Deontic modality: The use of language to express obligation, permission or prohibition. In English, this is typically done with modal verbs (e.g. ‘should’, ‘have to’), but also through adjectives (e.g. ‘compulsory’), adverbs (e.g. ‘obligatorily’) or nouns (e.g. ‘duty’).
Epistemic modality: The use of language to express how likely it is that something was, is or will be the case. In English, this is typically done with modal verbs (e.g. ‘may’, ‘might’), but also through adjectives (e.g. ‘likely’), adverbs (e.g. ‘possibly’) or nouns (‘probability’).
Open questions: Questions that leave the person asked free to elaborate as much or little in their answer as they like (e.g. ‘What do you expect from this change in career?’). Opposite of yes/no questions (e.g. ‘Are you considering a career change?’).
Parataxis: A series of sentences with only main clauses, e.g. ‘I went home after work. I had managed to tick off all items on my to-do-list. My partner had made lasagna.’ Opposite of hypotaxis, which is a sentence with main and sub-clauses, e.g. ‘After managing to tick off all items on my to-do list, I went home from work to find that my partner had made lasagna.’
Rhetorical questions: Questions that preempt their own answers, e.g. ‘Wouldn’t you like a pay rise?’.
Image Repair Theory (IRT): a rhetorical theory developed by W. L. Benoit. It focuses on how and why individuals and organisations defend their reputation. IRT focuses on ‘image repair strategies’ individuals or organisations use when they are accused of wrongdoing.
Lingua Franca: see episode 3
Evaluative language: as our guest, Dr Fuoli explains, this is a broad umbrella term for language that is used to convey a positive or a negative subjective opinion.
Trust/worthiness: we discuss a model of trust in the podcast, which is based on Mayer et al.’s (1995) work. This model identifies competence, integrity and benevolence as key factors influencing individuals’ perceptions of others’ trustworthiness. Source: Mayer, R. C., Davis, J. H., & Schoorman, F. D. (1995). An integrative model of organizational trust. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 709-734.
Audiences: Going back to Alan Bell’s 1984 paper ‘Language style as audience design’, published in the journal Language in Society (volume 13, issue 2, pages 145-204), we can distinguish four different kinds of recipients of a message:
– Addressee – recipients who are known, ratified, and addressed, e.g. a company tagged and addressed in a tweet by a customer
– Auditor: recipients who are not directly addressed, but are known and ratified, e.g. the person running the company’s Twitter account
– Overhearer: recipients of whom the text producer is aware, e.g. followers on Twitter
– Eavesdropper: non-ratified recipients of whom the text producer is unaware, e.g. podcast hosts analysing the customer’s tweet in an episode
Context collapse: The phenomenon in online communication whereby a message can be read by people that the person posting it knows from many different contexts, e.g. family, friends, colleagues.
Agentless passive: A grammatical construction that only mentions the object or goal of an action and the action itself, but eliminates the subject or actor. For example, ‘Additional security measures have been put in place’ does not mention who put those measures in place.
L1, L2: Short for first and second language, i.e. the language that someone learned as a child (mother tongue, native language) and one that they acquired later in life.
Lingua franca: Latin for ‘free language’. A language that speakers use to communicate although it is not their mother tongue or → L1. For instance, Bernard, Erika and Veronika are native speakers of Dutch, Hungarian and German, respectively, but we don’t know each other’s languages, so we use English with each other – including in this podcast of course!
Phatic communication: Often very conventional phrases that are not meant to convey or obtain information but have a social function, e.g. greetings (‘How are you?’) or well wishes (‘Have a nice day’).
Pragmatic affordances: The functions that speakers and writers can realise when using language in a particular context. For example, depending on context and participants, jokes allow speakers to diffuse tension in a conversation or disparage someone else. Emojis or emoticons such as 😉 and acronyms (e.g. LOL) are often used for their pragmatic affordance to mitigate the force of a request or a criticism.
Prosody: Elements of spoken language that are not individual sounds but qualities of a shorter or longer unit of speech. Prosodic elements include stress, rhythm, pitch and volume.
Sound symbolism: The idea that certain sounds communicate meaning and evoke associations. For example, vowels formed at the front of the mouth, like “i”, are often associated with small, spiky things, whereas so-called back vowels, like “o”, conjure up the image of large, round objects. Sound symbolism is widely used not only in poetry but also in brand names.
Lingua franca: Latin for ‘free language’. A language that speakers use to communicate although it is not their mother tongue. For instance, Benard, Erika and Veronika are native speakers of Dutch, Hungarian and German, respectively, but we don’t know each other’s languages, so use English with each other – and in this podcast of course!
Conduit model: A model of communication that was first proposed by Elwood Shannon and Warren Weaver in 1949. (It is also known as the Shannon-Weaver model.) Shannon and Weaver were engineers and developed their model for radio and phone technology. In simple terms, the model includes a sender who produces a message (e.g.a speaker), a transmitter encoding the message (in spoken communication, the same as the speaker), a channel to send the message (e.g. a website) and a receiver who decodes the message (e.g. reader). The conduit model assumes a linear flow of information and does not account for any contextual factors. It has therefore been recognised as unsuitable to describe and explain human communication.
Fordism: Named after the Ford automotive company, Fordism denotes an approach to management in manufacturing that is characterised by synchronisation, specialisation and precision. The Ford company was among the first to introduce assembly lines and split up the manufacturing process into a number of steps carried out by individual workers to increase efficiency. The term was first used by Marxist political theorist Antonio Gramsci in 1934 and is linked to Frederick Taylor’s Principles of Scientific Management (1911).
Greenwashing: Attempts by companies to build a brand image of themselves as sustainable and environmentally friendly, when their practices are not. The term comes from ‘whitewashing’, i.e. trying to appear innocent when not, and has been extended to ‘pinkwashing’, for attempts to appear women- or LGBT-friendly, and ‘blackwashing’, to describe the phenomenon of a few senior positions held by token non-white people to appear ethnically diverse.
Interdiscursivity: the mixing of typical features from various text types and discourses. The purpose can be to persuade (e.g. using scientific language in cosmetics advertising) or to get attention (e.g. making an advertisement look like a till receipt). Interdiscursivity is not always used to deliberately though and can then indicate some social change that is underway (e.g. a high-ranking police officer referring to members of the general public as ‘customers’).
Corpus linguistics: A branch of linguistics where research use computer software to analyse large bodies (Latin ‘corpora’, singular ‘corpus’) of texts to see, for example, what words are particularly frequent, what words co-occur with each other (collocation) and what words, word classes or semantic fields are over/underused with statistical significance (keywords, key parts of speech or key domains). Corpus linguistic research has been done on the grammars of the world’s languages, on the language use of learners of a language, on language variation and change, on the language of Shakespeare and many other areas.
Face-threatening act: In linguistic politeness theory, any utterance that can potentially damage someone else’s or the speaker’s wish to be appreciated and valued (called, somewhat confusingly, ‘positive face’) or their wish to be unhindered in doing what they want at the time they want to do it (so-called ‘negative face’). Speakers use a number of strategies to mitigate face-threatening acts and preserve social harmony.
Lingua franca: Latin for ‘free language’. A language that speakers use to communicate although it is not their mother tongue. For instance, Bernard, Erika and Veronika are native speakers of Dutch, Hungarian and German, respectively, but we don’t know each other’s languages, so use English with each other – and in this podcast of course!
Modal verbs: One way of expressing either a degree of certainty that something was, is or will be the case (so-called epistemic modality) or to convey a more or less strong obligation on someone (known as deontic modality). Examples of epistemic modal verbs are ‘I may/might be able to type up the notes in time’, while deontic modality is illustrated by ‘I really need to type up the notes in time’.