RSSScientific Discourse and the Rhetoric of Globalization: The Impact of Culture and Language
Dec 12
AUTHOR: Carmen Pérez-Llantada
TITLE: Scientific Discourse and the Rhetoric of Globalization
SUBTITLE: The Impact of Culture and Language
PUBLISHER: Bloomsbury Publishing (formerly The Continuum International Publishing Group)
YEAR: 2013
REVIEWER: Damian J. Rivers, Future University Hakodate
Review’s Editors: Malgorzata Cavar and Sara Couture
SUMMARY
This book attempts to sketch the position of scientific discourse within the
complexities of globalization with a theoretical slant aimed toward
genre-analysis and contrastive rhetoric in addition to the more expansive
domain of sociolinguistics. The author describes the volume as being heavily
influenced by the genre work of Miller (1984) and Swales (1990, 2004) and
these references are revisited throughout the volume.
Chapter 1, “The role of science rhetoric in the global village,” outlines the
thematic orientation of the volume as one with concern for the processes and
practices of globalization, language, culture and science in relation to
discourse and its multifarious ideological constructions. The author captures
the interest of the reader by mapping an array of decisive questions such as
“how is the experience of living in a globalizing world affecting contemporary
scholarly life?” and “to what extent do knowledge-based economies determine
research activities and assess research output?” (p.1). Factors concerning the
use of the English by “non-native English speaking scholars” (p.3),
particularly when discussed within a sociocultural paradigm, foreground the
questions raised and are discussed within this initial chapter at various
points. The chapter highlights “the linguistic burden” (p.3) of scholarly
participation and communication for scientists and researchers who do not
claim English as an L1. Other issues raised include the commodification of
scientific knowledge and the forms in which such knowledge is represented and
thus assigned value. The overall aim of the volume is cast as aiming to “offer
an in-depth examination of today’s scientific rhetoric and discursive
practices” through enquiring “into the socio-cultural reasons for the adoption
and hybridization processes of the standardized scientific discourse norms”
(p.7).
Chapter 2, “Scientific English in the postmodern age,” begins with a
description of the interdisciplinary and sophisticated intricacies of
contemporary scientific knowledge as a form of cultural and intellectual
expression, and perhaps most importantly, scientific knowledge is denoted as a
highly valuable economic, political and social commodity. The thrust of this
chapter aims to identify the forces reshaping contemporary scientific
discourse within what the author describes as a “complex research policy
matrix” (p.19). As an example of such, the author points toward “growing
institutional pressure to publish in impact-factor (English-language)
journals” (p.19) and provides insightful discussion concerning
knowledge-intensive economies, bibliometrics, and sources of university
research funding in addition to various other domains. More broadly, much of
this chapter draws from the work of Fairclough (1993) as it attempts to
demonstrate the expansive scope of the “marketization of contemporary
scientific discourse” across various fields and contexts (p.19).
Chapter 3, “Problematizing the rhetoric of contemporary science,” neatly
follows on from the previous chapter and takes the reader further into
phraseological, organizational and rhetorical mechanisms propelling the
commoditization and dissemination of scientific knowledge. More specifically,
the emphasis is placed upon the ways in which “the use of English for science
dissemination reflects rhetorical variation when we compare genres produced by
scholars from an Anglophone and a non-Anglophone context” (p.47). The author
departs with reference to Kuhn’s (1962) work on persuasion and the “textual
acrobatics” (p.47) of sales rhetoric, before revisiting Fairclough’s (1992)
work on commodification. The chapter proceeds to offer a contextually-bound
taxonomy for framing scientific discourse before discussing the cognitive
domain of scientific rhetoric and discourse genre. With reference to the
accepted format for the textual dissemination of scientific knowledge, the
author highlights how a lack of “adherence to the established ways of
arranging information [e.g. the situation-problem-solution-evaluation pattern
of presenting scientific discourse in academic publications] might be taken as
a pitfall” (p.57).
Chapter 4, “A contrastive rhetoric approach to science dissemination,” draws
from work conducted at the University of Zaragoza on the compilation of the
Spanish English Research Article Corpus (2008). The author draws upon corpus
linguistics and various ethnographic forms of exploration in order to identify
the similarities and differences between “scholars in Anglophone and
non-Anglophone contexts regarding the linguistic resources, rhetorical
traditions and community practices and procedures for interaction in their
local research sites” (p.71). The rationale for this chapter is stated as
having concern with the “view of cultural models as guiding our language and
interactions with others” (p. 72). Empirical data concerning standardized
lexicogrammar in scientific dissemination is presented (from English L1,
English L2 and Spanish L1 scholars) and thoroughly discussed from a variety of
interdisciplinary perspectives. The author notes how “the Spanish scholars
retain part of their culture-specific intellectual style when they write in
English as an additional language” while also being more sensitive to
“criticism and opt for less viable intersubjective stances” than their English
L1 counterparts (p.104).
Chapter 5, “Disciplinary practices and procedures within research sites,”
complements the previous chapter through a focus on “written discourse
produced by scholars from a North-American-based research site and from a
non-English-speaking research site” (p.105). This focus is foregrounded by the
author’s assertion that “scientific discourse is a socially situated activity”
(p.105). The chapter reports on interview-based protocols within a
“representative group” (p. 105) of Spanish academics and academics located
within a North-American context which aimed, among various other objectives,
to reveal attitudes toward contemporary research production in relation to the
role of English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) in the dissemination of scientific
knowledge. The discussion of over 50-hours of interview data is extensive and
covers a broad range of related topics including deviations from Anglophone
norms in addition to the role of perceptions and attitudes in the role of
gate-keeping scientific knowledge.
Chapter 6, “Triangulating procedures, practices and texts in scientific
discourse,” is a particularly well-presented chapter focused upon the
rhetorical paradigm of science dissemination and the need for a more complex
understanding of how “academic tribes and research territories” construct,
present and disseminate “new knowledge” (p. 136). The author examines how
scientific knowledge production to date has been both uniform, in terms of
lexicogrammatical patterns and phraseological unit, and fragmented, in terms
of wider interdisciplinary collaboration and an increasing number of
co-authored research publications. The chapter examines a wide range of
related positions including, the exigencies of globalizing processes, the
interplay between science and culture with attention given to the role of
English and “language gate-keeping” (p.151), and situated learning within
specific scientific communities of practice.
Chapter 7, “ELF and a more complex sociolinguistic landscape,” is focused upon
the use of ELF and the processes of “linguistic and cultural blending” (p.164)
observable within contemporary scientific knowledge. The author suggests that
scientific English, as a functional variety, should be considered as a
language of communication rather than as a language of identification, thus
allowing “social groupings across academic and research sites [to] surpass
nationalisms and cultural identities” (p.165). The chapter explores such
possibilities through discussions of plurilingualism, diversification in ELF,
language planning, and the creation of alternative geolinguistic spaces. The
chapter concludes with a proposed tailor-made course for scientists with
limited proficiency in English or with little experience with scientific
discourse.
Chapter 8, “Re-defining the rhetoric of science,” outlines numerable global
challenges facing contemporary science and scientific discourse dissemination.
The author notes how English will retain its “geopolitical and geolinguistic
status…at least in the near future” due to the need for a common language for
mutual understanding underpinned by the visions and pressures of
internationalization within scientific communities of practice (p. 191). The
first half of the chapter addresses concepts such as meaning-making
configurations, text-internal and text-external features of scientific
discourse, notions of genre, genre mixing and genre metaphor. The second half
of the chapter looks forward and draws attention to new forms of world
scientific interrelatedness, which are mainly realized as calls for an
increase in linguistic and cultural sensitivity, and the challenges
surrounding increased opportunities for intercultural communication,
especially through scientific discourse and discussion within increasingly
diverse sites of interaction.
EVALUATION
After reading this book, and as testament to its influence, I am compelled to
ask myself the following question: according to which (and by whose)
pre-determined criteria for legitimate scientific knowledge review should I
structure my evaluation? Indeed, as a result of reading this book, the reader
is invited to give greater consideration to the mechanics and values
discreetly underpinning scientific discourse when produced within certain
communities of practice. Overall, this book has various strengths. It is
eloquently written and well supported by the research literature. Moreover,
each chapter is insightfully detailed and the contents will certainly appeal
to researchers and scientific practitioners from a broad list of professional
domains.
In contrast to these outstanding aspects, there are a small number of
potential areas for future improvements. An immediate question one might ask
from reading this book is whether science actually requires a global language?
Is there an argument to be heard that resists the pressures for convergence
toward a unified global community of scientists? What challenges do
researchers face by disseminating scientific knowledge in languages other than
English? How could these researchers still acquire the kind of international
status and prestige that comes from publishing and presenting in certain
places? With consideration to these questions, readers might also find it
worthwhile to read, “Does science need a global language?” (Montgomery, 2013).
A further aspect of the book which should have demanded greater attention and
scrutiny is the fundamental legitimacy of the “native speaker” / “non-native
speaker” bifurcation. Throughout the book, the author warmly accommodates this
division without critical reflection or rigorous interrogation despite the
warnings of Musha-Doerr (2009) who describes how “certain notions prevail
despite their theoretical shortcomings…‘native speaker’ is such a notion…it is
based on the idea that there is a bounded, homogeneous, and fixed language
with a homogeneous speech community, which is linked to a nation-state” (p.1).
Although the author outlines the need for “social groupings across academic
and research sites [to] surpass nationalisms and cultural identities” (p.
165), her failure to deconstruct the “native speaker” / “non-native speaker”
bifurcation actually works to bind the language competencies of individuals to
the nation. One could argue that the identification of individual scientists
as “non-native speakers of English” is ultimately an act of false
categorization. Finally, the background literature concerning ELF is largely
underdeveloped and a great deal of the critical literature in relation to ELF
has been omitted (see O’Regan, 2014 for an especially insightful critique).
Despite these shortcomings, reading this book was a thoroughly rewarding
experience and provided food-for-thought in relation to a number of issues
connected to the way in which scientific knowledge is constructed, valued and
disseminated with the contemporary global community.
REFERENCES
Montgomery, Scott, L. 2013. Does Science Need a Global Language?: English and
the Future of Research. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
Musha-Doerr, Neriko. 2009. The native speaker concept. Berlin: Mouton De
Gruyter.
O’Regan, John, P. 2014. English as a Lingua Franca: An Immanent Critique.
Applied Linguistics, advanced access doi: 10.1093/applin/amt045.
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Dr. Damian J. Rivers is an Associate Professor at Future University Hakodate,
Hokkaido, Japan. His research interests include oppression in educational
contexts, language policy rhetoric and the ‘native-speaker’ criterion. He is
editor of Resistance to the Known: Counter-Conduct in Language Education
(2014) and co-editor of Native-Speakerism in Japan: Intergroup Dynamics in
Foreign Language Education (2013) and Social Identities and Multiple Selves in
Foreign Language Education (2013).
Recent Comments