Content uploaded by Vijay Kumar Bhatia
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vijay Kumar Bhatia on Jul 13, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Vijay Kumar Bhatia
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vijay Kumar Bhatia on Jul 11, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
International Journal of Language Studies
Volume 9, Number 2, April 2015, pp. 121-130
ISSN: 2157-4898; EISSN: 2157-4901
© 2015 IJLS; Printed in the USA by Lulu Press Inc.
Genre analysis: The state of the art
(An online interview with Vijay Kumar Bhatia)
Vijay Kumar BHATIA, (Retired as Professor), City University of Hong Kong,
Hong Kong
M. A. SALMANI NODOUSHAN, Iranian Institute for Encyclopedia Research, Iran
In this interview, Vijay Bhatia freely reflects on his personal
experiences, perceptions, and views about the development of Genre
Analysis in the early eighties towards Critical Genre Analysis today. He
offers his impressions about how professionals construct, interpret, use
and often exploit generic resources in their everyday practice to meet
their professional objectives in specific contexts. Starting from the early
conceptualization of Genre in the eighties in the United Kingdom, he
points out how it was essentially inspired by the everyday concerns
about the teaching and learning of English for Specific Purposes, and
how it continued to gain popularity and is considered one of the most
popular frameworks for ESP applications in the present-day context.
However, he points out, it is not enough to analyze and describe just the
specialist discourses; it is also equally important to understand how
such discourses are employed in professional practice to meet specific
requirements of a particular profession. Hence the need to develop
traditional Genre Analytical framework further towards what he calls
Critical Genre Analysis to demystify interdiscursive performance in
specific academic and professional settings.
Keywords: Genre Analysis; Critical Genre Analysis; Applied Linguistics; ESP;
Interdiscursive Performance
The Interview
MASN:1
How would you define the field of Genre Analysis today? How is it
different from traditional Greek rhetorics? What are its basic
tenets?
VKB:2
Genre Analysis today is one of the three somewhat different, though
1 Mohammad Ali Salmani Nodoushan
2 Vijay Kumar BHATIA
122
V. K . B h a t i a & M . A . S a l m a n i N o d o u s h a n
with considerable overlapping, approaches to the study of various
forms of discourse, particularly in academic and professional
contexts. The first of these approaches, popularly known as the
American tradition, draws its inspiration largely from the studies of
classical Greek rhetoric (Miller, 1984), whereas the second one
draws its strengths from Systemic-Functional Linguistics (Halliday,
1994). The third approach, popularly known as the British
Tradition was an attempt to study academic and professional
discourses for the design and implementation of English for Specific
Purpose (ESP) programmes in the United Kingdom and the a
number of other English as a second language (ESL) learning
contexts. I have been part of this last tradition and would like to
focus primarily on the developments in this approach.
Genre, in this tradition, is primarily viewed as a conventionalised
and largely standardized communicative event defined in terms of
its communicative purpose that a genre is meant to serve in a
specific academic or professional setting (Bhatia, 1993; Swales,
1990).
So far as the Traditional Greek Rhetoric is concerned, it was
primarily meant to help ordinary people to argue their claims in the
court of law, i.e., to persuade authorities and to influence decision-
making in their favor. Most modern theories of discourse analysis
seem to have been influenced by the key rhetorical principles of
‘Logos’ as the use of logical arguments, ‘Ethos’ to create an
emotional reaction, and ‘Pathos’ to create a reliable and convincing
impression. However, Genre Analysis has never made any direct
reference to these notions at any time, as far as I am aware of. The
American Tradition of rhetorical genres however, has been largely
inspired by this in various ways.
MASN:
What kind of interface do you see between discourse analysis,
pragmatics, and genre analysis?
VKB:
Discourse Analysis as the study of language use beyond sentence
boundaries was primarily inspired by some of the broad tenets of
Pragmatics, in particular, to bring context within the scope of
analysis and interpretation, which has been a very significant
development in the study of meaning. Genre Analysis is only a way
of analysing, interpreting, and accounting for some of the discursive
actions taking place in specific academic and professional contexts,
and considers context and any form of specific genre knowledge as
an important contributor to its understanding of genre.
123
International Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 121-130
MASN:
What is the interface between genre analysis and applied linguistics
on the one hand, and ESP on the other?
VKB:
In my view, applied linguistics was originally used to refer to the
application of linguistics for language teaching, including English
for Specific Purposes (ESP); however, in the last several years, the
concept has broadened quite significantly to include the study of
language use in a variety of other contexts, which means that we
need to redefine the notion of applied linguistics, to include the use
of language in organisational, management, institutional as well as
other Business Communication contexts. In my own work, I have
used genre analysis to study corporate disclosure documents and
practices, and also colonisation of arbitration practices by litigation
practices, which have been possible because of the relevance of
(critical) genre analysis to account for such professional
communicative practices (Bhatia, 2008a, 2008b). In addition, it is
also possible to use genre analysis to understand and account for
certain aspects of translation and interpretation practices, and
document and information design issues. All these contexts can be
validly studied and analysed through discourse and genre analysis,
and hence can be viewed as important aspects of applied linguistics.
MASN:
If you want to give our readers a helicopter sight of genre analysis,
(1) what distinct areas within genre analysis would you perceive,
(2) how are they connected or different, and (3) what is their
chronological sequencing?
VKB:
If we consider Genre Analysis as the study of language use in
specific academic and professional contexts, and focus primarily on
the specialist discourses in such contexts, then we are essentially
limiting ourselves to discursive acts, which are valid and are
considered crucially relevant resources for the study of professional
actions. However, it only offers significant, though limited
opportunities for the exploration and understanding of what is
practiced in academic and professional communication. What it
does not tell us is why most of the members of a professional
community construct, interpret, use, and exploit linguistic
resources, the way they do. The most important question for us is
‘why do the professionals write the way they do?’ This also means
that there is a vast area beyond the discursive practice, which
includes not only professional practice, but also the professional or
disciplinary culture, which we need to be taken into account.
124
V. K . B h a t i a & M . A . S a l m a n i N o d o u s h a n
Moreover, in order to make things easier to understand in
pedagogical contexts, we often focus on ideal forms of discourse,
conveniently underestimating the role of genre mixing, embedding
or even bending of generic norms in real life contexts (Bhatia, 1997,
2004). We often simplify things for focusing on pure genres,
whereas in real life situations, genres are most often found in hybrid
forms. So in my view, we need to focus more on the complexity and
dynamicity of genres, rather than on the purity of such discursive
configurations. The most important aspect of this kind of expansion
of scope will be to deepen our understanding of contexts in which
such genres are embedded.
Although in pedagogical situations, it is often necessary to begin
with ideal or less complex forms, one should realise that it is only
the beginning and not the end of application. By going beyond the
classroom, we can move closer to the real world, which is much
more complex than what we assume in the context of the classroom.
MASN:
I know that you have opted for a new field, which you call Critical
Genre Analysis; what are its basic tenets? How is it different from or
related to genre analysis practiced before it? What are its merits?
What was your motivation for theorizing it, and why do you see it as
important?
VKB:
I do not consider Critical Genre Analysis as a new field; it is a
development on, and advancement of the genre analytical
framework we have been using for more than 35 years. It became
obvious to me after working on a number of research projects at the
turn of the Century that if we want to understand or what I have
often said to demystify academic and professional discourses, we
need to go well beyond the mere analysis and description of
language use and widen considerably the notion of context in which
such discursive acts take place. This involves a closer and much
deeper look at the professional practice of specialists, paying
particular attention to what I have often referred to as ‘discursive
performance’, which is invariably realised interdiscursively because
of the increasing involvement of interdisciplinary practices and
contexts. Essentially, it involves looking at professional practice, in
addition to professional discourse. It is not, in any way,
undermining the conventional genre analysis, but going beyond it to
have a closer and deeper look at what makes it possible for
specialists not only to construct professional discourses but also to
achieve their professional objectives the way they do.
125
International Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 121-130
If we were to compare Critical Genre Analysis with conventional
Genre Analysis, then we find that earlier on we have always focused
on genres, whereas now we tend to go beyond it and incorporate
professional practice within our frame of reference in an attempt to
understand what makes these discursive actions possible and
pragmatically successful. In doing so, we also tend to pay more
attention to interdiscursive aspects of such actions, rather than just
the intertextual aspects (Bhatia, 2010). The focus has also shifted
from analysis of genres, though without in any way undermining it,
to explanation of how genres are exploited to achieve professional
actions, paying particular attention to hybridization of genres and
professional practices and disciplinary cultures. It must be noted
here that most of these additional aspects of this development take
analysis of genres towards analysis of context. On the whole, one
may view Critical Genre Analysis as analysis of contexts, over and
above that of Genre.
It is a very important development, in my view, because it allows
one to go beyond linguistic and rhetorical analysis to the analysis of
contextualisation, which allows us to bridge the widening gap
between the idealisation, typical of classroom, and the complex
realities of the professional world.
MASN:
What sorts of considerations does one need to take into account
when undertaking research in critical genre analysis? What are the
possible pitfalls for researchers who undertake such research? How
can these pitfalls be avoided?
VKB:
One of the main areas of confusion could be the use of the word
‘critical’ in Critical Genre Analysis (CGA) and also in Critical
Discourse Analysis (CDA). However, the term is used in two very
different senses in the two frameworks, though there could be some
areas of overlap. Although in both the frameworks, the focus is on
‘practice’, in CDA, it is used as the study of wider social practices,
whereas in CGA, it is used in narrowly defined and contextually
grounded contexts of professional and disciplinary practices, which
are essentially genre-based. The term critical in CDA is used to
investigate ‘hidden connections between language, power and
ideology, especially the way abuse, dominance, inequality are
enacted, reproduced, and resisted in socio-political contexts’
(Fairclough, 1989, p. 5), whereas in CGA, the term critical reflects
deeply grounded explanatory analysis, which is analytic rather than
ideological interpretation. In CDA, context is often viewed as pre-
126
V. K . B h a t i a & M . A . S a l m a n i N o d o u s h a n
determined intention of the analyst, whereas CGA is undertaken to
account for and explain contextualization. CDA tends to pay more
attention to the analyst’s interpretation of a text, and very little
attention to the varied ways a text can be produced, interpreted,
and even exploited in a variety of contexts by different audiences,
which raises the issues of subjective, partial or even prejudicial
interpretations, whereas CGA tends to provide a deeply grounded
explanatory analysis, which intends to provide discursive
performance of specialists in well-defined professional contexts,
keeping in mind not only the use of discursive resources, but also
their typical disciplinary and professional cultures.
The other most important characteristic aspect of CGA is that it
invariably focuses on interdiscursive aspects of genre construction,
interpretation and exploitation as most professional discourses
seem to be very rich in interdiscursivity, in addition to
intertextuality. In doing CGA, it is necessary not to undermine the
analysis of linguistic resources but to take it as a starting point and
then go on to professional and disciplinary practices. A very
important resource for the study of professional practice is the use
of ethnographic procedures (Smart, 1998), which Swales (1998)
calls ‘textography’, as it essentially allows one to have a closer look
at the intentions, motivations and other aspects of genre
construction and exploitation.
MASN:
What criticism would you level against traditional views of genre
analysis? What criticism (if any) would you expect to be levelled
against your theory of critical genre analysis? How would you
resolve them?
VKB:
I think traditional Genre Analysis has been a powerful theoretical
framework used very successfully for several decades and is still
one of the most popular frameworks for pedagogical applications to
language teaching at the post-secondary levels; however, when we
look at the discursive practices in the real world of professions, it
seems to be a bit constraining in that it fails to adequately account
for the realities of the complex world, thus leaving a significant gap
between what we undertake in the classroom and what happens in
the outside world, which often confronts us as teachers when we
get reactions from the professional world. In order to bridge this
gap, we need to develop genre theory beyond its traditional
concerns, and CGA can be viewed as a move towards this end.
What sort of criticism do I expect of CGA? It is difficult to think of
127
International Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 121-130
what might happen in the next ten years or so. I became aware of
these constraints about Genre Analysis only after I finished writing
my second book (Bhatia, 2004) on genre theory. CGA is still in its
early years and we need to wait to see to what extent it can answer
the questions we confront now or will do so in future.
MASN:
Which direction(s) do you think genre analysis studies will take in
future?
VKB:
In my estimate, genre theory from various other manifestations
such as those in rhetorical studies and the SFL inspired studies
(Martin, 1985) and the CGA will benefit from one another and will
do particularly well if they go in the direction of integrated
enrichment. This is also made possible today because of the much
wider acceptance of multiperspective and multidimensional
approaches to discourse analysis (Bhatia, 2008b; Smart, 1998).
MASN:
What are the implications of genre analysis in general, and critical
genre analysis in specific, for ESP on the one hand, and for Applied
Linguistics on the other?
VKB:
As I mentioned earlier, although Genre Analysis was initially
inspired by ESP, it soon started contributing to other forms of
language teaching, especially Business Communication and various
other professional contexts, such as organisational, management
and corporate communication. Similarly, it is now being widely
used to analyse non-pedagogical aspects of the professional world,
in particular the study of institutions, organisations, and other
forms of corporate behaviour (Bhatia, 2006; Devitt, 1991;
Nickerson, 1998, 2005) as in the study of corporate disclosure
practices, colonisation of arbitration practices (Bhatia, 2008a;
Bhatia, Candlin & Gotti, 2012), on-stage and off-stage performance
in medical practice (Barton, 2004), translation and interpretation,
and also information design. These developments have made it
necessary and possible to redefine the traditional notion of Applied
Linguistics, widening it considerably. These are interesting
developments and are likely to open up new areas of applied
linguistics.
MASN:
Do you have any recommendation to make?
VKB:
All I can say is that although we have gone a long way, the best is yet
to be, as they say. The future of Critical Genre Analysis, Critical
128
V. K . B h a t i a & M . A . S a l m a n i N o d o u s h a n
Discourse Analysis, and Applied Linguistics is full of excitement and
new possibilities as long as we keep our minds open, and keep
looking for more interesting and insightful answers to the questions
we have been bothered about for a long time.
MASN:
Thank you very much for accepting this interview invitation. It
means a lot to me and the readers of the journal. You are an Icon,
and it was a huge honor for me to be able to conduct this interview.
Thank you.
VKB:
Thank you for inviting me. It has been a real pleasure talking to you.
The Authors
Vijay Kumar Bhatia (Email: vjkbhatia1@gmail.com) is the President of Asia-
Pacific LSP and Professional Communication Association—an association of
researchers and practitioners specializing in languages for specific purposes
and professional communication. As a Professor of Applied Linguistics, Vijay
has taught in the Department of English at the City University of Hong Kong.
He was also an Adjunct Professor at the Macquarie University, Sydney,
Australia. Before joining the City University in 1993, he worked at the
National University of Singapore (1983-1993). He was also VELUX Visiting
Professor, Aarhus Business School, Denmark. His research interests include
applied genre analysis of academic and professional discourse, including,
legal, business, newspaper, advertising and other promotional genres; ESP
and Professional Communication (Theory and Practice); simplification of
legal and other public documents; cross-cultural and disciplinary variation in
professional discourses. Some of his recent research projects include
Analyzing Genre-bending in Corporate Disclosure Documents, and
International Arbitration Practice: A Discourse Analytical Study, i n w h ic h h e
led research teams from more than 20 countries. He has to his credit more
than 150 publications, which include journal articles, books chapters, edited
volumes and individually written books. His book Analysing Genre: Language
Use in Professional Settings (Longman) is widely used by researchers in
discourse and genre theory, and ESP practice. In his more recent book Wo rlds
of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View (2004), he further developed genre
theory to propose a multidimensional and multi-perspective model for
analyzing written professional discourse, extending substantially the notion
of pure genre to incorporate new configurations such as genre colonies, genre
mixing, genre-embedding, and genre-bending. He is at present writing his
theirs monograph on ‘Critical Genre Analysis’, which will be published by
Routledge in 2016. He has given more than 200 presentations in various
129
International Journal of Language Studies, 9(2), 121-130
international conferences, many of which include invited plenary and keynote
addresses.
Mohammad Ali Salmani Nodoushan (Email: dr.nodoushan@gmail.com)
received his PhD in Applied Linguistics from the University of Te hr an i n
November 2002, his MA in Applied Linguistics from the University of Isfahan
in November 1995, and his BA in Teaching English as a Foreign Language
(TEFL) from Shiraz University in September 1991. He has over 20 years of
teaching experience and has taught major EFL courses at BA, MA, and PhD
levels. His main areas of interest include language testing, ESP, p o l i t e n e s s , a n d
pragmatics. He has published over 50 papers in international academic
journals including Teaching and Teacher Education, Speech Communication,
TESL Canada Journal, and so on. He is currently associate professor of applied
linguistics/TESOL at the Iranian Institute for Encyclopedia Research, Tehran,
Iran.
References
Barton, E. (2004). Discourse methods and critical practice in professional
communication: The front-stage and back-stage discourse of prognosis
in medicine. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18 (1),
67-111.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings.
London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. London:
Continuum.
Bhatia, V. K. (2006). Discursive practices in disciplinary and professional
contexts. Linguistic and Human Sciences, 2 (1), 5–28.
Bhatia, V. K. (2008a). Genre analysis, ESP and professional practice. English
for Specific Purposes, 27, 161-74.
Bhatia, V. K. (2008b). Towards critical genre analysis. In V. K. Bhatia, J.
Flowerdew & R. Jones (Eds.), Advances in Discourse Studies, (pp. 166-
177). London: Routledge.
Bhatia, V. K. (2010). Interdiscursivity in professional communication.
Discourse and Communication, 21 (1), 32-50.
Bhatia, V. K., Candlin, C. N., & Gotti, M. (Eds.). (2012). Discourse and practice in
130
V. K . B h a t i a & M . A . S a l m a n i N o d o u s h a n
international commercial arbitration: Issues, challenges and prospects.
London: Ashgate Publishers.
Devitt, A. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting: Generic, referential and
functional. In C. Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual Dynamics of the
Professions, (pp. 337–357). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London:
Arnold.
Martin, J. R. (1985). Process and text: Two aspects of human semiosis. In J. D.
Benson & W. S. Greaves (Eds.), Systemic Perspectives on Discourse, (pp.
248-274). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Miller, C. R. (1994). Rhetorical community: The cultural basis of genre. In A.
Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the New Rhetoric, (pp. 67-78).
London: Taylor and Francis.
Nickerson, C. (1998). Corporate culture and the use of written English within
British subsidiaries in the Netherlands. English for Specific Purposes, 17,
281–294.
Nickerson, C. (2005). English as a lingua franca in international business
contexts. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 367–380.
Smart, G. (1998). Mapping conceptual worlds: Using interpretive ethnography
to explore knowledge-making in a professional community. Journal of
Business Communication, 35 (1), 111–127.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: Research in academic contexts. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (1998). Other floors, other voices: A textography of a small
university building. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
