STANDARDIZATION VS SPECIFICITY: A STYLISTIC APPROACH TO CONVERGENCE AND DIVERGENCE IN ENGLISH BUSINESS DISCOURSE
Abstract
The globalized world necessitates effective communication across business landscapes. This paper explores the interplay between standardization and specificity in written business discourse, focusing on English. While globalization fosters a convergence of communication styles, national peculiarities can still influence language use. The article investigates stylistic features of written English business discourse. It examines the concept of Institutional Business Discourse (IBD) and its core characteristics, including formulaic expressions and adherence to status roles. The provided analysis delves into the stylistic use of passive voice and modal verbs, revealing a shift towards active voice in English business discourse for a more assertive tone. A significant attention is paid to the growing trend of gender-neutral language in English business communication, employing gender-neutral pronouns and avoiding gendered nouns. This reflects the evolving social landscape and legal recognition of non-binary identities. The paper further explores commonly used verbs, participles, and phraseological units in both languages. It emphasizes the importance of clarity and precision in business discourse, highlighting the limited use of jargon and emotionally charged language. The key findings of the research are as follows: convergence in communication styles due to globalization; persistence of national specificities in vocabulary and phraseology; written business discourse as a form of IBD; shift towards active voice in English business discourse; rise of gender-neutral language in English business communication; importance of clarity and precision in the English language. The article also offers valuable insights for effective crosscultural business communication, highlighting the need to navigate between standardized business language elements and its national specificities to ensure clear and professional communication.
References
2. Hall E.T. Beyond Culture. Garden City New York : Anchor. 1976. 256p.
3. Harris Z. Discourse analysis. Language. 1952. V. 28. № 1. P. 1– 30.
4. Hofstede G. Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values. Beverly Hills CA : Sage. 1980. 475 p.
5. Leech G.N. Principles of Pragmatics. London, New York, Longman, 1983, 250 p.
6. Lewis R.D. When cultures collide: leading across cultures. 3rd ed., Finland: Bookwell, 2006, 599 p.
7. Mullany L. Gendered discourse in the Professional Workplace, Plagrave Macmillan UK, 2007, 236 p.
8. Stubbs M. Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford : Blackwell, 1983. 272 p.
9. Van Dijk T.A. Studies in The Pragmatics of Discourse. Janua linguarum. Series Maior, 101. Hague – Paris – New York, 1998. 1247 p.
10. Van Dijk T.A. The Analysis of News as Discourse. News Analysis. Case Studies in International and National News in the Press / Ed. by Tean A. Van Dijk. Hillsdaly, New Jersey. 1988.
11. 10 U.S. Code 2808. URL: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/2808.