Cover not available

Article published In: FORUM
Vol. 24:1 (2026) ► pp.1–36

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

The rhetorical structure of conference opening remarks

A corpus-based move analysis

ORCiD logo with link | National Taiwan University
Published online: 28 October 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/forum.25007.wu
Abstract
As a distinct genre, opening remarks serve the purpose of welcoming the audience and setting the tone for the event. This study conducted a corpus-based move analysis on opening remarks to explore their rhetorical structure and linguistic features. Seventy-four opening remarks delivered by leaders of the American Institute in Taiwan at international conferences from 2018 to 2022 were collected for analysis. Eight major move types (and 30 component steps) were identified: Set the Scene; Acknowledge Organizers, Distinguished Guests, and Attendees; Highlight the Significance of the Theme; Highlight the Organization’s Efforts and Commitments; Recognize the Host’s Efforts and Significance; Emphasize Friendship and Collaboration; Highlight Global Efforts; and Conclude the Remarks. Although the rhetorical elements in the remarks are mainly fixed, each remark shows its unique interweaving of moves and steps, exhibiting both regularity and flexibility. Linguistic features are highlighted at the end of this paper to expand interpreter trainees’ conference English repertoire.
Résumé
En tant que genre distinct, les remarques d’ouverture ont pour fonction d’accueillir l’auditoire et de donner le ton à l’événement. Cette étude propose une analyse des mouvements rhétoriques fondée sur corpus afin d’explorer la structure rhétorique et les caractéristiques linguistiques de ce type de discours. Soixante-quatorze remarques d’ouverture prononcées par les dirigeants de l’Institut américain de Taiwan lors de conférences internationales de 2018 à 2022 ont été collectées et analysées. L’étude a permis d’identifier huit mouvements principaux, décomposés en trente étapes : Planter le décor ; Remercier les organisateurs, les invités de marque et les participants ; Souligner l’importance du thème ; Mettre en évidence les efforts et les engagements de l’organisation ; Reconnaître le rôle et l’importance de l’hôte ; Insister sur l’amitié et la collaboration ; Mettre en avant les efforts mondiaux ; et Conclure les remarques. Bien que les éléments rhétoriques soient en grande partie récurrents, chaque discours présente un enchaînement singulier de mouvements et d’étapes, reflétant à la fois régularité et flexibilité. Enfin, les caractéristiques linguistiques relevées sont mises en avant à la fin de cet article afin d’enrichir le répertoire d’anglais de conférence des futurs interprètes en formation.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Corpus-based move analyses of written and spoken genres
  • 3.Research purpose and research value
  • 4.Methods
    • 4.1Corpus description
    • 4.2Coding procedure
      • Stage 1.Pilot
      • Stage 2.Initial Coding
      • Stage 3.Second coding
      • Stage 4.Third coding
      • Stage 5.Training session
      • Stage 6.Inter-rater reliability
      • Stage 7.Identifying obligatory move types and steps
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Move 1. Set the scene
      • 5.1.1Step 1-1. Greetings
      • 5.1.2Step 1-2. Personal background
      • 5.1.3Step 1-3. Introduction
      • 5.1.4Step 1-4. Purpose/value
      • 5.1.5Step 1-5. Agenda
      • 5.1.6Step 1-6. Origin
      • 5.1.7Step 1-7. Structure
    • 5.2Move 2. Acknowledge organizers, distinguished guests, and attendees
      • 5.2.1Step 2-1. Organizers
      • 5.2.2Step 2-2. Distinguished guests
      • 5.2.3Step 2-3. Attendees
    • 5.3Move 3. Highlight the significance of the theme
      • 5.3.1Step 3-1. Explanation of theme context/significance
      • 5.3.2Step 3-2. Quotation
      • 5.3.3Step 3-3. Relevant events
      • 5.3.4Step 3-4. Problems
      • 5.3.5Step 3-5. Relevance
      • 5.3.6Step 3-6. Call for action
    • 5.4Move 4. Highlight the Organization’s efforts and commitments
      • 5.4.1Step 4-1. Personal efforts
      • 5.4.2Step 4-2. The Organization’s efforts and accomplishments
      • 5.4.3Step 4-3. The Organization’s commitments and stance
    • 5.5Move 5. Recognize the Host’s efforts and significance
      • 5.5.1Step 5-1. The Host’s efforts and accomplishments
      • 5.5.2Step 5-2. The Host’s significance
    • 5.6Move 6. Emphasize friendship and collaboration
      • 5.6.1Step 6-1. Friendship and partnership
      • 5.6.2Step 6-2. Shared values
      • 5.6.3Step 6-3. Collaborative efforts
      • 5.6.4Step 6-4. Impact of collaboration
    • 5.7Move Type 7. Highlight global efforts
    • 5.8Move Type 8. Conclude the remarks
      • 5.8.1Step 8-1. Hopes and wishes
      • 5.8.2Step 8-2. A gesture of goodwill
      • 5.8.3Step 8-3. Resources or other event highlights
      • 5.8.4Step 8-4. Invitation to other events
      • 5.8.5Step 8-5. Gratitude
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Pedagogical applications
  • 8.Conclusion
  • References
References (32)
References
Aston, Guy. 2018. “Acquiring the Language of Interpreters: A Corpus-Based Approach.” In Making Way in Corpus-Based Interpreting Studies, ed. by Mariachiara Russo, Claudio Bendazzoli, and Bart Defrancq, 83–96. Singapore: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Ulla Connor, and Thomas A. Upton. 2007. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brett, Paul. 1994. “A Genre Analysis of the Results Section of Sociology Articles.” English for Specific Purposes 13 (1): 47–59. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chang, Yu-Jung, and Hung-Tzu Huang. 2015. “Exploring TED Talks as a Pedagogical Resource for Oral Presentations: A Corpus-based Move Analysis.” English Teaching & Learning 39 (4): 29–62. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cotos, Elena, Sarah Huffman, and Stephanie Link. 2017. “A Move/Step Model for Methods Sections: Demonstrating Rigour and Credibility.” English for Specific Purposes 461: 90–106. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cresswell, Andy. 2018. “Looking up Phrasal Verbs in Small Corpora of Interpreting: An Attempt to Draw out Aspects of Interpreted Language.” inTRAlinea 201. [URL]
Flowerdew, Lynne. 2005. “An Integration of Corpus-Based and Genre-Based Approaches to Text Analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering Criticisms against Corpus-Based Methodologies.” English for Specific Purposes 24 (3): 321–332. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2003. “Genre-Based Pedagogies: A Social Response to Process.” Journal of Second Language Writing 12 (1): 17–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. “Genre Pedagogy: Language, Literacy and L2 Writing Instruction.” Journal of Second Language Writing 16 (3): 148–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, Guangwei, and Yanhua Liu. 2018. “Three Minute Thesis Presentations as an Academic Genre: A Cross-Disciplinary Study of Genre Moves.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 351:16–30.
Jones, Roderick. Conference Interpreting Explained. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2014. VitalSource. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, Budsaba. 2005. “Rhetorical Structure of Biochemistry Research Articles.” English for Specific Purposes 24 (3): 269–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kwan, Becky S. C. 2006. “The Schematic Structure of Literature Reviews in Doctoral Theses of Applied Linguistics.” English for Specific Purposes 25 (1): 30–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Joseph J. 2016. “‘There’s Intentionality behind It …’: A Genre Analysis of EAP Classroom Lessons.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 231: 99–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li, Yang, and Sandra L. Halverson. 2024. “Lexical Bundles in Formulaic Interpreting: A Corpus-Based Descriptive Exploration.” Translation and Interpreting Studies 19 (1): 33–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Minhua. 2009. “How Do Experts Interpret? Implications from Research in Interpreting Studies and Cognitive Science.” In Efforts and Models in Interpreting & Translation Research: A Tribute to Daniel Gile, ed. by Gyde Hansen, Andrew Chesterman, and Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast, 159–177. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Liu, Yi, Han Xu, and Dechao Li. 2025. “Formulaicity in Simultaneous Interpreting: Examining Lexical Bundles in Interpreted and Non-Interpreted English Speeches at UN Security Council Meetings.” Perspectives, May1, 1–19. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musa, Nurul Farahin, Noorli Khamis, and Jano Zanariah. 2015. “The Structure of Method Section in Engineering Research Articles.” Asian Social Science 11 (17): 74–82. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peacock, Matthew. 2002. “Communicative Moves in the Discussion Section of Research Articles.” System 30 (4): 479–497. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Riccardi, Alessandra. 2005. “On the Evolution of Interpreting Strategies in Simultaneous Interpreting.” Meta 50 (2): 753–767. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rowley-Jolivet, Elizabeth, and Shirley Carter-Thomas. 2005. “The Rhetoric of Conference Presentation Introductions: Context, Argument and Interaction.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15 (1): 45–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Singh, Kuldip Kaur Maktiar, and Afida Mohamad Ali. 2019. “A Genre-Based Investigation of the Introduction Sections of Academic Oral Presentations.” Asian Journal of University Education 15 (2): 95–125.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Setton, Robin, and Andrew Dawrant. 2016a. Conference Interpreting: A Complete Course. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2016b. Conference Interpreting: A Trainer’s Guide. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, John M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tessuto, Girolamo. 2015. “Generic Structure and Rhetorical Moves in English-Language Empirical Law Research Articles: Sites of Interdisciplinary and Interdiscursive Cross-Over.” English for Specific Purposes 371:13–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thompson, Susan. 1994. “Frameworks and Contexts: A Genre-Based Approach to Analysing Lecture Introductions.” English for Specific Purposes 13 (2): 171–186. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Upton, Thomas A., and Mary Ann Cohen. 2009. “An Approach to Corpus-Based Discourse Analysis: The Move Analysis as Example.” Discourse Studies 11 (5): 585–605. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wu, Yinyin. 2023. “Phrasal Verbs in European Parliament Conference English: A Corpus-Based Pedagogical List.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 17 (2): 301–318. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2024. “Multiword Constructions in European Parliament Conference English: A Corpus-Driven Pedagogical List.” The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 18 (3): 423–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yen, Ching-Chang. 2017. Advanced Conference English. Taipei: Bookman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue