Languages & Linguistics
Consultative Register
The consultative register refers to a style of language use that is polite, formal, and respectful. It is often employed in professional or formal settings, such as business meetings, academic presentations, or official correspondence. Speakers using the consultative register typically use more complex and sophisticated language structures and show deference to their interlocutors.
Written by Perlego with AI-assistance
Related key terms
1 of 5
7 Key excerpts on "Consultative Register"
eBook - PDF- Ulrich Ammon, Norbert Dittmar, Klaus J. Mattheier, Peter Trudgill, Ulrich Ammon, Norbert Dittmar, Klaus J. Mattheier, Peter Trudgill(Authors)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
Other authors try to resolve the problem 38. Style and Register 281 by introducing a differentiation in functional stylistics that approaches the conception of linguistic registers (cf. e.g. Kraus 1971, 273; Gal'perin 1973, 14 ft). 3.4. Theory of Register In contrast to functional stylistics, which pro-ceeds from a small number of domains of communication and assigns to them relatively closed subsystems of linguistic means on all levels of language, registers are determined by the parameters of the communication situa-tion. Unlike the functional styles, they refer to both written and spoken language; a deli-mitation to standard language is not made by all authors. The theory of register was developed in English linguistics by J. R. Firth and his school (cf. Gläser 1976, 234-240); though the theoretical positions and the terminology of its various adherents are very heterogene-ous (cf. the comparison in Hess-Lüttich 1974, 272 — 274), yet it is possible to summarize it as a common theoretical basis: Den meisten Definitionen des register-Begriffs gemeinsam sind die sprachliche Variante, der Rollen-wechsel des Sprechers sowie der sozial-situa-tive Rahmen der sprachlichen Äußerung. Übereinstimmung besteht unter den Vertre-tern der FIRTH-Schule und anderen engli-schen Linguisten auch darin, daß die registers einen gesellschaftlich verbindlichen Charak-ter tragen und als makrolinguistische Norm gelten können. (Gläser 1976, 239). Halliday defines 'register' as 'language variety accord-ing to use' in contrast to 'dialect', which he conceives as 'language variety according to user' (Halliday/Mclntosh/Strevens [1964] 1970, 87). The difference between dialect and register is explicated further by Turner: In one case, when we compare dialects, we nor-mally compare entirely different linguistic situations: speaker, hearer, and circumstances all differ between one dialect and another.
eBook - PDF- Oscar Uribe-Villegas(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
Indeed it is by their register range, and not by their linguistic features, that 'developed' languages are recognised and distinguished from 'undeveloped' ones (e.g., Ferguson, 1968). 198 Jean Ure and Jeffrey Ellis Nevertheless, although the fact of register and its importance, for example, in language development, is recognised now by many workers in the sociolinguistic field, investigations are still only beginning: small parts only of a very few languages have been examined, and a great deal remains to be done on the nature of the relation between language patterning and social reality. In the following paper we give a brief account of some of the methods that may be employed and some preliminary investigations. Register and language A register is a subdivision of a given language, a 'situational variety' constituted by a selection of choices from among the total linguistic options offered by that specific language. Some people use only one language on all occasions and have all their registers in one language, but there are many communities which draw on more than one language for their different purposes, and in that case a member of that com-munity will have different registers in different languages. It was in fact in relation to bilingualism that register was first observed (Gum-perz, 1959; Ferguson, 1958) and named (Reid, 1956). (The term register was introduced by Reid; Gumperz and many American lin-guists and anthropologists use the term code when discussing the same phenomena.) Thus a given speaker's idiolect may consist of a repertory of registers drawn all from one language or from entirely different lan-guages and/or from dialects of the same language. Different dialects of the same language may include different local varieties of the same language and also different social varieties (Ellis, 1965). Register, as we have said, is a norm that obtains in a particular language community.
eBook - PDF- Helen Leckie-Tarry(Author)
- 1995(Publication Date)
- Pinter(Publisher)
'[Register] is the set of meanings, the configuration of semantic patterns, that are typically drawn upon under the specified con-ditions, along with the words and structures that are used in the realization of these meanings' (Halliday, 1978: 23). Register is determined, by what is taking place, who is taking part and what part the language is playing (Halliday, 1978: 31). There is also a greater emphasis on the broader social context: 'a register can be defined as the configuration of semantic resources that the member of a culture typically associates with a situation type. It is the meaning potential that is accessible in a given social context' (Halliday, 1978: in). Halliday further makes the point that, while register may be recognized by its formal (i.e. linguistic) characteristics, its structure is semantic. Hence, and crucially, in this definition, the critical elements are seen to be firstly contextual, and secondly, linguistic. Many of the theorists working in the 19605 and 19705 acknowledge the influence of Halliday in their perceptions of register. Gregory and Carroll (1978: 64) see register as 'a useful abstraction linking variations of language to 6 Register and genre variations of social context', 'a contextual category correlating groupings of linguistic features with recurrent situational features' (Gregory and Carroll, 1978: 4). This is an observation which similarly relates text to context defining register as 'a linguistic category, a property relating a given text, in terms of its formal, phonological or graphological, or substantial, features to similar texts in comparable situations, and thereby to features in the situation of utterance or composition' (Ure and Ellis, 1977: 251) qualifying this with the statement that 'a given language will be said to have a register distinction at a certain point only if there are both linguistic and situational differences there' (Ure and Ellis, 1977: 252).
eBook - PDF- Manuel Köster, Holger Thünemann, Meik Zülsdorf-Kersting(Authors)
- 2022(Publication Date)
- Wochenschau Verlag(Publisher)
In the following, we examine the registers most relevant to history in the classroom . We draw these from different, largely unconnected research contexts and branches of historiography, education and linguistics . These different disci-plinary approaches (with their own traditions and identities) have not yet been cross-referenced systematically and analytically . While the discourses involved are not always easy to combine, attempting to do so sheds new light on the lin-guistic dimensions of history in the classroom, which to date have at best been examined in isolation . 7.2.1 Casual register Casual register is the range of standard language used in everyday communica-tion (as opposed to “educated” English, technical register or specific language used e . g . by young people; cf . Glück 2004, 31) . Colloquial language is often described as the main variety of casual register because it is assumed to be typi-cal of specific speech situations, rather than determined by social class (ibid .) . Colloquial language is primarily spoken – although it is used to communicate online and through messaging services – and hence mainly a “speech form of immediate contact” (ibid ., 757) . In his research into the processes involved in acquiring a second language, Jim Cummins (2004) distinguishes basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS), used to communicate in situations that are cognitively less demanding and strongly embedded in specific contexts, from cognitive academic language pro-ficiency (CALP) . The latter is required in cognitively sophisticated communica-tion where little reference is made to specific contexts (cf . Berendes et al . 2013, 20; Schmölzer-Eibinger 2013, 27) . Simply put, BICS enables communication in casual register, while CALP enables discourse in academic register . 7 Cf . “double contingency” ( → History in the classroom, 28; → Emotions, 122) and the three “improbabilities of successful communication” ( → Media, 157) .
eBook - PDF- Joshua A. Fishman(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- De Gruyter Mouton(Publisher)
The study of registers is crucial both to our understanding of how language works and in application to literary analysis, machine translation and native and foreign language teaching. 6 Languages in contact, dialects and registers are three of the major topics of institutional linguistics. The fourth and last to be considered is the observation of the attitudes of members of a language community to-wards their language and its varieties. Here we mention briefly some of the attitudes that are relevant to the present discussion, with commen-tary where necessary. Most communities show some reverence for the magical powers of language. In some societies, however, this respect is mingled with, and may be eclipsed by, a newer set of attitudes much more disdainful of the language, or of a part of it. The value judgments that underlie these attitudes may be moral or aesthetic, or they may rest on a pragmatic appeal to efficiency. The degree of social sanction they carry varies according to the language community; but whether the judgments and 160 Μ. A.K. Halliday, Angus Mcintosh, and Peter Strevens attitudes are social or individual, the individual expounding them fre-quently claims objectivity for his opinions. A typical formulation is: Obviously it is better (or: 'Everybody agrees that it is better') to say, or write, this than that, because' either 'it's clearer' or 'it sounds better' or 'it's more correct'. Less common, and more sophisticated, are 'because the best people do it' and 'because I prefer it'. The most far-reaching among such value judgments are those passed on whole languages. Those who argue that it is necessary for English to remain the language of government, law, education or technology in former colonies sometimes claim, in support of their view, that the na-tional languages are not suitable for these purposes. This reason is even put forward by the native speaker of the languages concerned.
- Douglas Biber, Randi Reppen(Authors)
- 2015(Publication Date)
- Cambridge University Press(Publisher)
Hundt and Mair (1999) demonstrate that late twentieth-century newspaper English is relatively open to the spread of linguistic features associated with speech, while the acceptance of such features is slower and less noticeable in academic writing. However, it is possible for a register to be agile concerning the spread of some features while remaining conservative with regard to others; for instance, Biber and Gray (2011) show that academic English has been innovative with regard to the development of the syntactic elaboration of noun phrases. In diachronic investigations, an added complication is that the linguistic features typically associated with a register may change over time (see Biber and Finegan 1997). The complex and shifting interplay of registers and their characteristic linguistic features mean that careful consideration of the register parameter is crucial in historical corpus linguistics. The register parameter can be taken into account in two ways in diachro- nic investigations. In one approach, several different registers are sampled for each period analyzed, and the aim of the analysis is then typically that the corpus should be representative of a language variety so that studying the corpus “can stand proxy for the study of some entire language or language variety” (Leech 2007: 135); for instance, the LOB corpus has been taken to represent early 1960s written British English. From another per- spective, the aim is rather to represent particular registers (e.g. scientific Diachronic registers 331 research articles), and conclusions about language change are restricted to the level of specific registers rather than of a variety as a whole (see, for instance, Biber and Gray 2011 on academic research writing). Both perspec- tives will be present in our discussion below.
eBook - PDFThinking Arabic Translation
A Course in Translation Method: Arabic to English
- James Dickins, Sándor Hervey, Ian Higgins(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
15.2 Register ‘Register’ is a term used in so many different ways that it can be positively mis-leading. It is possible to isolate at least four theoretically distinct types of register that might be used in the analytic description of language (Hervey 1992). For our purposes, however, these fall into two types of register that it is methodologically useful for translators to distinguish. 15.2.1 Tonal register The fi rst is what we shall call ‘tonal register’. This is the feature of linguistic expression that carries affective meaning, which we examined in Section 8.4. That is, it is the tone that the speaker takes – vulgar, familiar, polite, formal, etc. The affective meaning of a feature of tonal register is conveyed by a more or less deliberate choice of one out of a range of expressions capable of conveying a given literal message – compare, for example, ﺖﻤﺼﻟا ءﺎﺟﺮﻟا as opposed to ﺖﻜﺳا or سﺮﺧا or in English ‘Would you mind being quiet’ or ‘Silence please’ as opposed to ‘Shut up!’. As these examples suggest, the effect of tonal registers on listen-ers is something for which speakers can be held responsible, in so far as they are deliberately being obscene, polite, etc. In handling tonal register, it is clearly important for the translator to accurately assess where the ST expression comes on the SL ‘politeness scale’ and to render it with an expression as close as possible to a corresponding TL degree of politeness. But it is not enough just to have a repertoire of expressions capable of injecting various affective meanings into a given literal message. Equally important is the situation in which the expression is used: different sorts of social transactions – preaching in a mosque or in a church, defending a client in court, selling a car to a male customer, etc.
Index pages curate the most relevant extracts from our library of academic textbooks. They’ve been created using an in-house natural language model (NLM), each adding context and meaning to key research topics.
