Abstract
The academic presentation is one of the fairly under-researched spoken academic varieties, especially with regard to certain linguistic features that reveal presenters’ attempts to accommodate their listeners. The chapter offers a brief summary of some of the benefits of academic presentations for degree-seeking college students. It also discusses a connection between the strong audience orientation, promoted by many published manuals and materials on giving effective presentations, and the notion of audience accommodation as proposed by Communication Accommodation Theory (CAT). The discussion is followed by a brief overview of the register perspective taken in the analysis of the corpus of student academic presentations (SAP) used in the book and an overview of the rest of the chapters.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Aune, R. K., & Kikuchi, T. (1993). Effects of language intensity similarity on perceptions of credibility, relational attributions, and persuasion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 12, 224–238.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
Bourhis, R. Y., Montaruli, E., & Amiot, C. E. (2007). Language planning and French-English bilingual communication: Montreal field studies from 1977 to 1997. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 185, 187–224.
Chivers, B., & Shoolbred, M. (2007). A student’s guide to presentations: Making your presentation count. London: Sage.
Crook, C. W., & Booth, R. (1997). Building rapport in electronic mail using accommodation theory. SAM Advanced Management Journal, 62, 4–13.
Davis, M., Davis, K. J., & Dunagan, M. M. (2012). Scientific papers and presentations (3rd ed.). London: Elsevier.
Dragojevic, M., Gasiorek, J., & Giles, H. (2016). Accommodative strategies as core of the theory. In H. Giles (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. 36–59). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engleberg, I., & Daly, J. (2005). Presentations in everyday life: Strategies for effective speaking. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Gasiorek, J. (2016). Theoretical perspectives on interpersonal adjustments in language and communication. In H. Giles (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. 13–35). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giles, H. (2016a). Communication accommodation theory. In H. Giles (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. i–ii). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giles, H. (Ed.). (2016b). Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Giles, H., Scherer, K. R., & Taylor, D. M. (1979). Speech markers in social interaction. In K. R. Scherer & H. Giles (Eds.), Social markers in speech (pp. 343–381). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levin, P., & Topping, G. (2006). Perfect presentations! Student-friendly guides. New York: Open University Press.
Linnemann, G. A., & Jucks, R. (2016). As in the question, so in the answer? Language style of human and machine speakers affects interlocutors’ convergence on wordings. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 35(6), 686–697.
McCarthy, P., & Hatcher, C. (2002). Presentation skills: The essential guide for students. London: Sage.
McGlone, M. S., & Giles, H. (2011). Language and interpersonal communication. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 201–237). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Okeke, G. T., Mbah, B. M., & Okeke, C. O. (2018). Sociolinguistic analysis of the language of palm wine drinkers’ Club (Kegite). Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 9(4), 856–868.
Rendle-Short, J. (2006). The academic presentation: Situated talk in action. London: Routledge.
Rice, R. E., & Giles, H. (2017). The contexts and dynamics of science communication and language. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 36(1), 127–139.
Riordan, M. A., Markman, K. M., & Stewart, C. O. (2013). Communication accommodation in instant messaging: An examination of temporal convergence. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 32, 84–95.
Street, R. L., & Giles, H. (1982). Speech accommodation theory: A social cognitive approach to language and speech behavior. In M. E. Roloff & C. R. Berger (Eds.), Social cognition and communication (pp. 33–53). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Zareva, A. (2009a). Informational packaging, level of formality, and the use of circumstance adverbials in L1 and L2 student academic presentations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 55–68.
Zareva, A. (2009b). Student academic presentations: The processing side of interactiveness. English Text Construction, 2(2), 265–288.
Zareva, A. (2012). Lexical composition of effective L1 and L2 student academic presentations. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 91–110.
Zareva, A. (2013). Self-mention and the projection of multiple identity roles in TESOL graduate student presentations: The influence of the written academic genres. English for Specific Purposes, 32, 72–83.
Zareva, A. (2019a). Providing feedback on the lexical use of ESP students’ academic presentations: Teacher training considerations. In S. Papadima-Sophocleous, E. Kakoulli Constantinou, & C. N. Giannikas (Eds.), ESP teaching and teacher education: Current theories and practices (pp. 63–78). Research-publishing.net.
Zareva, A. (2019b). Lexical complexity of academic presentations: Similarities despite situational differences. Journal of Second Language Studies, 2(1), 72–93.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zareva, A. (2020). Introduction: Why Looking into Student Academic Presentations?. In: Speech Accommodation in Student Presentations. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37980-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37980-3_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Pivot, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-37979-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-37980-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)