Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- German (2)
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (2) (remove)
Keywords
- Einsprachigkeit (1)
- Englisch (1)
- Gemeinsprache (1)
- Interaktion (1)
- Kommunikation (1)
- Kommunikationsanalyse (1)
- Mehrsprachigkeit (1)
- Mündlichkeit (1)
- Nationalsprache (1)
- Professionalität (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Peer-Review (1)
Professional and technical practice and the technical character of social interaction.
The focus on communication in research on professional and scientific language somehow reflects the intention of John L. Austin’s phrase “How to do things with words?” But a description based on the concept of communication ultimately also relies on linguistic idiosyncrasies. We will look at things the other way round and ask first “how to do (professional) things” and then look at the linguistic units used specifically for this purpose. Professionalism in this view takes very different forms for different types of actions (“practices”). Although reliability and professional authority are central features of all linguistic realizations to be considered, they are represented in very different ways. As a result, professionalism not only shows in the high degree of explicitness of technical prose typical for written scientific discussion. It is also reflected in the high degree of implicitness of speech that accompanies and constitutes practical action.
Even though the use of several languages has become more common in modern societies, it is important to find a common language in order to communicate economically (by the way, also with regard to economic success). So, of course, it is an advantage and a basic request in our national societies to be able to communicate by means of the national language(s). But looking a bit closer at the communicative demands of today one sees that there is a growing need to react to internal variation, and that a modern linguistic identity not only covers that fact, but also the fact, that English – in different forms – is part of a linguistic spectrum fitting a modern European communicative life. In the last years a communicative pattern is developing within an elite group of young academically educated people that is based on the use of English only, more or less ignoring the connection to the national linguistic surroundings, somehow kind of an alternative monolingualism. But looking at the communicative needs in our complex societies losing the ability to cope with different linguistic options in different communicative situations and to integrate this possibility into your linguistic identity is a rather restricted option – also in economic terms. And this even holds not taking into account the linguistic effect of modern migration.