Select your language

Suggested languages for you:
Log In Start studying!
StudySmarter - The all-in-one study app.
4.8 • +11k Ratings
More than 3 Million Downloads
Free

All-in-one learning app

  • Flashcards
  • NotesNotes
  • ExplanationsExplanations
  • Study Planner
  • Textbook solutions
Start studying

Language and Occupation

Save Save
Print Print
Edit Edit
Sign up to use all features for free. Sign up now
X
Illustration You have already viewed an explanation Register now and access this and thousands of further explanations for free
English

A person's language can differ depending on what social group they're in, and a person can be in many social groups simultaneously. Something that determines one of these social groups is the work a person does, their occupation. Occupational groups are often classified as discourse communities and each has its own sets of rules and trends for language use.

In this article, we will look at what a discourse community is, what occupational language is, the pros and cons of occupational language in society, and different linguistic theories surrounding occupational language.

What is a discourse community?

In its most basic sense, a discourse community is a group of people who share interests, beliefs, assumptions and the language used to discuss these things. It is easier to understand this if we know what discourse means.

Discourse is any form of written or spoken communication.

From this definition, we can say that a discourse community is a group of people whose communication is based on shared topics and interests. If a social group is described as a discourse community, they will have a specific way of communicating within that group which is different to how they would in another social group. Their communication may be specific in areas such as conversational rules, grammar and lexis.

What is occupational language?

Occupational language refers to the way people speak within their occupational group. This includes all of the rules and topics that apply to the conversations commonly had in the workplace. Each occupational group will have different occupational language because of their different professions.

An occupational group is a type of discourse community where the members are all in the same occupational field. The common tie between the members of this community is their shared occupation, whether it be 'teaching,' 'dentistry,' or 'nursing.'

The main distinguishing factor of occupational language is that it often isn't language used in everyday (casual) conversation. This means that many items of occupational lexis will be considered jargon and won't be commonly known or understood by laymen (someone without specialist knowledge of a particular subject).

Jargon is the name given to specialist words used in a profession that are not part of a person's usual lexicon. In the profession of computer programming, jargon includes the terms: javascript, linux, MVC, PHP and sprint. As a non-professional might not know what these words mean, they are classified as jargon.

Within an occupational group, there is often a specific semantic field - a selection of words that all relate to a single topic.

Words in the semantic field of cars include: bonnet, wheel, engine, acceleration and MOT.

It is also possible though for different occupational groups to overlap, such as the groups 'nursing' and 'GP practitioner,' which would most likely share a semantic field. These two groups would be able to communicate with each other while still retaining their use of occupational language, but they will also have some differences in the way they communicate within their occupational groups. This could be in the way they address each other (such as GPs addressing each other as 'doctor' and nurses addressing each other as 'nurse'), or in the formality of their conversations (GP practitioners usually communicate with each other in front of the general public so may be more formal in their workplace talk).

Here are some examples of different occupational groups with their semantic fields:

Occupation
Semantic Field
LawyerLegal lexis: court, order, jury, guilty, defendant, acquittal, bail, ad litem, caveat, plaintiff, verdict
DoctorMedical lexis: abrasion, benign, chronic, defibrillator, inpatient, prognosis, suture, epidermis
DentistDentistry: abutment, arch, bicuspid, bonding, caries, cavity, dentin, gingiva, malignant, orthodontist, root
ChefCookery: amuse bouche, basting, blanching, crimp, fricassee, ganache, julienne, omakase, roux, sautee

Why occupational language is beneficial

In any setting, it is important to have clear and effective communication. In the workplace, this is achieved through the use of occupational language. Generally, everyone in the workplace will share the same knowledge of their occupational language and so using it will allow for clear and concise instruction or communication whenever needed. This makes for an effective working environment, allowing people to work together like a well-oiled machine.

A person may also use occupational language to their advantage, using specific words to show their intelligence. This could be done simply to feel as clever as their peers, or it could be done to exert power. If someone uses a lot of occupational lexis, they may give the impression of knowing more than their peers. In a similar way, occupational language can be used to differentiate people within a social hierarchy in the workplace. For example, the boss is likely to have the most knowledge and therefore use the widest variety of workplace-specific lexis, making it clear that they are someone who can provide knowledge and answers where needed.

Another positive is that it can create a sense of professionalism and integrity in the workplace. This level of professionalism at work can then encourage a better work/life distinction as a person's language use may differ greatly between work and home. This gives them a clear point in the day where they can switch off and communicate with a different social group, such as friends and family, leaving work at work.

Why occupational language can be problematic

Although occupational language can be very beneficial to a good workplace environment and work ethic, it can also bring with it some negative consequences. These can be separated into problems faced by the workforce and problems faced by the general public.

A problem faced in the workplace is sometimes encountered when there is a new hire. In this instance, the new member of a team may be either new to the occupation or just unfamiliar with how the new team functions and communicates. This means they won't be familiar with all of the occupational language that goes with it, which can cause someone to feel excluded and unmotivated at work.

If we look at the interaction between professionals and laymen, we encounter another problem. With occupations that require interacting with the general public such as doctors and dentists, it can be hard sometimes for laymen to understand what is meant. Although the general public has the opportunity to ask for a simpler explanation, it can leave them then feeling inferior and unintelligent. This can lead to a very hesitant rapport which can hinder efficiency in reaching the end goal.

This lack of understanding can be a further problem when there's no one around to ask for help. In situations where laymen encounter occupational lexis, it can leave them feeling confused and frustrated. This could happen when having to read and fill out any legal documents which may have confusing wording, or even when following a recipe.

When reading a recipe, words such as 'blanche' may appear as part of an instruction. If you're not a frequent cook and you don't speak French, then you're much less likely to know what that would mean, leaving you in a likely heated kitchen not knowing what to do next.

Language and Occupation Theorists

John Swales

In 2011, linguist John Swales researched discourse communities and defined them as having members who:

Share a set of common goals

This applies to language and occupation as people within one discourse community or occupational group will share common goals. These could be generic goals within the workplace such as having a productive day and clear communication, or it could be something more company-specific, such as completing a certain project as a team.

If we look at an occupational group in marketing, their shared goal could be to gain five new returning clients within three months. This would be a shared goal between all members of this discourse community as it would lead to greater company success.

Communicate internally

Within a discourse community, there will be specific ways in which the members communicate. This communication may differ from how they would normally communicate in their social lives. While in everyday social life, people may communicate through speech, texting, social media and any other means available, in the workplace discourse community, it is more likely that specific genres of communication will be favoured over others.

If we look again at the example of a marketing occupational group, it is most likely their main modes of internal communication would be through speech, email and telephone calls to ensure they can get relevant information as quickly as they can.

Use specialist lexis and discourse

This relates to what we discussed earlier about semantic fields. Every discourse community will have a semantic field of lexical terms they frequently use in their communication. Swales also states that discourse communities share specialist discourse, meaning there will be specific ways of communicating. In an occupational group, this may be in the way that orders and instructions are given by people with the highest authority.

Posses a required level of knowledge

Swales' final point suggests that someone cannot be a member of a discourse community if they don't have the required knowledge. If discourse communities or occupational groups didn't have shared knowledge among their members, communicating ideas and information would become very difficult and hinder the group's functionality.

Almut Koester

After a study in 2004, Koester said that phatic talk is important in the workplace for getting jobs done.

Phatic talk is communication that functions to create and maintain social relationships. This may include talking about the weather, sharing a joke, or discussing traffic on the way to work.

Koester suggests that being sociable and using banter within an occupational group is key to creating a positive and productive working environment. This encourages members of the group to engage in personal chat and gives a more personable atmosphere, in turn creating a more effective working environment.

Michael Nelson

Linguist Michael Nelson carried out research while at Manchester University into the possibility of the existence of specific business lexis. He compared the corpora of business English with the more generic English corpora and found that business lexis exists. From this research, Nelson concluded that business lexis coincides with a semantic field of business, including categories such as business, people, companies, institutions, money, time and technology. In business lexis, people were found to avoid personal topics, reserving those for when they weren't at work or in the business environment.

Nelson's research also highlighted the topics that weren't a part of business lexis. These included personal and social subjects such as weekends, family, relationships, personal issues, house and home, and personal activities and hobbies.

As a final point, the research also showed a significant lack of negative lexis in business communication. Instead, a lot of the language used in the 'business' occupational group was neutral and used with the main goal of being informative.

Drew and Heritage

In 1992, linguists Drew and Heritage applied conversation analysis to the language used in institutional settings. They came up with the theory of institutional talk, which refers to six characteristics that appear in speech in the workplace or within an occupational group. These characteristics are:

  • Goal orientation - People conversing will want to reach the same outcome from their interaction.
  • Turn-taking rules - These differ from institutional talk to ordinary conversation as someone may have more power and therefore be allowed to interrupt more often, disregarding ordinary turn-taking conventions.
  • Allowable contributions - There are constraints on what someone may contribute in institutional talk. Talking about your weekend plans, for example, may not be an allowable contribution.
  • Professional lexis - This is the language specifically used in an institutional setting, such as workplace-specific jargon.
  • Structure - Certain interactions in institutional talk may have particular structures that are followed every time, such as a business meeting being led by the highest-ranking person in the room, who then invites people to talk at different intervals.
  • Asymmetry - Institutional talk interactions can be one-sided due to one speaker having more power and is therefore able to speak for longer without being interrupted.

Herbert and Straight

When studying language and communication in 1989, Herbert and Straight found a link between compliments and authority. People of higher authority were more likely to give compliments to those of lower authority than the other way round. In workplace settings, this means that compliments are used as a form of praise from someone higher to someone of a lower rank. If the reverse were to happen, the lower-ranking employee may be seen as being condescending or self-important, potentially harming workplace relationships.

Hornyak

In 1994, Hornyak studied the link between language and occupation and found that the shift from work talk to social or personal talk follows a pattern. This pattern is that the shift is always initiated by the highest-ranking person in the room.

In a situation where an intern is talking to an employee that has been at the company for three years, the intern should stay focussed on the job and only shift to personal chat when the long-term employee initiates it. This way, the intern knows personal chat is then an allowable contribution.

If the lower-ranking person in the workplace were to initiate personal chat, they may be viewed as being unfocused and not dedicated to the job.

Language and Occupation - Key takeaways

  • Occupational groups are types of discourse communities.
  • A discourse community is a group of people who share a common interest, like an occupation.
  • Occupational language is the language used in a workplace or occupational group.
  • Each occupation will have a semantic field of workplace-specific lexis.
  • Occupational language can contribute to effective communication, professionalism and maintaining a hierarchy in the workplace.
  • The use of occupational language can cause misunderstandings between professionals and the general public.

Language and Occupation

Language and occupation is a section of linguistic study into the way people's language use differs from everyday communication when at work.

Koester found that phatic talk and banter are key to getting jobs done at work.

Occupational groups can have a semantic field of frequent workplace-specific lexis used by its members.

The language used by people while at work and communicating in their occupation.

Occupational language can cause misunderstandings between professionals and the general public.

The shift from work talk to personal talk is initiated by the highest-ranking person in the room.

Final Language and Occupation Quiz

Question

What is a discourse community?

Show answer

Answer

A group of people who share a common interest and have specific ways of communicating.

Show question

Question

What is an occupational group?

Show answer

Answer

A discourse community whose common interest is their occupation.

Show question

Question

What is occupational language?

Show answer

Answer

The occupation-specific language used within an occupational group.

Show question

Question

What are the benefits of occupational language?

Show answer

Answer

  • Clear and effective communication in the workplace
  • Allows people to show power and intelligence at work
  • Maintains a hierarchy in the workplace
  • Creates a sense of professionalism
  • Creates a distinction between work and social life

Show question

Question

What are the potential problems with using occupational language?

Show answer

Answer

  • Can cause new members of an occupational group to feel excluded
  • Can cause misunderstandings between professionals and the general public
  • Can cause frustration when laymen encounter occupation language

Show question

Question

What did John Swales find about discourse communities?

Show answer

Answer

Discourse communities have members who:

  • Share a set of common goals
  • Communicate internally
  • Use specialist lexis and discourse
  • Posses a required level of knowledge

Show question

Question

What does Koester say is important for getting jobs done and effective working?

Show answer

Answer

  • Phatic talk is important for getting jobs done
  • Being sociable and engaging in personal chat is an important aspect of effective working

Show question

Question

What did Michael Nelson find from his business English corpus analysis?

Show answer

Answer

  • Business lexis has a semantic field of business
  • Social and personal topics are not included in business lexis
  • Less negative lexis is used in business lexis than in everyday language

Show question

Question

What are Drew and Heritage's six aspects of Institutional Talk?

Show answer

Answer

  • Goal orientation
  • Turn-taking rules
  • Allowable contributions
  • Professional lexis
  • Specific structure
  • Asymmetry in workplace interactions

Show question

Question

What did Herbert and Straight conclude about language in the workplace?

Show answer

Answer

Compliments flow from those of higher rank to those of lower rank.

Show question

Question

What did Hornyak find about the shift from work talk to personal talk?

Show answer

Answer

The shift from work talk to personal talk is initiated by the highest-ranking person in the room.

Show question

Question

How did Drew and Heritage come up with the six elements of institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

They collated and summarised research into the concept of institutional talk and found six recurring elements that differentiated it from ordinary social talk.

Show question

Question

What are the six elements of Drew and Heritage's institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

  • Goal orientation
  • Turn-taking rules
  • Allowable contributions
  • Professional lexis
  • Structures
  • Asymmetry

Show question

Question

What is goal orientation in institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

Goal orientation is when the participants of a conversation share the same aims for the outcome such as the exchange of information or the giving and receiving of instructions.

Show question

Question

How does Drew and Heritage's concept of goal orientation link to John Swales theory of discourse communities?

Show answer

Answer

Drew and Heritage state that in institutional talk, people will have the same goals. Swales states that discourse communities have shared goals. A workplace or institutional setting is a type of discourse community so both theories are in agreement that shared goals are part of effective communication within a type of community.

Show question

Question

How is turn-taking in institutional talk different to turn-taking in ordinary social talk?

Show answer

Answer

Turn-taking in ordinary social talk is conventional and allows for one person to stop talking before the other begins. In institutional talk, someone with more power may interrupt when they want without it being deemed a breach of polite interaction.

Show question

Question

What are allowable contributions in institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

There are constraints on what is deemed an allowable contribution in an institutional setting or workplace. Allowable contributions may refer to certain topics or specific contributions that have to be made.

Show question

Question

What are some examples of what wouldn't be allowable contributions in a courtroom setting?

Show answer

Answer

Talking when you haven't been directly addressed, talking about your social plans, asking what the weather forecast is.

Show question

Question

How does Herbert and Straight's language and occupation theory link to Drew and Heritage's allowable contributions?

Show answer

Answer

Herbert and Straight state that compliments flow from those of the highest rank. As this is a one-way exchange, it means compliments are an allowable contribution from someone of a high rank but not from someone of low rank.

Show question

Question

Which other language theorist can be linked to Drew and Heritage's concept of professional lexis?

Show answer

Answer

Michael Nelson and his theory of business lexis as it shows there is a particular semantic field of lexis used in the workplace.

Show question

Question

How do structures apply to institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

Different institutional settings and interactions will have different structures that apply to them. For example, appointments will always follow a similar fixed structure where a problem is discussed, examined and then a solution is discussed.

Show question

Question

What is asymmetry in institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

Asymmetry occurs either in relation to power or role.

When one person has more power than another, they may lead the conversation, speak more often or interrupt, and choose and change the topic of conversation when it suits them.

Alternatively, someone of low power may be required to present in a meeting, causing them to be speaking a lot and creating a seemingly one-sided conversation.

Show question

Question

How does asymmetry relate to Hornyak's language and occupation theory?

Show answer

Answer

Hornyak found that the shift from work talk to personal talk was initiated by the highest-ranking person in the room. This creates conversation asymmetry as the highest-ranking person has the power to begin conversations, choose the topic and then terminate them regardless of the input of others.

Show question

Question

What is Koester known for researching in workplace interactions?

Show answer

Answer

Relational talk and phatic communication

Show question

Question

What is phatic communication?

Show answer

Answer

Talk used with the sole intention of creating social interactions with no transactional goals for any participant.

Show question

Question

What can phatic communication also be known as?

Show answer

Answer

  • Small talk
  • Phatic talk
  • Phatic expression

Show question

Question

What is relational talk?

Show answer

Answer

Phatic talk that is embedded into transactional or task-oriented talk.

Show question

Question

What are three types of relational talk?

Show answer

Answer

  • Phatic communication
  • Work-related gossip
  • Banter

Show question

Question

What is transactional talk?

Show answer

Answer

Interactions or conversations that have a purpose such as to complete a task, exchange information or reach a work-specific goal.

Show question

Question

What process did Koester use to decipher her data?

Show answer

Answer

Conversational analysis

Show question

Question

Koester found that phatic communication typically occurred in the same position. What was this?

Show answer

Answer

At the beginning or end of a transactional interaction.

Show question

Question

According to Koester, what do people simultaneously pursue in workplace interactions?

Show answer

Answer

Transactional and relational goals.

Show question

Question

What did Koester find were used as subtle means of relational and phatic talk?

Show answer

Answer

Humour and banter.

Show question

Question

Why is phatic talk important in the workplace?

Show answer

Answer

It helps build and maintain social relationships thus creating a good working environment. It also helps people to complete tasks more effectively.

Show question

Question

Sinclair and Coulthard's model examines discourse produced where?

Show answer

Answer

In the classroom.

Show question

Question

Sinclair and Coulthard's model comprises 4 ranks, what are they?

Show answer

Answer

act, move, exchange, and transaction.

Show question

Question

Who usually initiates discourse in the classroom?

Show answer

Answer

The teacher.

Show question

Question

What are the two main types of exchanges?

Show answer

Answer

Boundary exchanges and teaching exchanges.

Show question

Question

Which type of exchange is used to set the context and intentions of a lesson?

Show answer

Answer

Boundary exchange.

Show question

Question

What are the three types of teaching exchanges?

Show answer

Answer

Informing, directing, and eliciting exchanges.

Show question

Question

What does IRF stand for?

Show answer

Answer

Initiation - Response - Feedback

Show question

Question

Which teaching exchange follows the complete Initiation - Response - Feedback model?

Show answer

Answer

Eliciting exchange.

Show question

Question

What does IRF model fail to recognise the importance of?

Show answer

Answer

Para-linguistic features (hand movements, eye contact etc).

Show question

Question

True or false, the IRF approach to teaching allows for student-initiated discourse?

Show answer

Answer

False. This approach does not allow for student-initiated discorse.

Show question

Question

What is an example of where structure in institutional talk is important?

Show answer

Answer

An example of where structure in institutional talk is important is in wedding ceremonies. In these ceremonies, there is a very fixed structure where participants have specific things to say at specific points of the ceremony.

Show question

Question

In a classroom setting, what causes asymmetry?

Show answer

Answer

In a classroom, asymmetry is caused by the teacher having more power than the students.

Show question

Question

What usually determines turn-taking in institutional talk?

Show answer

Answer

The person with the most power can usually decide who talks when and for how long. They can control turn-taking through inviting specific people to speak or through interrupting.

Show question

Question

What was the original intention of Sinclair and Coulthard's model?

Show answer

Answer

To analyse and explain the discourse that took place in a classroom between the teacher and the student 

Show question

Question

When was Sinclair and Coulthard's model created and revised?

Show answer

Answer

Created: 1975

Revised: 1992

Show question

Question

Why did Halliday create his rank scale model for discourse analysis?

Show answer

Answer

He wanted to show how all language is grammatically interlinked.

Show question

60%

of the users don't pass the Language and Occupation quiz! Will you pass the quiz?

Start Quiz

Discover the right content for your subjects

No need to cheat if you have everything you need to succeed! Packed into one app!

Study Plan

Be perfectly prepared on time with an individual plan.

Quizzes

Test your knowledge with gamified quizzes.

Flashcards

Create and find flashcards in record time.

Notes

Create beautiful notes faster than ever before.

Study Sets

Have all your study materials in one place.

Documents

Upload unlimited documents and save them online.

Study Analytics

Identify your study strength and weaknesses.

Weekly Goals

Set individual study goals and earn points reaching them.

Smart Reminders

Stop procrastinating with our study reminders.

Rewards

Earn points, unlock badges and level up while studying.

Magic Marker

Create flashcards in notes completely automatically.

Smart Formatting

Create the most beautiful study materials using our templates.

Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.