Empirical studies of register variation have established the existence of functional correspondence between
situation/context and language use. However, previous conceptualizations of register cannot adequately account for empirical
findings which have revealed (i) situational and linguistic variation among texts within registers and (ii) texts that do not
belong to a register. We propose an alternative conceptualization in which registers are culturally-recognized categories, as
opposed to scientifically-defined categories. This allows us to describe registers for their typical characteristics as well as
the variation among texts within register categories. It also allows us to account for the functional correspondence of texts that
exist outside of register categories.
Article outline
1.Introduction
2.Background: The TxtLx (Text-Linguistic) approach to register variation
3.Empirical research analyzing patterns of variation among texts within registers
Barbieri, F., & Wizner, S. (2019). Appendix A: Annotations of major register and genre studies. In D. Biber & S. Conrad (Eds.), Register, genre, and style [2nd edition] (pp. 318–349). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (1994). An analytical framework for register studies. In D. Biber & E. Finegan (Eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register (pp. 31–56). New York: Oxford University Press.
Biber, D. (2012). Register as a predictor of linguistic variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,
8
(1), 9–37.
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2019). Register, genre, and style (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Egbert, J., & Davies, M. (2015). Exploring the Composition of the Searchable Web: A Corpus-based Taxonomy of Web Registers. Corpora 10(1), 11–45.
Biber, D., & Egbert, J. (2018). Register variation online. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Egbert, J., & Keller, D. (2020). Reconceptualizing register in a continuous situational space. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,
16
(3), 581–616.
Biber, D., Egbert, J., Keller, D., & Wizner, S. (2021a). Towards a taxonomy of conversational discourse types: An empirical corpus-based analysis. Journal of Pragmatics,
171
1, 20–35.
Egbert, J., & Biber, D. (2016). Do all roads lead to Rome? Modeling register variation with factor analysis and discriminant analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,
14
(2), 233–273.
Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Davies, M. (2015). Developing a bottom-up, user-based method of web register classification. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology,
66
(9): 1817–1831.
Egbert, J., Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2022). Designing and evaluating language corpora: A practical framework for corpus representativeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Egbert, J., Wizner, S., Keller, D., Biber, D., McEnery, T., & Baker, P. (2021). Identifying and describing functional discourse units in the BNC Spoken 2014. Text & Talk,
41
(5–6), 715–737.
Egbert, J., & Schnur, E. (2018). The role of the text in corpus and discourse analysis: missing the trees for the forest. In C. Taylor & A. Marchi (Eds.), Corpus approaches to discourse (pp. 159–173). New York: Routledge.
Ferguson, C. (1981). “Foreign talk” as the name of a simplified register. International Journal of the Sociology of Language,
28
1, 9–18.
Goulart, L., Gray, B., Staples, S., Black, A., Shelton, A., Biber, D., Egbert, J., & Wizner, S. (2020). Linguistic perspectives on register. Annual Review of Linguistics,
6
1, 435–455.
Goulart, L., Biber, D., & Reppen, R. (2022). In this essay, I will…: Examining variation of communicative purpose in university writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
59
1.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1968). The users and uses of language. In J. F. Fishman (Ed.), Readings in the sociology of language (pp. 139–169). The Hague: Mouton.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1988). On the language of physical science. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features (pp. 162–178). London: Frances Pinter.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1985). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Victoria: Deakin University.
Martin, J. R. (2002). Meaning beyond the clause: SFL perspectives. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,
22
1, 52–74.
2024. Expanding the scope of grammatical variation: towards a comprehensive account of genitive variation across registers. English Language and Linguistics 28:1 ► pp. 95 ff.
Dirdal, Hildegunn, Stine H. Johansen & Philip Durrant
2024. Representativeness and metadata presentation in learner/child corpora: Lessons from the GiG and TRAWL corpora. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 3:3 ► pp. 100145 ff.
Egbert, Jesse, Douglas Biber, Daniel Keller & Marianna Gracheva
2024. Register and the dual nature of functional correspondence: accounting for text-linguistic variation between registers, within registers, and without registers. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory
Hanks, Elizabeth & Cassidy Christenson
2024. Mitigation in instructor feedback: A register analysis of written and spoken comments. Applied Corpus Linguistics 4:3 ► pp. 100101 ff.
Wood, Margaret
2024. Linguistic variation in functional types of statutory law. Applied Corpus Linguistics 4:1 ► pp. 100081 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.