Article published In: Internet Pragmatics
Vol. 2:1 (2019) ► pp.54–82
Articles
Genres, media, and recontextualization practices
Re-considering basic concepts of genre theory in the age of social media
Published online: 20 May 2019
https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00023.gru
https://doi.org/10.1075/ip.00023.gru
Abstract
The main argument put forward in this paper is that traditional linguistic genre theories neglect the importance
of media and their modal affordances in the formation of new genres. It argues that media cannot be viewed as (passive)
configurations of technical, semiotic, and cultural features which are chosen by actors/ rhetors in order to serve their
communicative needs, but rather as mediators whose modal affordances actively influence communicators’ meaning making choices. In
order to support this argument, it will be shown how forms of discourse representation gradually developed from a stylistic device
in oral communication to a genre constitutive practice (e.g., in printed academic communication), and eventually became a genre of
its own (as the practice of “sharing” content) in social media communication. In the analyses, the focus is on the interplay
between modal affordances of the different media in which discourse representation formats are used, their formal properties, and
pragmatic factors (like audience expectations in different communicative genres and situations). It is shown how innovative
aspects of a medium influence formal features of discourse representation which in turn serve different communicative purposes in
different genres.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Some common assumptions of genre theories
- 3.What is a medium?
- 3.1Relevant affordances of different media
- 4.Recontextualization and discourse representation
- 5.Empirical part: Discourse representation in different media and genres
- 5.1Discourse representation in spoken discourse
- 5.2Discourse representation in research articles
- 5.3Discourse representation in e-mail communication
- 5.4Discourse representation in Twitter discourse fragments
- 6.Discussion and conclusion
- Notes
References
References (62)
Bakhtin, Michail. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Edited by Caryl Emerson, and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Bateman, John A. 2017. “Triangulating transmediality: A multimodal semiotic framework relating media, modes and genres.” Discourse, Context & Media 201: 160–174.
Bateman, John, Janina Wildfeuer, and Tuomo Hiippala. 2017. Multimodality, Foundations, Research and Analysis: A Problem-Oriented Introduction. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Bawden, David, and Lyn Robinson. 2000. “A distant mirror?; the Internet and the printing press.” Aslib Proceedings 52(2): 51–57.
Bazerman, Charles. 1988. Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, Wisc.: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2009. Entwurf einer Theorie der Praxis: Auf der ethnologischen Grundlage der kabylischen Gesellschaft. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
boyd, Dana, Scott Golder, and Gilad Lotan. 2010. “Tweet, tweet, retweet: Conversational aspects of retweeting on Twitter.” In Proceedings of the 43nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS-43), 1–10. CD-ROM, IEEE Computer Society.
Davies, Bronwyn, and Rom Harre. 1990. “Positioning: The discursive production of selves.” Journal of the Theory of Social Behavior 201(1): 43–68.
Draucker, Fawn, and Lauren Collister. 2015. “Managing participation through modal affordances on Twitter.” Open Library of Humanities 1(1): 1–36.
Dürscheid, Christa. 2005. “Medien, Kommunikationsformen, kommunikative Gattungen.” Linguistik Online 22(1): 3–16.
Dynel, Marta. 2014. “On the part of ratified participants: Ratified listeners in multi-party interactions.” Brno Studies in English 40(1): 27–44.
Ehlich, Konrad. 1983. “Text und sprachliches Handeln.” In Schrift und Gedächtnis, ed. by Aleida Assmann, Jan Assmann, and Christof Hardmeier, 24–43. München: Fink.
Ehlich, Konrad, and Jochen Rehbein. 1986. Muster und Institution. Untersuchungen zur schulischen Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr.
Eisenlauer, Volker. 2014. “Facebook as a third author – (Semi-)automated participation framework in Social Network Sites.” Journal of Pragmatics 721: 73–85.
Eisenstein, Elizabeth L. 2012. The Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gruber, Helmut. 1998. “Computer-mediated communication and scholarly discourse: Forms of topic-initiation and thematic development.” Pragmatics 81: 21–46.
. 2008. “Specific genre features of new mass media.” In Handbook of Communication in the Public Sphere, ed. by Ruth Wodak, and Veronika Koller, 363–383. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2017. “Quoting and retweeting as communicative practices in computer mediated discourse.” Discourse, Context & Media 201: 1–9.
. to appear. “Doing ordinariness on Twitter: An analysis of tweets of the 2016 Austrian presidential campaign candidates.” In Construction of Ordinariness across Media Genres, ed. by Anita Fetzer, and Elda Weizman. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Günthner, Susanne, and Hubert Knoblauch. 1994. “‘Forms are the food of faith’: Gattungen als Muster kommunikativen Handelns.” Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie Und Sozialpsychologie 41: 693–723.
. 1995. “Culturally patterned speaking practices – the analysis of communicative genres.” Pragmatics 5(1): 1–32.
Herring, Susan C. 2006. “Interactional coherence in CMC.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 4(4).
2007. “A faceted classification scheme for computer-mediated discourse.” Language@Internet 41, article 1. [URL]
2013. “Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent.” In Discourse 2.0: Language and New Media, ed. by Deborah Tannen, and Anna Marie Tester, 1–25. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.
Holly, Werner. 1997. “Zur Rolle von Sprache in Medien: Semiotische und kommunikationsstrukturelle Grundlagen.” Muttersprache 1071: 64–75.
. 2011. “Medien, Kommunikationsformen, Textsortenfamilien.” In Textsorten, Handlungsmuster, Oberflächen. Linguistische Typologien der Kommunikation, ed. by Stephan Habscheid, 144–164. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Hyland, Ken. 1999. “Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge.” Applied Linguistics 20(3): 341–367.
Jakobs, Eva-Maria. 1999. Textvernetzung in den Wissenschaften. Zitat und Verweis als Ergebnis rezeptiven, reproduktiven und produktiven Handelns. Tübingen: Niemeyer Verlag.
John, Nicholas A. 2013. “Sharing and Web 2.0: The emergence of a keyword.” New Media & Society 15(2): 167–182.
Khamis, Susie, Lawrence Ang, and Raymond Welling. 2017. “Self-branding, ‘micro-celebrity’ and the rise of social media influencers.” Celebrity Studies 8(2): 191–208.
Kress, Gunther. 2010. Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication. Abingdon: Routledge.
Latour, Bruno. 2005. Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Livnat, Zohar. 2012. Dialogue, Science and Academic Writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Liu, Yabing, Chloe Kliman-Silver, and Alan Mislove. 2014. “The tweets they are A-changin’: Evolution of Twitter users and behaviour.” In Proceedings of the Eighth International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, 305–314. Palo Alto: The AAAI Press. [URL]
Martin, James R. 1992. English Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Marwick, Alice, and dana boyd. 2011. “To see and be seen: Celebrity practice on Twitter.” Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 17(2): 139–158.
Miller, Carolyne R. 1994. “Genre as social action.” In Genre and the New Rhetoric, ed. by Aviva Freedman, and Peter Medway, 23–43. London: Taylor & Francis.
Page, Ruth. 2012. “The linguistics of self-branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags.” Discourse & Communication 6(2): 181–201.
Papacharissi, Zizi. 2012. “Without you, I’m nothing: Performances of the self on Twitter.” International Journal of Communication 61: 1989–2006.
Schneider, Jan-Georg. 2017. “Medien als Verfahren der Zeichenprozessierung: Grundsätzliche Überlegungen zum Medienbegriff und ihre Relevanz für die Gesprächsforschung.” Gesprächsforschung – Online-Zeitschrift zur verbalen Interaktion 181: 34–55.
Severinson Eklundh, Kerstin. 2010. “To quote or not to quote: Setting the context for computer-mediated dialogues.” Language@Internet 71, article 5. [URL]
Spronck, Stef. 2012. “Minds divided: Speaker attitudes in quotatives.” In Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and Cross-disciplinary Perspectives, ed. by Isabelle Buchstaller, and Ingrid van Alphen, 71–116. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Squires, Helen. 2015. “Twitter: Design, discourse and the implications of public text.” In Routledge Handbook of Language and Digital Communication, ed. by Alexandra Georgakopoulo, and Teresa Spiloti, 239–255. Abingdon: Routledge.
Suh, Bongwon, Lichan Hong, Peter Pirolli, and Ed H. Chi. 2010. “Want to be retweeted? Large scale analytics on factors impacting retweet in Twitter network.” In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Social Computing (SocialCom 2010), 177–184.
Taboada, Maite. 2006. “Discourse markers as signals (or not) of rhetorical relations.” Journal of Pragmatics 381: 567–592.
Tannen, Deborah. 1989. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vitak, Jessica. 2012. “The impact of context collapse and privacy on social network site disclosures.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 56(4): 451–470.
Wieser, Matthias J. 2012. Das Netzwerk von Bruno Latour: die Akteur-Netzwerk-Theorie zwischen Science & Technology Studies und poststrukturalistischer Soziologie. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.
Cited by (26)
Cited by 26 other publications
Dontcheva-Navratilova, Olga
Shurma, Svitlana, Helmut Gruber & Petra Bačuvčíková
Andersson, Marta
Luginbühl, Martin & Jan Georg Schneider
2024. Introduction. In Media as Procedures of Communication [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 348], ► pp. 1 ff.
Bülow, Lars & Michael Johann
Chen, Xinren & Tiancheng Chen
Pfurtscheller, Daniel
Pfurtscheller, Daniel
Yus, Francisco
Yus, Francisco
Haugh, Michael
Haugh, Michael
2024. Online public denunciation as recursive social practice. Internet Pragmatics 7:1 ► pp. 161 ff.
Johannessen, Marius Rohde
Weizman, Elda & Zohar Livnat
Chang, Wei-Lin Melody, Michael Haugh & Hsi-Yao Su
2021. Taking it too far. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 31:3 ► pp. 382 ff.
Haapanen, Lauri
2021. Journalists’ use of social media. In Participation, Engagement and Collaboration in Newsmaking [Discourse Approaches to Politics, Society and Culture, 94], ► pp. 151 ff.
Reyero, David, Daniel Pattier & David García-Ramos
Dynel, Marta
Dynel, Marta
Haapanen, Lauri & Leo Leppänen
Kirner-Ludwig, Monika
2020. Internet memes as multilayered re-contextualization vehicles in lay-political online
discourse. Internet Pragmatics 3:2 ► pp. 283 ff.
Kirner-Ludwig, Monika
2022. Internet memes as multilayered re‑contextualization vehicles in lay-political online
discourse. In The Pragmatics of Internet Memes [Benjamins Current Topics, 120], ► pp. 145 ff.
Xie, Chaoqun, Ying Tong & Francisco Yus
2020. Bonding across Chinese social media. Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA) 30:3 ► pp. 431 ff.
Sakai, Noboru
2019. How much reading between the lines is there in online game playing?. Internet Pragmatics 2:2 ► pp. 290 ff.
[no author supplied]
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
