职场邮件的开头和结尾

Q2 Arts and Humanities Hermes (Denmark) Pub Date : 2021-07-02 DOI:10.7146/hjlcb.vi61.127908
Kristin Rygg
{"title":"职场邮件的开头和结尾","authors":"Kristin Rygg","doi":"10.7146/hjlcb.vi61.127908","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Languages vary when it comes to linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, but what particularly marks professional email communication is the flexibility of the genre compared to traditional, formal business letters. This poses the question of how individual email writers navigate without clear standards and clearly prescribed formulae. This study focuses on the individual email writer and, specifically, opening salutations and closing valedictions in 927Norwegian workplace emails, followed by metapragmatic interviews with their senders. In an egalitarian society with few explicit linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, individual choices of formulations provide a rich source of data. Linguistic content analysis reveals a significant degree of consistency in each person’s individual use, which indicates that when there are no commonly held norms, people make their own rules. The interviewees are aware ofwhich openings and closings they prefer, but often not why. Further analysis of the data reveals that hierarchical social distance is not a motivational factor, but the intentions to be either personally close or professionally distant are. Both are regarded as viable options in formal workplace emails by their users. However, the informants’ perception of which linguistic items represent these motivations depends on individual preferences rather than on any establishedor institutionalised practises. The latter is not a uniquely Norwegian problem, but concerns email correspondents in general because of the flexibility innate to the email genre.","PeriodicalId":38609,"journal":{"name":"Hermes (Denmark)","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Openings and Closings in Workplace Emails\",\"authors\":\"Kristin Rygg\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/hjlcb.vi61.127908\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Languages vary when it comes to linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, but what particularly marks professional email communication is the flexibility of the genre compared to traditional, formal business letters. This poses the question of how individual email writers navigate without clear standards and clearly prescribed formulae. This study focuses on the individual email writer and, specifically, opening salutations and closing valedictions in 927Norwegian workplace emails, followed by metapragmatic interviews with their senders. In an egalitarian society with few explicit linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, individual choices of formulations provide a rich source of data. Linguistic content analysis reveals a significant degree of consistency in each person’s individual use, which indicates that when there are no commonly held norms, people make their own rules. The interviewees are aware ofwhich openings and closings they prefer, but often not why. Further analysis of the data reveals that hierarchical social distance is not a motivational factor, but the intentions to be either personally close or professionally distant are. Both are regarded as viable options in formal workplace emails by their users. However, the informants’ perception of which linguistic items represent these motivations depends on individual preferences rather than on any establishedor institutionalised practises. The latter is not a uniquely Norwegian problem, but concerns email correspondents in general because of the flexibility innate to the email genre.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hermes (Denmark)\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hermes (Denmark)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.vi61.127908\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hermes (Denmark)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/hjlcb.vi61.127908","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

当涉及到正式礼貌的语言表现时,语言各不相同,但与传统的正式商务信函相比,专业电子邮件交流的特别标志是体裁的灵活性。这就提出了一个问题:如果没有明确的标准和明确规定的公式,个人电子邮件作者如何导航。本研究主要关注个人电子邮件作者,特别是927封挪威职场电子邮件中的开头称呼和结尾告别,然后对发件人进行元语用访谈。在一个平等主义的社会中,很少有明确的正式礼貌的语言表现,个人选择的表述提供了丰富的数据来源。语言内容分析表明,每个人的个人使用都有很大程度的一致性,这表明当没有共同持有的规范时,人们会制定自己的规则。面试者知道他们更喜欢哪一种方式,但往往不知道为什么。对数据的进一步分析表明,等级社会距离不是一个动机因素,但个人亲近或职业疏远的意图是一个动机因素。这两种邮件都被用户视为正式工作邮件的可行选择。然而,举报人对哪些语言项目代表这些动机的看法取决于个人偏好,而不是取决于任何既定或制度化的做法。后者并不是挪威独有的问题,但由于电子邮件类型固有的灵活性,它与电子邮件通讯员普遍相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Openings and Closings in Workplace Emails
Languages vary when it comes to linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, but what particularly marks professional email communication is the flexibility of the genre compared to traditional, formal business letters. This poses the question of how individual email writers navigate without clear standards and clearly prescribed formulae. This study focuses on the individual email writer and, specifically, opening salutations and closing valedictions in 927Norwegian workplace emails, followed by metapragmatic interviews with their senders. In an egalitarian society with few explicit linguistic manifestations of formal politeness, individual choices of formulations provide a rich source of data. Linguistic content analysis reveals a significant degree of consistency in each person’s individual use, which indicates that when there are no commonly held norms, people make their own rules. The interviewees are aware ofwhich openings and closings they prefer, but often not why. Further analysis of the data reveals that hierarchical social distance is not a motivational factor, but the intentions to be either personally close or professionally distant are. Both are regarded as viable options in formal workplace emails by their users. However, the informants’ perception of which linguistic items represent these motivations depends on individual preferences rather than on any establishedor institutionalised practises. The latter is not a uniquely Norwegian problem, but concerns email correspondents in general because of the flexibility innate to the email genre.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Hermes (Denmark)
Hermes (Denmark) Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Master Narratives in US Contemporary War Discourse: Situating and Constructing Identities of Self and Other Discourse Analysis of the 2022 Australian Tennis Open: A Multimodal Appraisal Perspective Strategies of Justification in Resolving Conflicts of Values and Interests. A Comparative Analysis of Constitutional Argumentation in Cases of Animal Sacrifice consentimiento informado en la comunicación médico-paciente: análisis crítico del marco legislativo Introduction: Evaluation, Argumentation and Narrative(s) in Conflicting Contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1