1887
Volume 7, Issue 1
  • ISSN 2542-9477
  • E-ISSN: 2542-9485
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This diachronic study analyzes engagement features — epistemic positioning and interactivity in particular — in the business case studies published by the (HBR) over the last century (1922–2023). Our study is based on a small, specialized corpus of HBR case studies, covering three periods (1922–1929, 1961–1979 and 2008–2023) in which we compare the frequency of epistemic and interactivity features. After reviewing the literature on the expression of positioning and stance in specialized contexts, we conceptualize business case studies as a register, and we identify a set of features by adopting a corpus-based approach thanks to a semantic tagger. Our corpus-driven, quantitative analysis highlights sharp differences in the frequency patterns as well in the functions they fulfill in the discourse.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/rs.25006.mil
2025-08-08
2026-04-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Akar, D., & Louhiala-Salminen, L.
    (2014) Towards a new genre: A comparative study of business faxes. InF. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Éds.), Writing Business : Genres, Media and Discourses (p.207–226). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315840246‑9
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315840246-9 [Google Scholar]
  2. Anthony, L.
    (2014) AntConc (Version 3.4. 3) [Sofware]. Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Banks, D.
    (2012) Diachronic ESP: At the interface of linguistics and cultural studies. ASp, 611, 55–70. 10.4000/asp.2738
    https://doi.org/10.4000/asp.2738 [Google Scholar]
  4. (2017) The birth of the academic article Le Journal des Sçavans and the Philosophical Transactions, 1665–1700. Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bargiela-Chiappini, F.
    (1999) Meaning creation and genre across cultures: Human resource management magazines in Britain and Italy. InF. Bargiela-Chiappini & C. Nickerson (Éds.), Writing Business (p.129–152). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Biber, D., & Egbert, J.
    (2023) What is a register ? Accounting for linguistic and situational variation within — and outside of — textual varieties. Register Studies, 5(1), 1–22. 10.1075/rs.00004.bib
    https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.00004.bib [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, D., & Finegan, E.
    (1988) Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse Processes, 11(1), 1–34. 10.1080/01638538809544689
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538809544689 [Google Scholar]
  8. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C.
    (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  9. Candlin, C. N., & Candlin, S.
    (2002) Discourse, expertise, and the management of risk in health care settings. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35(2), 115–137. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3502_1
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3502_1 [Google Scholar]
  10. Chandler, A. D. J.
    (1977) The visible hand: The managerial revolution in American business. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Charles, M.
    (1996) Business negotiations: Interdependence between discourse and the business relationship. English for Specific Purposes, 15(1), 19–36. 10.1016/0889‑4906(95)00029‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(95)00029-1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Chiapello, E., & Fairclough, N.
    (2002) Understanding the new management ideology: A Transdisciplinary contribution from critical discourse analysis and new sociology of capitalism. Discourse & Society, 13(2), 185–208. 10.1177/0957926502013002406
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926502013002406 [Google Scholar]
  13. Clemen, G.
    (1997) The concept of hedging: Origins, approaches and definitions. InR. Markkanen & H. Schröder (Éds.), Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts, 241, 235–248. 10.1515/9783110807332.235
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110807332.235 [Google Scholar]
  14. Coombs, W. T.
    (2001) Teaching the crisis management/communication course. Public Relations Review, 27(1), 89–101. 10.1016/S0363‑8111(01)00072‑8
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0363-8111(01)00072-8 [Google Scholar]
  15. Crawford Camiciottoli, B.
    (2018) Persuasion in earnings calls: A diachronic pragmalinguistic analysis. International Journal of Business Communication, 55(3), 275–292. 10.1177/2329488417735644
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488417735644 [Google Scholar]
  16. Domenec, F.
    (2012) The “greening” of the annual letters published by Exxon, Chevron and BP between 2003 and 2009. Journal of Communication Management, 16(3), 296–311. 10.1108/13632541211245767
    https://doi.org/10.1108/13632541211245767 [Google Scholar]
  17. Dury, P.
    (2005) Terminology and specialized translation: The relevance of the diachronic Approach. LSP and Professional Communication, 5(1), 31–41. https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/LSP/article/view/2042
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fairclough, N.
    (2003) Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203697078
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203697078 [Google Scholar]
  19. Ferguson, M.
    (2003) The rise of management consulting in Britain. Routledge. 10.4324/9781315183534
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315183534 [Google Scholar]
  20. Fox, R.
    (1999) The social identity of management ergolect. English for Specific Purposes, 18(3), 261–278. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00057‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00057-4 [Google Scholar]
  21. Gimenez, J. C.
    (2000) Business e-mail communication: Some emerging tendencies in register. English for Specific Purposes, 19(3), 237–251. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(98)00030‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00030-1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gunnarsson, B.-L., Linell, P., & Nordberg, B.
    (1997) Introduction. InB.-L. Gunnarsson, P. Linell, & B. Nordberg (Éds.), The contruction of professional discourse (pp.1–12). Pearson Education.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Handford, M.
    (2010) The language of business meetings. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139525329
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139525329 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hoekje, B. J.
    (2007) Medical discourse and ESP courses for international medical graduates (IMGs). English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 327–343. 10.1016/j.esp.2006.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M.
    (2015) Power and politeness in the workplace: A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at work (2nd éd.). Routledge. 10.4324/9781315750231
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315750231 [Google Scholar]
  26. Hyland, K.
    (1996) Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 433–454. 10.1093/applin/17.4.433
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.4.433 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2005) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. 10.1177/1461445605050365
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  28. Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (Kevin)
    (2017) Is academic writing becoming more informal?English for Specific Purposes, 451, 40–51. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hyland, K., & Zou, H.
    (2022) Pithy persuasion: Engagement in 3 minute thesis presentations. Applied Linguistics, 43(1), 21–44. 10.1093/applin/amab017
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amab017 [Google Scholar]
  30. Ivanova, M., & von Scheve, C.
    (2020) Power through empowerment? The managerial discourse on employee empowerment. Organization, 27(6), 777–796. 10.1177/1350508419855709
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508419855709 [Google Scholar]
  31. Jameson, D. A.
    (2001) Narrative discourse and management action. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 38(4), 476–511. 10.1177/002194360103800404
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002194360103800404 [Google Scholar]
  32. Johlke, M. C., Duhan, D. F., Howell, R. D., & Wilkes, R. W.
    (2000) An integrated model of sales managers’ communication practices. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 28(2), 263–277. 10.1177/0092070300282007
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070300282007 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kankaanranta, A.
    (2006) “Hej Seppo, could you pls comment on this!” — Internal email communication in Lingua Franca English in a multinational company. Business Communication Quarterly, 69(2), 216–225. 10.1177/108056990606900215
    https://doi.org/10.1177/108056990606900215 [Google Scholar]
  34. Koester, A.
    (2010) Workplace discourse. A&C Black.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kupritz, V. W., & Cowell, E.
    (2011) Productive management communication: Online and face-to-face. The Journal of Business Communication (1973), 48(1), 54–82. 10.1177/0021943610385656
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943610385656 [Google Scholar]
  36. Lakoff, G.
    (1973) Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4), 458–508. 10.1007/BF00262952
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00262952 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ledema, R., & Scheeres, H.
    (2009) Organisational discourse analysis. InF. Bargiela-Chiappini (Éds.), The handbook of business discourse (pp.80–91). Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Lejeune, P.
    (2018) The epistemic status of predictions in Central Bank reports: A cross-linguistic study. International Journal of Business Communication, 55(3), 357–382. 10.1177/2329488418768691
    https://doi.org/10.1177/2329488418768691 [Google Scholar]
  39. Louhiala-Salminen, L.
    (2002) The fly’s perspective: Discourse in the daily routine of a business manager. English for Specific Purposes, 21(3), 211–231. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(00)00036‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00036-3 [Google Scholar]
  40. Marín-Arrese, J. I.
    (2017) Stancetaking and inter/subjectivity in journalistic discourse : The engagement system revisited. InR. Breeze & I. Olza (Éds.), Evaluation in the media: European perspectives (pp.21–46). Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Markkanen, R., Schröder, H., & Schröder, H.
    (1997) Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts. De Gruyter, Inc.ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/bham/detail.action?docID=913093. 10.1515/9783110807332
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110807332 [Google Scholar]
  42. Marschan-Piekkari, R., Welch, D., & Welch, L.
    (1999) In the shadow: The impact of language on structure, power and communication in the multinational. International Business Review, 8(4), 421–440. 10.1016/S0969‑5931(99)00015‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-5931(99)00015-3 [Google Scholar]
  43. Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R.
    (2005) The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  44. McKinlay, A., McVittie, C., & Cowan, S.
    (2011) How expert psychiatrists formulate criticisms of lay descriptions of psychiatry in front of a lay audience, 31(5), 601–618. 10.1515/text.2011.029
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2011.029 [Google Scholar]
  45. McLaren-Hankin, Y.
    (2008) ’We expect to report on significant progress in our product pipeline in the coming year’: Hedging forward-looking statements in corporate press releases. Discourse Studies, 10(5), 635–654. 10.1177/1461445608094216
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445608094216 [Google Scholar]
  46. Millot, P.
    (2017) Inclusivity and exclusivity in English as a business Lingua Franca: The expression of a professional voice in email communication. English for Specific Purposes, 461, 59–71. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.12.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  47. Nesi, H., & Gardner, S.
    (2012) Genres across disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781009030199
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009030199 [Google Scholar]
  48. Nickerson, C.
    (2000) Playing the corporate language game: An investigation of the genres and discourse strategies in English used by Dutch writers working in multinational corporations (Vol.151). Rodopi. 10.1163/9789004483842
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004483842 [Google Scholar]
  49. O’Rourke, J. S.
    (2019) Management communication: A case analysis approach. Routledge. 10.4324/9780429057793
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429057793 [Google Scholar]
  50. Pennock, G. A.
    (1930) Industrial research at Hawthorne. Personnel Journal, 81, 296–313.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Pyle Millar, D., & Heath, R. L.
    (Éds.) (2004) Responding to crisis: A rhetorical approach to crisis communication. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Quinn, R. E., Hildebrandt, H. W., Rogers, P. S., & Thompson, M. P.
    (1991) A competing values framework for analyzing presentational communication in management contexts. Journal of Business Communication, 28(3), 213–232. 10.1177/002194369102800303
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002194369102800303 [Google Scholar]
  53. Rayson, P.
    (2008) From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 519–549. 10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.13.4.06ray [Google Scholar]
  54. Read, J., & Carroll, J.
    (2012) Annotating expressions of appraisal in English. Language Resources and Evaluation, 46(3), 421–447. 10.1007/s10579‑010‑9135‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-010-9135-7 [Google Scholar]
  55. Resche, C.
    (2004) Investigating ‘greenspanese’: From hedging to ‘fuzzy transparency’. Discourse & Society, 15(6), 723–744. 10.1177/0957926504046502
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926504046502 [Google Scholar]
  56. Rogers, P. S., & Hildebrandt, H. W.
    (1993) Competing values instruments for analyzing written and spoken management messages. Human Resource Management, 32(1), 121–142. 10.1002/hrm.3930320107
    https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.3930320107 [Google Scholar]
  57. Rogerson-Revell, P.
    (1999) Meeting talk: A stylistic approach to teaching meeting skills. InM. Hewings & C. Nickerson (Éds.), Business English: Research into practice (pp.55–72). Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Salager-Meyer, F.
    (1999) Referential behavior in scientific writing: A diachronic study (1810–1995). English for Specific Purposes, 18(3), 279–305. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(97)00042‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00042-2 [Google Scholar]
  59. Sarangi, S., & Clarke, A.
    (2002) Zones of expertise and the management of uncertainty in genetics risk communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 35(2), 139–171. 10.1207/S15327973RLSI3502_2
    https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327973RLSI3502_2 [Google Scholar]
  60. Schryer, C. F., & Spoel, P.
    (2005) Genre theory, health-care discourse, and professional identity formation. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 19(3), 249–278. 10.1177/1050651905275625
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651905275625 [Google Scholar]
  61. Seal, W.
    (2010) Managerial discourse and the link between theory and practice: From ROI to value-based management. Management Accounting Research, 21(2), 95–109. 10.1016/j.mar.2010.02.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mar.2010.02.007 [Google Scholar]
  62. Sprain, L.
    (2015) Expertise discourse. InThe international encyclopedia of language and social interaction (pp.1–5). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. 10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi184
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi184 [Google Scholar]
  63. Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S.
    (1986) Reducing social context cues: Electronic mail in organizational communications. Management Science, 32(11), 1492–1512. 10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492
    https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.32.11.1492 [Google Scholar]
  64. Wren, D. A., & Bedeian, A. G.
    (2020) The evolution of management thought (6e éd.). John Wiley & Sons.
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. J.
    (1992) Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. The Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 299–326. 10.2307/258774
    https://doi.org/10.2307/258774 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.25006.mil
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/rs.25006.mil
Loading

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