Volume 4, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2589-109X
  • E-ISSN: 2589-1103
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This article explores the function of metapragmatic expressions (MPEs) as pragmatic manipulation during Business English as a lingua franca (BELF) meetings within the framework of the socio-cognitive approach (SCA), with special attention to how MPEs in the chair’s utterances reveal their way of using institutional power to accomplish communicative tasks. Drawing on data from three BELF meetings from the Vienna-Oxford International Corpus of English, four types of MPEs are identified in the chair’s utterances. Their pragmatic manipulation is examined in three dimensions: information-oriented, procedure-oriented, and interpersonal relationship-oriented. Data analysis reveals that MPEs are intended to activate shared senses (e.g., shared experiences, mutual knowledge, and common interests) and current senses (e.g., personal judgments, evaluations, and opinions). The activation of these senses supports the creation of emergent common ground to control and shape ongoing interactions, which leads towards task accomplishment. The findings shed light on English language teaching and professional training.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Angouri, J., & Marra, M.
    (2009, July12–17). Don’t you know who I am? Corporate meetings and professional identity [Paper presentation]. The 11th International Pragmatics Conference, Melbourne, Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. (2010) Corporate meetings as genre: A study of the role of the chair in corporate meeting talk. Text & Talk, 30(6), 615–636. doi:  10.1515/text.2010.030
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2010.030 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baker, W.
    (2011) Intercultural awareness: Modeling an understanding of cultures in intercultural communication through English as a lingua franca. Language and Intercultural Communication, 11(3), 197–214. doi:  10.1080/14708477.2011.577779
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2011.577779 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2015) Culture and identity through English as a Lingua Franca: Rethinking concepts and goals in intercultural communication. Water de Gruyter. 10.1515/9781501502149
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501502149 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baumgarten, N., & House, J.
    (2010) I think and I don’t know in English as lingua franca and native English discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42, 1184–1200. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.018 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bilbow, G.
    (2002) Commissive speech act use in intercultural business meetings. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 40, 287–304. doi:  10.1515/iral.2002.014
    https://doi.org/10.1515/iral.2002.014 [Google Scholar]
  7. Birlik, S., & Kaur, J.
    (2020) BELF expert users: Making understanding visible in internal BELF meetings through the use of nonverbal communication strategies. English for Specific Purposes, 58, 1–14. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2019.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  8. Caffi, C.
    (1984) Introduction. Journal of Pragmatics, 8, 433–435. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(84)90035‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(84)90035-3 [Google Scholar]
  9. (1993) Metapragmatics. InR. E. Asher (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (pp.2461–2466). Elsevier.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Canagarajah, S.
    (2007) Lingua franca English, multilingual communities and language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 91, 923–939. doi:  10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2007.00678.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00678.x [Google Scholar]
  11. (2013) Translingual practice: Global Englishes and cosmopolitan relations. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203120293
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203120293 [Google Scholar]
  12. Charles, M.
    (2007) Language matters in global communication. Journal of Business Communication, 44(3), 260–282. doi:  10.1177/0021943607302477
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943607302477 [Google Scholar]
  13. de Saussure, L.
    (2005) Manipulation and cognitive pragmatics: Preliminary hypotheses. InL. de Saussure & P. Schulz (Eds.), Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century: Discourse, language, mind (pp.113–146). Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.17.07sau
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.17.07sau [Google Scholar]
  14. Ehrenreich, S.
    (2010) English as a business lingua franca in a German multinational corporation: Meeting the challenge. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 408–431. doi:  10.1177/0021943610377303
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377303 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2016) English as a lingua franca (ELF) in international business contexts: Key issues and future perspectives. InK. Murata (Ed.), Exploring ELF in Japanese Academic and Business Contexts (pp.135–155). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Enfield, N.
    (2008) Common ground as a resource for social affiliation. InI. Kecskes & J. Mey (Eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer (pp.223–254). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Firth, A.
    (1996) The discursive accomplishment of normality: On ‘lingua franca’ English and conversational analysis. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(2), 237–259. doi:  10.1016/0378‑2166(96)00014‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(96)00014-8 [Google Scholar]
  18. Hall, J. K., & Butler, E. R.
    (2017) The shifting role of a document in managing conflict and shaping the outcome of a small group meeting. Text & Talk, 37(5), 615–638. doi:  10.1515/text‑2017‑0021
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2017-0021 [Google Scholar]
  19. Handford, M.
    (2010) The language of business meetings. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139525329
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139525329 [Google Scholar]
  20. Haugh, M.
    (2016) The role of English as a scientific metalanguage for research in pragmatics: Reflections on the metapragmatics of “politeness” in Japanese. East Asian Pragmatics, 1, 39–71. doi:  10.1558/eap.v1i1.27610
    https://doi.org/10.1558/eap.v1i1.27610 [Google Scholar]
  21. Holmes, J., & Meyerhoff, M.
    (1999) The community of practice: Theories and methodologies in language and gender research. Language in Society, 28, 173–183. doi:  10.1017/S004740459900202X
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S004740459900202X [Google Scholar]
  22. Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M.
    (2003) Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work. Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hongladarom, K.
    (2007) “Don’t blame me for criticizing you …”: A study of metapragmatics comments in Thai. InW. Büblitz & A. Hübler (Eds.), Metapragmatics in use (pp.29–47). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.04hon
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.04hon [Google Scholar]
  24. Hübler, A.
    (2011) Metapragmatics. InW. Büblitz & N. Norrick (Eds.), Foundations of pragmatics (pp.107–136). Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214260.107
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214260.107 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hübler, A., & Bublitz, W.
    (2007) Introducing metapragmatics in use. InW. Büblitz & A. Hübler (Eds.), Metapragmatics in use (pp.1–26). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.02hub
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.02hub [Google Scholar]
  26. Jenkins, J.
    (2007) English as a lingua franca: Attitude and identity. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. (2014) English as a lingua franca in the international university: The politics of academic English language policy. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L.
    (2013) What language does global business speak? – The concept and development of BELF. Ibérica, 26, 17–34.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Kankaanranta, A., & Planken, B.
    (2010) BELF competence as business knowledge of internationally operating business professionals. Journal of Business Communication, 47(4), 380–407. doi:  10.1177/0021943610377301
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377301 [Google Scholar]
  30. Karimzad, F.
    (2020) Metapragmatics of normalcy: Mobility, context, and language choice. Language & Communication, 70, 107–118. doi:  10.1016/j.langcom.2019.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2019.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Kaur, J.
    (2018) ELF in spoken genres in the international university: Of contextual factors and non-linguistic resources. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 7(2), 403–410. doi:  10.1515/jelf‑2018‑0020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2018-0020 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kecskes, I.
    (2007) Formulaic language in English lingua franca. InI. Kecskes & L. Horn (Eds.), Explorations in pragmatics: Linguistic, cognitive and intercultural aspects (pp.191–218). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (2008) Dueling contexts: A dynamic model of meaning. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 385–406. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.12.004 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2010) Situation-bound utterances as pragmatic acts. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 2889–2897. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.06.008 [Google Scholar]
  35. (2013) Intercultural pragmatics. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199892655.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. (2017) The interplay of recipient design and salience in shaping speaker’s utterance. InM. de Ponte & K. Korta (Eds.), Reference and representation in thought and language (pp.238–273). Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. (2019) English as a lingua franca: The pragmatic perspective. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316217832
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316217832 [Google Scholar]
  38. Kecskes, I., & Zhang, F.
    (2009) Activating, seeking, and creating common ground: A socio-cognitive approach. Pragmatics & Cognition, 17(2), 331–355. doi:  10.1075/pc.17.2.06kec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.2.06kec [Google Scholar]
  39. (2013) On the dynamic relations between common ground and presupposition. InA. Capone, F. Lo Piparo, & M. Carapezza (Eds.), Perspectives on linguistic pragmatics (pp.375–396). Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑319‑01014‑4_15
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01014-4_15 [Google Scholar]
  40. Kleinke, S., & Bös, B.
    (2015) Intergroup rudeness and the metapragmatics of its negotiation in online discussion fora. Pragmatics, 25(1), 47–71. doi:  10.1075/prag.25.1.03kle
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.25.1.03kle [Google Scholar]
  41. Kytölä, S., & Westinen, E.
    (2015) ‘‘I be da reel gansta” – a Finnish footballer’s Twitter writing and metapragmatic evaluations of authenticity. Discourse Context Media, 8, 6–19. doi:  10.1016/j.dcm.2015.05.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2015.05.001 [Google Scholar]
  42. Liu, P., & Liu, H.
    (2017) Creating common ground: The role of metapragmatic expressions in BELF meeting interactions. Journal of Pragmatics, 107, 1–15. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2016.10.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.10.006 [Google Scholar]
  43. Liu, P., & Ran, Y.
    (2016) The role of metapragmatic expressions as pragmatic manipulation in a TV panel discussion program. Pragmatics and Society, 7(3), 463–481. doi:  10.1075/ps.7.3.06liu
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.7.3.06liu [Google Scholar]
  44. Louhiala-Salminen, L., & Kankaanranta, A.
    (2011) Professional communication in a global business context: The notion of global communicative competence. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 54(3), 244–262. doi:  10.1109/TPC.2011.2161844
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2011.2161844 [Google Scholar]
  45. Louhiala-Salminen, L. M., Charles, M., & Kankaanranta, C. A.
    (2005) English as a lingua franca in Nordic corporate mergers: Two case companies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(4), 401–421. doi:  10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  46. Mackenzie, I.
    (2014) English as a lingua franca: Theorizing and teaching English. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315890081
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315890081 [Google Scholar]
  47. Mey, J.
    (1993/2001) Pragmatics: An introduction (2nd ed.). Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2008) “Impeach of exorcise?” Or, what’s in the (common) ground?InI. Kecskes & J. Mey (Eds.), Intention, common ground and the egocentric speaker-hearer (pp.255–275). Mouton de Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Overstreet, M., & Yule, G.
    (2001) Formulaic disclaimers. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 45–60. doi:  10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00125‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00125-3 [Google Scholar]
  50. Passera, S., Kankaanranta, A., & Louhiala-Salminen, L.
    (2017) Diagrams in contracts: Fostering understanding in global business communication. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 60(2), 118–146. doi:  10.1109/TPC.2017.2656678
    https://doi.org/10.1109/TPC.2017.2656678 [Google Scholar]
  51. Penz, H.
    (2007) Building common ground through metapragmatic comments in international project work. InW. Bublitz & A. Hubler (Eds.), Metapragmatics in use (pp.263–292). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.17pen
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.17pen [Google Scholar]
  52. Pomerantz, A., & Denvir, P.
    (2007) Enacting the institutional role of chairperson in upper management meetings: The interactional realization of provisional authority. InF. Cooren (Ed.), Interacting and organizing: Analyses of a management meeting (pp.31–51). Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Pullin, P.
    (2010) Small talk, rapport, and international communicative competence: Lessons to learn from BELF. Journal of Business Communication, 47, 455–476. doi:  10.1177/0021943610377307
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377307 [Google Scholar]
  54. Rigotti, E.
    (2005) Towards a typology of manipulative processes. InL. de Saussure & P. Schulz (Eds.), Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century: Discourse, language, mind (pp.61–83). John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.17.05rig
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.17.05rig [Google Scholar]
  55. Seidlhofer, B.
    (2004) Research perspectives on teaching English as a lingua franca. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 209–239. doi:  10.1017/S0267190504000145
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000145 [Google Scholar]
  56. (2011) Understanding English as a lingua franca. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. (2016) ELF: English in a global context. InK. Murata (Ed.), Exploring ELF in Japanese academic and business contexts (pp.17–28). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Silverstein, M.
    (1976) Shifters, linguistic categories, and cultural description. InK. H. Basso & H. A. Selby (Eds.), Meaning and anthropology (pp.11–56). The University of New Mexico Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. (1993) Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function. InL. John (Ed.), Reflexive language: Reported speech and metapragmatics (pp.33–58). Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511621031.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621031.004 [Google Scholar]
  60. Sinkeviciute, V.
    (2019) Juggling identities in interviews: The metapragmatics of ‘doing humour’. Journal of Pragmatics, 152, 216–227. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.08.005 [Google Scholar]
  61. Smith, S. W., & Liang, X.
    (2007) Metapragmatic expressions in physics lectures. InW. Büblitz & A. Hubler (Eds.), Metapragmatics in use (pp.167–197). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.165.12smi
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.165.12smi [Google Scholar]
  62. Su, H.-Y.
    (2019) The metapragmatics of Taiwanese (im)politeness: Conceptualization and evaluation of limao. Journal of Pragmatics, 148, 26–43. doi:  10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.018
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.05.018 [Google Scholar]
  63. Svennevig, J.
    (2012a) The agenda as resource for topic introduction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14(1), 53–66. doi:  10.1177/1461445611427204
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427204 [Google Scholar]
  64. (2012b) Interaction in workplace meetings. Discourse Studies, 14, 3–10. doi:  10.1177/1461445611427203
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611427203 [Google Scholar]
  65. Sweeney, E., & Zhu, H.
    (2010) Accommodating toward your audience. Do native speakers of English know how to accommodate their communication strategies toward non-native speakers of English?Journal of Business Communication, 47(4), 477–504. doi:  10.1177/0021943610377308
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610377308 [Google Scholar]
  66. Tunmer, W. E., & Herriman, M. L.
    (1984) Metalinguistic awareness in children. Springer. 10.1007/978‑3‑642‑69113‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69113-3 [Google Scholar]
  67. van Dijk, T. A.
    (2006) Discourse and manipulation. Discourse and Society, 17(2), 359–383. doi:  10.1177/0957926506060250
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250 [Google Scholar]
  68. Vande Kopple, W.
    (1985) Some explanatory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93. 10.2307/357609
    https://doi.org/10.2307/357609 [Google Scholar]
  69. Verschueren, J.
    (1999/2000) Understanding pragmatics. Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. (2000) Notes on the role of metapragmatic awareness in language use. Pragmatics, 10(4), 439–456. doi:  10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver
    https://doi.org/10.1075/prag.10.4.02ver [Google Scholar]
  71. Wenger, E.
    (1998) Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511803932
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803932 [Google Scholar]
  72. Zhu, Y.
    (2011) Building intercultural alliances: A study of moves and strategies in initial business negotiation meetings. Text & Talk, 31(1), 101–125. doi:  10.1515/text.2011.005
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2011.005 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error