Pressetextsorten
im Vergleich
 

Contrasting Text Types
in the Press

Herausgeber/Editors:
Hartmut E. H. Lenk & Andrew Chesterman

Hildesheim, Zürich, New York: Georg Olms Verlag.
(Germanistische Linguistik – Monographien; 17).
XI + 387 S./p. 
ISBN 3-487-12941-8
49,80
€ (D)

Klappentext / English description

Inhaltsverzeichnis des Sammelbands (pdf-Datei)

Abstracts der Beiträge / of the papers (pdf-Datei)
(deutsch und englisch / in German and English)

Rezensionen

 

 

 

 

 

 

Klappentext:

Texte nehmen wir stets als Exemplare einer bestimmten Textsorte wahr. Dies steuert unsere Erwartungshaltung in der Rezeption. Unsere Erwartungen orientieren sich an Normen, nach denen wir Texte im Hinblick auf die Angemessenheit ihres Auftretens in bestimmten Situationen und bezüglich ihrer strukturellen sowie stilistischen Gestaltung beurteilen.
Textsorten sind nicht nur allgegenwärtig, sondern auch kulturgebunden. Sie entstehen und vergehen, sie unterliegen historischen Veränderungen. Und vor allem können sie zwischen verschiedenen Kommunikationsgemeinschaften und Sprachen divergieren. Das gilt, trotz etlicher Konvergenzen in der hochgradig internationalisierten Medienbranche, auch für manche Prinzipien der Inhaltsauswahl und -strukturierung sowie für die Formulierungsgewohnheiten in Zeitungen und Zeitschriften.

17 Autorinnen und Autoren aus neun Ländern gehen in diesem Band der Frage nach, in welchem Ausmaß textsortenspezifische Normen oder Muster über die Grenzen der Kulturen hinweg Gültigkeit besitzen bzw. inwiefern sie in verschiedenen Sprach- bzw. Kommunikationsgemeinschaften divergieren. Dabei spannen die auf Deutsch und Englisch verfassten Beiträge einen thematischen Bogen von primär text- bzw. sprachbetonten Analysen hin zur Einbeziehung solcher Aspekte, die mit der materiellen und multimodalen Gestalt von Pressetexten und mit multimedialen Rezeptionsangeboten verknüpft sind.

 

We recognise texts always as examples of a particular text type. This influences our orientation in the reading process. Our expectations are based on norms, which affect the way we assess the structural and stylistic features of texts in certain situations. Text types are not only ubiquitous; they are also bound to a given culture. They emerge and disappear, they change over time. And they can differ between languages and communication communities. This is also true of the world of the media, in spite of its high degree of internationalisation. We find variation in some of the content selection principles, and in the way texts in newspapers and journals are composed.

In this volume, 17 authors from nine countries explore the extent to which text-specific norms or patterns are valid for different cultures, and how far they differ from language to language. The papers are written in German or English. Their themes range from analyses primarily focused on texts and language to research on the material and multimodal nature of media texts and the reception of multimedia communication.

 

 


Rezensionen


Wolf-Dieter Krause (Universität Potsdam) in Languages in Contrast 7.1 (John Benjamins Publishing Company), S. 108-114:

"[...] the title of the book reviewed here raise[s] the reader's hope, on the one hand, it will deal with a wide range of text types in newspapers which - to use a term from Eija Ventola's article - can be regarded as 'text colonies', and, on the other hand, it will include different languages being contrasted.

The range of text types analysed is relativly wide: press news (3), presse commentary (2), press report (2), portrait in the press (2), sports article (1), job ad (1), personal ad (1), interview (1), front page (1), cover (1). [...] Fortunately, the languages offered for contrastive analysis are not confined to the 'big' ones like English, French, and German but also include less widespread and not often linguistically contrasted languages such as Hungarian, Finnish, Latvian, Polish and Danish, and even varieties of German language in Germany, Austria, and Romania, as well as varieties of English in Great Britain, the USA and Australia. Some articles also conduct multilingual contrastive analyses, e.g. German with French, Portuguese, Spanish or German with Hungarian and Polish.

[...]

Is the common assumption that text types are culture-specific also propriate for press text types, which are subject to processes of internationalization? On the basis of the results of the investigation presented in this volume the answer can only be 'yes'. In spite of all tendencies of internationalization, press texts from different discourse communities are only partially equivalent just like the overwhelming majority of text types in our text world are. Thus, despite all critical remarks the current book makes an interesting and important scientific contribution to the problem of comparing texts from different discourse and language communities and gives a good overview for readers interested in media communication. The book can also be recommended because it is carefully edited (with the exception of one contribution) and has an excellent typographical design."