CAPÍTULO II: FORMAS DEL RECONOCIMIENTO
2. Acta civil de celebración del matrimonio de los padres
perspective
As Chapter 3 has indicated, the reasons given in the literature for the use of English in job advertisements in EFL countries – such as prestige,
Chapter 4
international consistency, and the importance of English language skills for successful applicants – are based on researchers’ analysis of examples (Hilgendorf, 1996; Hilgendorf & Martin, 2001; Larson, 1990; Moore &
Varantola, 2005; Peereboom, 1991; Seitz, 2008; Tiggeler & Doeve, n.d.; Watts, 2002).
In a discussion of the analysis of professional genres in general, Bhatia (1993, p. 12) points out that, in addition to researchers, “specialist informants also have an important role to play in the description, analysis and clarification of genres”. Bhatia stresses that it is important to check researchers’ findings against the views of such specialist informants, i.e. the members of the professional community that produces the genre texts (p.
34), since they “have greater knowledge of the conventional purpose(s), constru
t that these can only be discove
den sie sich auf Vermüt
ction and use of specific genres than those who are non-specialists”
(p. 15). Harwood (2006) compares corpus analyses of text features with asking the writers of these texts to comment on these text features. He observes that, while corpus analyses can reveal patterns in the way these features are used, only questioning the authors “can provide researchers with the necessary insight into the writers’ thought processes and decisions that shape the way the text turns out” (p. 425). A corpus analysis could, for instance, never indicate why a certain linguistic feature was not used, but the writer of the text could explain why this was the case. Harwood concludes that a corpus analyst can only guess at the writer’s intentions and motivations for using certain text features, bu
red by asking the writer him or herself (pp. 444-445).
The need to ask the writers of professional texts for their motivation has been expressed in similar terms in relation to the use of English in product advertising in EFL countries. König (1974) carried out one of the first studies in which companies were asked for their motivation to use English words in the product advertisements they had placed. He points out that up to then the reasons given for the use of English words in this context were based on assumptions and lacked a secure foundation: “der Untersuchung der Verwendungsmotivation [von Anglizismen im Deutschen wurde] bisher kaum Beachtung geschenkt. … Wo immer Ursachen der Verwendung genannt werden, grün
ungen und entbehren der gesicherten Grundlage” [hardly any attention so far has been paid to the study of the motivation for using
94
[Anglicisms in German] ... If causes of use were mentioned at all, they were based on assumptions and lacked a secure foundation] (König, 1974, as cited in Viereck, 1980, p. 252). Wetzler (2006) also underlines the need to study the motivation for the use of English in German product advertising from the perspective of the producers of the ads. She states that pronouncements about the reasons for the use of English from the literature which are not based on such research are subjective judgements without empirical basis (“subjektive Einschätzungen, nicht aber empirisch untermauerte Aussagen”, p. 24).
ies in which makers of product advertisements in Germany re asked for their reasons for using English, there would appear to be at
investig in Viereck, 1980), and such
search has also been conducted in other parts of the world where English
(Hsu, 20 ds (Baker &
also in
Martin) r, no such research would seem to have been carried out
job ads yet
een determined. It would seem important to gather this information, since,
that non
writers ed light on the motivations for using particular text
could b hether the reasons given for this use by
non-just as nts by makers of product ad to the
how the
to the r r the use of English in product advertising, to see
have be
& Marti ut at the same time they are distinct genres in that Although Wetzler (2006, pp. 23-24) remarks that there have been hardly any stud
a
least a number of such studies (Clyne, 1973; Wetzler, 2006; various ations reported in Fink et al., 1995, and
re
is a foreign language: Ecuador (Alm, 2003), France (Martin, 2006), Taiwan 08), Thailand (Masavisut et al., 1986), and the Netherlan
Van Gelder, 1997; Gerritsen et al., 2000); in some of these studies ad makers dicate why they avoid using English in their advertising (Alm,
. Howeve
with respect to job advertisements. This means that the reasons makers of in EFL countries have for using or avoiding English have not b
as Bhatia (1993) observes, genre practitioners have knowledge of a genre -practitioners do not have, and, as Harwood (2006), points out, only can really sh
features. The information about job ad makers’ motives for using English e used to check w
practitioner researchers are actually considered relevant by practitioners, Wetzler (2006) links comme
reasons given in the literature by researchers. It would also be useful to see reasons for the use of English given by makers of job ads compare easons given fo
what is common to the two types of advertising and what is different. Both en described as promotional genres (Bhatia, 2004, p. 62; Hilgendorf n, 2001, p. 218), b
Chapter 4
their purpose is to promote “an employment opportunity” (Hilgendorf &
Martin, p. 218) versus a product, and they also have their own characteristic features, for instance in terms of moves and typical phrasing (Bhatia, in fact, depicts them as distinct members of the “colony of promotional genres”, p.
ussed in Chapter 3 suggest possible reasons for the use of English in job ads, they do not comment on whether the makers of
b advertisements in the Netherlands.
as cited in Viereck, 1980, . 252; Wetzler, 2006, pp. 303-304). Again, no such information is available about m
ments
present r this
62). Knowledge about the motives and intentions for using English as identified by writers of job ads themselves is also important in that it could also be used to compare the desired impact of the use of English with the actual effect this has on potential target groups of the job ads, again similar to what Wetzler (2006) did with respect to product ads in Germany. For all these reasons, finding out why makers of job ads in the Netherlands use or avoid English would seem relevant to gaining a better understanding of this use of English and its effects.
A basic question which underlies the question as to what reasons makers of job ads have for using English or Dutch is whether they consciously decide to use or avoid English in their job ad messages. If the use of English or Dutch is the result of a conscious decision, such reasons are more likely to play an explicit role in the language the job ad makers use.
While the authors disc
these ads use English consciously and deliberately. Research among makers of product ads in Germany provides evidence that they use English consciously (Fink et al., 1995, p. 230), but no such information is available for makers of jo
Another issue relating to job ad makers’ decision to use English is to what extent they consider the comprehensibility of English in these decisions. As we have seen in Chapter 3.3.1, a number of people have expressed doubts about the comprehensibility of English in job advertisements in the Netherlands and other European EFL countries.
Research involving makers of product ads in Germany has shown that they do not consider the comprehensibility of English to be a problem for the target groups of the ads they place, but that they do not usually test whether this is so (Fink et al., 1995, pp. 214, 230; König, 1974,
p
akers of job advertisements in the Netherlands.
Finally, the model of the role of English in job advertise ed in Chapter 1.3.6, which describes possible reasons fo
96
languag in EFL
countrie estion
that rea its
suggesti to job
advertis del in these
spects is to determine whether makers of job ads give symbolic and
non-RQ 2b: In what ways have the makers of job ads tested whether the English
s give for using or not using English e use, is largely based on literature on English in product ads s. It has not yet been empirically examined whether its sugg sons for the use of English may be symbolic or non-symbolic, and
ons as to the entities these reasons may refer to, actually apply ements. One way of finding empirical support for the mo re
symbolic reasons for using or not using English and whether the entities to which their reasons refer match those described in the model.
The aim of the interviews with makers of job advertisements in the Netherlands therefore is to answer the following research questions and sub-questions:
RQ 1: To what extent do makers of job ads consciously decide to use English or Dutch in the ads they place?
RQ 2: How do makers of job ads view the comprehensibility of the English or Dutch they use, and to what extent do they test this?
RQ 2a: To what extent do makers of job ads consider the comprehension of the English or Dutch they use to be a problem for the ads’ target groups?
or Dutch they use is a problem for the ads’ target groups?
RQ 3: What reasons do job ad maker
in job ads, and how do these reasons relate to the model described in Chapter 1.3?
RQ 3a: To what extent do job ad makers give symbolic reasons for using or not using English?
RQ 3b: To what extent do job ad makers give non-symbolic reasons for using or not using English?
RQ 3c: To which of the entities described in the model (sender, message, receiver, context) do the symbolic reasons given by the job ad makers relate?
RQ 3d: To which of the entities described in the model (sender, message, receiver, context) do the non-symbolic reasons given by the job ad makers relate?
Chapter 4