d' , that is, no server in p a r t i c u l a r
is a p p o i n t e d to s e r v e the c u s t o m e r (when e n t e r i n g a ch emist, for instance). Thus, u n l i k e H a s a n ' s model, o b l i g a t o r y e l e m e n t s a r e not c o n s i d e r e d g e n r e - d e f i n i n g in the n e t w o r k r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Rat h er , it
is the r e l a t i o n s b e t w ee n the e l e m e n t s w h i c h d e f i n e a genre.
A s e c o n d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of M a r t i n ’s s y s t e m ne twork , wh ic h al so d i s t i n g u i s h e s it from H a s a n ' s model r e f e r s to text c o m p l e t e n e s s . A c c o r d i n g to him, a text is still c o n s i d e r e d a c o m p l e t e and
func ti ona l text even when the p u r c h a s e of g o o d s do es not occu r. When this h a p p e n s it indica tes that the f e a t u r e s e l e c t i o n in the n e t w o r k has not r e a c h e d the st ag e wh er e the p u r c h a s e is a c c o m p l i s h e d .
Howe ve r, in r e l a t i n g the c o n c e p t s of text as p r o c e s s and text as pro duct to M a r t i n ' s network r e p r e s e n t a t i o n it can be no te d that ge n r e n e t w o r k s a l s o pr ese nt a s y n o p t i c v i e w of genre .
Th er ef or e, M a r t i n ' s model of a n a l y s i s d o e s not account for all the d y n a m i c as pec t of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r in te ra c t i o n s . O n e of t h e s e a s p e c t s is the s e q u e n c e of e l em en ts . As for th is pr oblem, M a r t i n
(1985) a d m i t s that in the net wor k r e p r e s e n t a t i o n "nothing h a s been said about the s e q u e n c e of el e m e n t s * (p. 254). By le ar ni ng from V e n t o l a 's work on s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r te xt s, he a d d s that:
...onc-r d o e s not ha v e to collect very many s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s b e f o r e one c o m e s a c r o s s d e p a r t u r e s from th is n o r m in what a r e still felt to be we 11- f o r me d text s. G r e e t i n g s for e x a m p l e are found initially, after A t t e n d a n c e A l l o c a t i o n and af te r Service- 13 ids as well; ... (p.254).
A n o t h e r aspec t whi ch M a r t i n ' s model d o e s not h a n d l e p r o p e r l y is R e c u r s i o n . In other words, the synoptic: r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of genre-: d o e s not a l i o w f o r e 1 e ni e n t s o f t h e s ervi c e e n c o u n t e r s t r u c t u r e to o c ¢: u r mo r e than once. The a n a l y s i s of V e n t o l a 's data, howev er, s h o w s that e l e m e n t s r e cc ur very of te n. For e x a m p l e o n e can very e a si ly think of a text w h e r e a c u s t o m e r has mo r e than one need and, f o r g e t t i n g to spell both n e e d s at t h e s a m e time, will need to go back to t h e el em ent Servi cc-: af te r h a v i n g go ne t h r o ug h it once.
B e c a u s e of the p r o b l e m s p o i n t e d out above, it s e e m s that the ne tw or k re pr e s e n t at io n ca nn ot fully ac cou nt for all the
r e a 1 i sat i on a 1 f l e x i b i l i t y of nat ur a 1 s e r v i c e en c oun t er da t a . As Mar tin (i 9 8 5 ) h i m s c I f states:
The n e t w o r k . . . and the c o r r e s p o n d i n g r e a l i s a t i o n r u l e s ... wo uld if a n y w h e r e near c o r r e c t , go so m e way t o w a r d s d i s t i n g u i s h i n g one g e n r e from a n o t he r and s h o w i n g the r e l a t i o n s b e t w e e n them. But they are still a long way from g e n e r a t i n g w e l l - f o r m e d s c h e m a t i c s t r u c t u r e s for s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s in our c u l t u r e .. .(p . 254). B e c a u s e s o m e p h e n o m e n a of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r t e x t s r e m a i n u n a c c o u n t a b l e by both H a s a n ' s S t r u c t u r e P o t e n t i a l and M a r t i n ' s n e t w o r k r e p r e s e n t at i o n , V e n t o l a (Í9Í37) s u g g e s t s that t e x t s s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d from a d y n a m i c point of vi ew as an o n - g o i n g p r o c e s s .
V e n t o l a b u i l d s up from the c o n n o t a t i v e s y s t e m i c fr am ewo rk , fo l l o w i n g the c o n t r i b u t i o n s ma d e by H a s a n ' s model, and p r o p o s e s a 'genre
flowchart'. T h is d y n a m i c 'tool' e n a b l e s one to r e a l i s e and g e n e r a t e t e x t s from g e n r e n e tw or ks , r e p r e s e n t i n g m o r e f a i t h f u l l y t h e
i n t e r a c t i v e n a t u r e of s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s .
1.1.3.2.1 - The Flowchart: A Dynamic Representation of Genre
B e f o r e I p r o c ee d with the d e s c r i p t i o n of V e n t o l a 's fl ow ch ar t, let me ma k e clear what is meant by a d y n a m i c p e r s p e c t i v e on text» Ravelli (1989) al so a d d r e s s e s th is m a tt er by asking: ’H o w do e s one
1 ool< d y n am i c a 11 y at so met h i n g ? ( p ., 5 ) „
A c c o r d i n g to Ravel li (1989), a dynamic: point of vi ew will be d i f f e r e n t from a s y n o p t i c vi e w b e c a u s e t e x t s are looked at
p r os p e c t iv e l y , and the analyst tr ie s to e x p l a i n what is to co m e af te r a c e r t a i n s t a g e in a text» Wi th t h i s p e r s p e c t i v e , the fo cu s s h i f t s from r e l a t i o n s of c o n s t i t u e n c y to r e l a t i o n s of
i n t e r d e p e n d e n c y . In other words, a text is first split up into
parts, th e s e pa rt s are e x a m i n e d and the r e l a t i o n th ey h a v e wi th one a n o t h e r is an al y s e d . A s y n o p t i c p e r s p e c t i v e , on t h e ot he r hand,
p r e s e n t s a text as a w h ol e' and only later will the text be a n a l y s e d in its part s. Th er ef ore , in r e l a t i n g the p a r t s of a text wi t h o n e an ot he r, a model with a d y n a m i c p e r s p e c t i v e is ‘a b l e to g e n e r a t e in mo me nt -by--moment st ages. That is, it s h o u l d be n o n - e x p 1 os i ve “
( Ravelli 1989:6).
A fu rt he r c h a r a c t e r i st i c: of the d y n a m i c v i e w is that any
s t a t e m e n t about a text sh ou ld be ma d e in p r o b a b i l i s t i c t e r m s r a th er than c a t e g o r ical s t a t e m e n t s about what is c o m i n g next in a text. F i n a l l y and most importantly, Ravelli (1989) p o i n t s out that for a model to ha v e an a c t i v e and p r o s p e c t i v e v i e w of l i k e l i h o o d and
i n t e rd ep en de nc y , it is n e c e s s a r y to a t t a c h t e x t s to the c o n t e x t in wh ic h they are pro d uc ed . Th i s vi ew is s u p p o r t e d by Ha sa n (1977) who s a y s that :
If text can be seen as a b r i d g e b e t w e e n the verb al s y m b o l i c s y s t e m and t h e cu lt ur e, t h i s
is b e c a u s e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p b e t w e e n text and social cont ext : text is 'in l a n g u a g e ' as well as 'in c u l t u r e ' (p.229).
I now r e tu rn to the d i s c u s s i o n of V e n t o l a ' s Flowchart by listing the e l e m e n t s she p r o p o s e s -For the generic: s t r u c t u r e of s e r v i c e en c o u n t er t e x t s :
Element Abbrevia tion
Function A simple example of realization
G REETIN G GR — phatic hello— hi
A TTEN D A N CE- AA — organization of who's next— 1 am ALLO CATION proximity
S E R V IC E BIO SB — offer of service can 1 help you— yes SE R V IC E S — needs & their could 1 have .. .7—
provision yes sure
RESO LU TIO N R — decision to buy/ I'll take these— okay
not to buy
GOODS GH — exchange of goods here you are—
HANDOVER thanks
PAY P — exchange of money it's 3.50— right
CLO SIN G CL — appreciation of service thanks very much—
thank you
GO O DBYE GB — phatic bye— goodbye
FIG. 1.1 - Generic: S t r u c t u r e E l e m e n t s of S e r v i c e E n c o u n t e r Texts, (as found in V e n t o l a 1987:69)
A c c o r d i n g to V e n t o l a (1987), the p a r t i c i p a n t s who interact in s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r s c r e a t e the social p r o c e s s in a c o o p e r a t i v e way, re al iz ing , thus, a u n i q u e text. In the f l o w ch ar t, th is social
p r o c e s s is r e p r e s e n t e d by two c e n t r e li ne s le ad in g d o w n w a r d s . The e l e m e n t s o u t l i n e d ab ov e are r e p r e s e n t e d by o b l o n g c i r c l e s and both the s e rv er and the c u s t o m e r p e r f o r m th ei r r o l e s by r e a l i z i n g t h e s e el em e n t s . The-; s e r v e r ' s path fo ll ow s the line on the left and the c u s t o m e r ' s the one on the righ t. S o m e t i m e s , ho we v e r , t h e s e p a t h s c o n v e r g e due to so m e n e g o t i a t i o n about the o n - g o i n g interaction.
In de pe nd en t d e c i s i o n s about the i n t e r a c t i v e p r o c e s s a r e al so ma de by the in te ra c t a n t s who s i d e s t e p and c h o o s e othe r p a t h s away
•From t h e m i d d l e social p r o c e s s lines. T h e s e d e c i s i o n s are
r e p r e s e n t e d by dia m on ds . The d e c i s i o n s wh i c h the in te ra c t a n t s re a c h are p o i n t e d out by 'yes/no' an sw er s. T h e s e a n s w e r s lead t h e
p a r t i c i p a n t s to act a c c o r d i n g l y . Mo re o v e r , t h e s e d e c i s i o n s d e t e r m i n e the f o l l o w i n g 'work' to be done. Th is work is r e p r e s e n t e d by s q u a r e s with the s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t y wri tt en in them. The wavy square, in
turn, s h o w s t h e interact an ts the d i r e c t i o n s of the f l o w c h a r t . In other words, they indicate thr o ug h the i n s t r u c t i o n s (GO F O R W A R D / BACK TO) if a c e r t a i n ele ment is to be r e c u r s e d or sk ip p e d .
The f l ow ch ar t b e l o w is the o r i g i n a l v e r s i o n p r o p o s e d by M e n t ó l a (Í987) for t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r g e n r e .
20
S E R V E R ( S ) S E R V I C E E N C O U N T E R S Fl o * Chart S O C I A L P R O C E S S C U S IO M E : R ( C ) 8E P R E S E N T IN S E R V I C E A R E A Start E N T E R S E R V I C E A R E A ( G R E E T I N GJ
\L O O K FOR j ■ A N O T H E R S< i j L F A VE ! i t C A L L C TO A P P R O A C H ! >1 / t + ■")-V
P R E S E N T Y O U R -*■ N E E D ( S ) R E Q U E S T S P E C I F I C A T I O N OF T H E N E E D G I V E S P E C I F I C A T I O N r * - * ' 5 ye»
--- 22
REP
RES
ENT
IN
G
SE
RV
IC
E
EN
C
O
U
N
TE
R
AS
A
PR
O
C
ES
S
23
Fig. 1.2 - The Flowchart Representation of the Service Encounter Genre
(as found in Ventola 1987:70)
ï
)
In short, V e n t o l a s u g g e s t s that the f l ow ch ar t r e v e a l s the d e v e l o p m e n t of a text t h r o u g h the n e g o t i a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e two p a r t i c i p a n t s involved. She s u m m a r i s e s the d e s c r i p t i o n of the
f l o w c h a r t by sa yi ng that "it r e p r e s e n t s t h e v a r i o u s w a y s in whic h i n t e r a c t a n t s c o n t i n u o u s l y ha v e to ma ke d e c i s i o n s about the
d e v e lop morn t and the d i r e c t i o n of the soci al p r o c e s s ” ( p , 67 ) . F i n a l l y and most importantly, the fl ow ch ar t e n a b l e s the an aly st to r e p r e s e n t
1an g u a g e an d c on t ext as sy st emat i cal ly an d Fun ct i on ally c o r r e l a t ed . Fr o m a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l point of view, the f l ow ch ar t can
c e r t a i n l y pr o v e to be a very us ef ul tool- S i n c e V e n t o l a (1987) do es not pr ese nt it as a un i v e r s a l chart , it s e e m s to be i n t e r e s t i n g and r a t h e r n e c e s s a r y to see in what r e s p e c t s the g e n e r i c s t r u c t u r e of a g e n r e is d i f f e r e n t / s i m i l a r in di st in ct c u l t u r e s .
In the present study, I will apply th i s flo w ch ar t t o my d a t a in or de r to stud y the? s e r v i c e e n c o u n t e r g e n r e in both B r a s i l i a n and B r i t i s h s o c i e t i e s . Th e r e f o r e , the Focus of th i s st u d y wi ll b e on g e n r e and on what " II g e n r e II is set up to ex pl ai n: how you a c c o m p l i s h t h i n g s on a day to day basis, in a c u l t u r a l l y s p e c i f i c w a y ’ (Martin 1984 : 2 8 ).
1.2 - DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA AND DATA COLLECTION
The B r a z i l i a n d a t a w e r e c o l l e c t e d in Flor ia n o p o l is ~ SC, d u ri ng a p e r i o d of thre e m o n t h s (August to Octo be r, 1988). The B r i t i s h data, in turn, we re c o l l e c t e d in B i r m i n g h a m (E ng la nd ) For a n o t h e r t h r e e m o n t h s (February to April, 1989).
In both settings, t h e fo ll o w i n g p r o c e d u r e s w e r e used for da t a g a t h e r i n g . I initially c h o s e t h r e e l o c a t i o n s for the da t a
c o l l e c t i o n : (1) the p h ar ma cy ; (2) the post off ice ; and (3) the
tr av el age ncy . This c h o i c e r e f l e c t e d the a s s u m e d c o m m u n i c a t i v e n e e d s of a B r a z i l i a n learner of E n g l i s h in an E n g l i s h c o n t e x t , as well as
