qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty

uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasd
fghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
Prácticas Discursivas
de la Comunicación
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
Oral IV

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
4º FIII

2024
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
Prof. Lic. Paula V. Viera

vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
I.S.F.D. Nº 88
PROFESORADO DE INGLÉS

wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui
opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg
hjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert
yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
 UNIT 1
SFL and SPOKEN DISCOURSE

From literary genres to speech genres

Let´s start by reading and reflecting upon the following excerpts taken from The
Problem of Speech Genres by Mikhail Bakhtin (1982).

“All the diverse areas of human activity involve the use of language. Quite

understandably, the nature and forms of this use are just as diverse as are
the areas of human activity. This, of course, in no way disaffirms the

national unity of language. Language is realized in the form of individual

concrete utterances (oral and written) by participants in the various areas

of human activity. These utterances reflect the specific conditions and

goals of each such area not only through their content (thematic) and

linguistic style, that is, the selection of the lexical, phraseological, and
grammatical resources of the language, but above all through their

compositional structure. All three of these aspects –thematic content,

style, and compositional structure – are inseparably linked to the whole

of the utterance and are equally determined by the specific nature of the
particular sphere of communication. Each separate utterance is individual,

of course, but each sphere in which language is used develops its own
relatively stable types of these utterances. These we may call speech
genres.”

“{…} It is especially important here to draw attention to the very significant

difference between primary (simple) and secondary (complex) speech

genres (understood not as a functional difference). Secondary (complex)

speech genres – novels, dramas, all kinds of scientific research, major

genres of commentary, and so forth – arise in more complex and
comparatively highly developed and organized cultural communication

1
(primarily written) that is artistic, scientific, sociopolitical, and so on.

During the process of their formation, they absorb and digest various
primary (simple) genres that have taken form in unmediated speech

communion.”

“We speak only in definite speech genres, that is, all our utterances have
definite and relatively stable typical forms of construction of the whole.

Our repertoire of oral (and written) speech genres is rich. We use them

confidently and skillfully in practice, and it is quite possible for us not

even to suspect their existence in theory. Like Moliere’s Monsieur

Jourdain who, when speaking in prose, had no idea that was what he was
doing, we speak in diverse genres without suspecting that they exist. Even

in the most free, the most unconstrained conversation, we cast our

speech in definite generic forms, sometimes rigid and trite ones,

sometimes more flexible, plastic, and creative ones (everyday

communication also has creative genres at its disposal). We are given

these speech genres in almost the same way that we are given our native
language, which we master fluently long before we begin to study

grammar. We know our native language – its lexical composition and

grammatical structure – not from dictionaries and grammars but from

concrete utterances that we hear and that we ourselves reproduce in live

speech communication with people around us. We assimilate forms of

language only in forms of utterances and in conjunction with these forms.

The forms of language and the typical forms of utterances, that is, speech

genres, enter our experience and our consciousness together, and in

close connection with one another. To learn to speak means to learn to

construct utterances (because we speak in utterances and not in

individual sentences, and, of course, not in individual words). Speech
genres organize our speech in almost the same way as grammatical

2
 (syntactical) forms do. We learn to cast our speech in generic forms and,

when hearing others’ speech, we guess its genre from the very first words;
we predict a certain length (that is, the approximate length of the speech

whole) and a certain compositional structure; we foresee the end; that is,
from the very beginning we have a sense of the speech whole, which is

only later differentiated during the speech process. If speech genres did
not exist and we had not mastered them, if we had to originate them

during the speech process and construct each utterance at will for the

first time, speech communication would be almost impossible.”

Genres in Systemic Functional Linguistics

The concept of genre is a fundamental part of the stratification system that
Halliday proposes in his Systemic Functional Linguistics model (SFL). Below is a
diagram which summarises the main dimensions in Halliday’s theory.

To understand this further, let’s read a section from Chapter 1 in Intonation in

the Grammar of English (2008) by Halliday and Greaves. This text will help us
develop the theoretical framework for our textual analyses.

3
4
5
In this chapter, we have read about stratification in SFL, wording, and
delicacy, among other concepts. Let’s go over them together one more time.

The codification of thoughts, ideas, experiences, etc. in linguistic format begins

when meanings move from the semantic stratum to the linguistic one. The
speaker decides that he has gone far enough in the ramification of each lexico-
grammatical decision, which has allowed them to make their choices regarding
what is called the delicacy of the system. The delicacy of the system allows the
user of the language to move from the more general to the more specific
choices, stopping at the most convenient option.

This basic axis of description is, as the authors claim, a paradigmatic one “A
category is located according to its value in the system”. The more you go
through the set of options, the more conscious you are as a speaker of the
decisions you are making and the better your communicative intentions will be
conveyed. These choices fill the selection slots thus forming phrases, the
wording of the system, the concrete level of organization of the linguistic code
that groups the lexico-grammatical elements into units of meaning. Skilled

6
language users will efficiently pick the optimal elements without affecting
fluency, and richly contributing to accuracy, while adjusting to the right level of
complexity.

This stratum is built embedded in its context which, in turn, is divided into
context of situation and context of culture. The former made of field, tenor
and mode, the latter occurring in one or various speech genres, culturally
construed, conventional and routinized. Moreover, field, tenor and mode work
in connection with each metafunction of language. Have a look at the chart
on the next page:

• the “aboutness” of the text

FIELD • expresses ideational meanings, that is the speaker's experiences

• embodies the interpersonal function

• expresses the relationship constructed between the Self and the
TENOR Other, setting the register

• allows the textual function to manifest through a channel, oral or

written
MODE • sometimes mediated, with features of spokenness and/or
writtenness either as required, or as the speaker chooses to use
them

In the same way, when moving to the phonetic-phonological stratum,

decisions must be made, either articulatory – such as the shape and position
of the tongue – or prosodic – such as pitch movement. This plane of
realization is not of content like the previous layers (semantic and lexico-
grammatical), but of expression. We can mention here that the content plane
has a system of meaning which has to be coherent, in other words logical, and
a lexicogrammatical system which needs to be both coherent and cohesive.
Below, there is a graphic which displays the two planes and their connection
with the corresponding strata:

7
It is within this theoretical framework of potential meanings that we are going
to carry out the analysis of texts, particularly spoken texts, and in agreement
with Jacques Derrida’s statement “There is no genre-less text” (1980: 65). We
will attribute at least one genre, and perhaps more, to each text. That is, a text
will never be genre-less but it might belong to more than one genre.

The phonetic-phonological stratum

Finally comes the expression plane, in which spoken language is in charge of

the realization stage, through articulatory and prosodic phonetics and
phonology. This is often accompanied by paralinguistic features and it is
sometimes mediated. This occurs as the expression plane, which is responsible
for sending out the message for successful communication to take place. The
complexity of this whole system is enormous, from the initial Semantic Stratum,
through the lexico-grammatical ramifications – with its many choices – adapted
in terms of the many variables of the situational-cultural context strata and
finally realizing through the phonological strata.

Writtenness and Spokenness

Although it might seem very clear where to set a limit between written and oral
language, the truth is that there are various degrees of writtenness and
spokenness in both written and oral texts. Think of a notice board as an
example of a text which contains features of writtenness, within a written genre,

8
through a graphic channel. Now, think of an announcement through a
loudspeaker which also contains features of writtenness although it is a spoken
text and is uttered through an oral channel, mediated. Also, consider the
spokenness in a WhatsApp text message, although it travels through a written
–graphic- mediated channel. What other examples can you provide?

Let’s read the following extract from Spoken and Written Language by Halliday
(1989: 61). In it, we will read about lexical density and grammatical intricacy in
connection with the use of content and function words in spoken and written
texts.

Lexical density appears to be linked to written formats, with a common use of

nominalization of processes. As Halliday states, “Modern English is a highly
nominalised language because dressing up as a noun is the only way to gain
access to all the possibilities in thematic and informational structure” (1989:71).

9
The use of a higher number of lexical items – or content words – and the
reduction in the number of function words is a fundamental feature of written
texts. On the other hand, oral texts have a higher number of function words.
We can explain this as follows: the difference between written and spoken
language is one of density, the density with which the information is presented.
Written language is dense, oral language is sparse:

“Spontaneous speech is unlike written texts, it contains many

mistakes, sentences are usually brief and the whole fabric of verbal
expression is riddled with hesitations and silences.” (Halliday,
1989:76)

However, this does not mean that written language is highly organised,
structured and complex while spoken language is disorganised, fragmentary and
simple. Spoken language is every bit as highly organised as the written and is
capable as just as great a degree of complexity. Only, it is complex in a
different way. In spoken texts, grammatical intricacy takes the place of
lexical density by becoming dynamic and intricate, instead of static and dense.

Here is a comparison between a sentence from a written text and a possible

rendering of it in spoken form. In it you will perceive an increase in the
spokenness thanks to the rise in the number of clauses and function words. This
will result in a decrease in lexical density.

10
Theme and Rheme
Another interesting topic concerning the organization of meaning in the textual
and syntactic level has to do with Theme and Rheme. To think about this
concept, let´s read an extract taken from Halliday’s Introduction to Functional
Grammar (2014: 88-9):
“We may assume that in all languages the clause has the character
of a message, or quantum of information in the flow of discourse: it
has some form of organization whereby it fits in with, and contributes
to, the flow of discourse (cf. Matthiessen, 2004b: Section 10.5). But
there are different ways in which this may be achieved. In English, as
in many other languages, the clause is organized as a message by
having a distinct status assigned to one part of it. One part of the
clause is enunciated as the theme; this then combines with the
remainder so that the two parts together constitute a message. For
example, From Raffles Place MRT is given the status of the theme of
the message in From Raffles Place MRT, walk through the office blocks
of Chulia Street; it combines with walk through the office blocks of

11
 Chulia Street to form a message in a text that sets out a walking tour
around a part of Singapore. In some languages that have a pattern
of a similar kind, the theme is announced by means of a particle: in
Japanese, for example, there is a special postposition -wa, which
signifies that whatever immediately precedes it is thematic (see
Teruya, 2004; 2007). This element tends to come early in the clause,
and may be preceded by other elements such as cohesive
conjunctions that are also given thematic status. In other languages,
of which English is one, the theme is indicated only by position in the
clause. In speaking or writing English we signal that an item has
thematic status by putting it first. No other signal is necessary,
although it is not unusual in spoken English for the theme to be
marked off also by the intonation pattern.”

Next is this interesting distinction between unmarked themes and marked

ones, also known as fronting. Notice how the syntax is altered for the sake of
emphasis.

12
 (Halliday, 2014: 100)

Theme and rheme develop in a dialogical manner, acknowledging the

interpersonal metafunction of language as an exchange, where the clause is
organized as an interactive event involving speaker and audience.

Finally, at the semantic analysis level, there is the organization of

participants, processes and circumstances, realized as wording and
organised into a grammatical system that will serve the purpose of conveying a
message in a certain context. Grammar and phonology, or the phonology of
grammar, in the typical Hallidayan view, states that phonology is the bridge
between phonic substance and linguistic form in such a way that phonology is
at the service of the grammar:

13
 “The given language organises its phonic resources in such a way so
as to carry or expound its grammatical and lexical patterns.”
(Halliday, 1961: 244)

Listening comprehension strategies in the EFL secondary education

class
In groups, let’s think of the didactic uses that the previous theoretical framework
can have. In what ways can it help teachers ask good questions before, during
and after a listening comprehension task? How can we scaffold our students’
listening skills with these notions in mind?

14