{"title":"This deserves a brief mention","authors":"D. Siepmann","doi":"10.1075/lic.21004.sie","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n This article takes a doubly contrastive approach to spoken academic language. On the one hand, it explores genre\n differences between spoken and written academic English and French; on the other, it considers divergences between spoken academic\n discourse in the two languages. The corpora used for this purpose were purpose-built on the basis of YouTube video subtitles and\n other sources. The focus of attention is on keywords and key metadiscursive routines. The results suggest that, somewhat\n counterintuitively, the distance between academic speech and writing is smaller in French than it is in English, so that written\n routines can be more easily transferred to speech in French. French written and spoken discourse shows a greater degree of\n abstraction and self-referentiality than is the case in English. The article selectively illustrates that both French and English\n have a distinct set of spoken routines that are not used in writing; these need to be described and recorded in lexicographic\n resources to make them available for teachers and learners.","PeriodicalId":43502,"journal":{"name":"Languages in Contrast","volume":"30 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Languages in Contrast","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.21004.sie","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article takes a doubly contrastive approach to spoken academic language. On the one hand, it explores genre
differences between spoken and written academic English and French; on the other, it considers divergences between spoken academic
discourse in the two languages. The corpora used for this purpose were purpose-built on the basis of YouTube video subtitles and
other sources. The focus of attention is on keywords and key metadiscursive routines. The results suggest that, somewhat
counterintuitively, the distance between academic speech and writing is smaller in French than it is in English, so that written
routines can be more easily transferred to speech in French. French written and spoken discourse shows a greater degree of
abstraction and self-referentiality than is the case in English. The article selectively illustrates that both French and English
have a distinct set of spoken routines that are not used in writing; these need to be described and recorded in lexicographic
resources to make them available for teachers and learners.
期刊介绍:
Languages in Contrast aims to publish contrastive studies of two or more languages. Any aspect of language may be covered, including vocabulary, phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, text and discourse, stylistics, sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics. Languages in Contrast welcomes interdisciplinary studies, particularly those that make links between contrastive linguistics and translation, lexicography, computational linguistics, language teaching, literary and linguistic computing, literary studies and cultural studies.