Maket 2011-2:Layout 1.qxd


English as a “Shared Code” for International Scientific

Communication

Ofelia Poghosyan
Yerevan State University

In recent years the role of English has become crucial in the ongoing process ofglobalization worldwide. Today the public recognition of the global position of
English is already a fact, and, presumably, there is nothing to stop the spread of English
as a global lingua franca in the foreseeable future.

As a consequence of globalization, a range of language situations, either physically
or virtually (e.g. through Internet communication), have emerged. As far as the present
research work is concerned, the physical contact situations are frequently observed at
conferences, debates, discussions, lectures, round tables, etc..., when the participants
have to make presentations, ask/answer questions, when they do not only have to intro-
duce their new ideas or express their own viewpoints on this or that professional prob-
lem/issue, but also understand and share thoughts with each other. Actually, it is the lack
of necessary professional language skills that makes it difficult for a scientist-speak-
er/listener or scientist-writer/reader to send and receive information on a particular sub-
ject for professional/specific purposes. In this connection it is indisputable that due to
today’s requirements of the English language acquisition, some new approaches and
strategies of language teaching/learning are needed.

H.G. Widdowson (1978) states that even though language itself is a complex system,
it may display certain peculiarities of usage as a means of communication in certain pro-
fessional spheres. Such peculiarities are closely connected with the characteristics of this
or that profession. In this respect various perspective paths for teaching/learning English
for specific purposes should be paved.

It goes without saying that teaching Scientific English (SE) plays an indispensable
role in the sphere of International Scientific Communication (ISC), as the learning
process of the latter can be implemented on the basis of SE. SE, which is, in fact, a lan-
guage for specific purposes, is important for every scholar to master not only because it
is a key to understand and be understood in scientific communication environment, but
also because it is necessary for a scientist to be aware of the process of the development
of international scientific thought.

In terms of functional styles the language of science serves to perform an informative
function, and that is a top priority for this style of language. As it is assumed, the lan-
guage of science is used to convey scientific information and facts. However, it is also
well known that either the sender or the receiver of information (those involved in scien-
tific communication) are human beings, therefore, the language they use for specific pur-
poses cannot be devoid of emotions at all (Bragina, Dodrokhotova 1988; Budagov 1976).
In other words, though in scientific discourse the stylistic function proper is that of
informative, in some situations  the function of impact also works. In this respect the
function of impact is used to express not only the exquisiteness of the author’s (scientist-

Armenian Folia AnglistikaLinguistics

19



speaker’s/writer’s) personal style (as it generally occurs in fiction), but also to make the
so-called dry, complicated style of scientific language more attractive and achievable, as
well as, to introduce the scientific information as clearly, concisely and vividly  as pos-
sible.

Thus, on the one hand the language of science contains linguistic elements with the
help of which the informative function is realized, on the other hand there are words and
word-combinations which are used to implement the function of impact. However, in this
respect it should be pointed out that the function of impact works differently in the styles
of scientific language and fiction (or verbal art). This fact is quite grounded, since the aim
of communication in different functional styles (genres, registers) is different.  

It is generally an acknowledged fact that the function of impact is characteristic of
verbal art. It is mainly used to meet the aesthetic purposes of the reader/listener, as well
as to express the beauty, originality or uniqueness of the author’s personal style of writ-
ing, the level of flight of his/her imagination and objective reality in general. In con-
trast, the function of impact in the language of science is aimed at making the informa-
tion and facts of scientific discourse more impressive and comprehensive as well as
demonstrating the author’s diversity of knowledge, the properties of his/her personal
style.

Before passing to our target issue, which may be one of the key strategies of interna-
tional scientific communication, it is worth shedding light upon some approaches to LSP.

Some linguists, such as P. Strevens, P. Robinson, T. Hutchinson & A.Waters  etc, hold
that LSP deals with language teaching methods rather than with language system. The
linguists state that LSP has to work out special methods and principles which will meet
the learners’ educational needs. 

The learners’ needs have necessarily to be taken into account in the process of teach-
ing.  However, we should assume that no method can work unless the learner of LSP has
the basic knowledge of General English. No one would probably deny the fact that it is
impossible to construct anything if one does not have the necessary building materials,
even if the most modern tools are available for that purpose. The same phenomenon is
observed in language teaching sphere. Consequently, it should be taken into account that
a certain level of language knowledge (speaking/writing skills) is required for the imple-
mentation of verbal communication in general and in scientific environment in particu-
lar.   In this respect we   side with the standpoint of such linguists as O. Akhmanova, R.
Idzelis, Z. Bareikite,  V.G. Kostomarov, O.D. Mitrofanova, L. Hoffman etc., who state
that LSP is a variety of language whose mastering requires a certain level of language
medium necessary for communication on professional matters.

Thus, in connection with the concept of LSP, it should be concluded that the question
“What shall we teach?” is of more importance than that of “How shall we teach?”.

Research work has shown (Akhmanova, Idzelis 1978; Ter-Minasova 1986;
Gasparyan 2000) that LSP is aimed at realizing an effective and purposeful scientific
communication. The thorough linguostylistic analyses of linguistic texts, literary-critical
texts, law-texts, etc. have brought us to the conclusion that the three basic levels of the
vocabulary of scientific prose style (1. words of general language; 2. general scientific

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics

20



vocabulary; 3. terms proper: terms and terminological words or word-combinations
(Akhmanova,  Idzelis 1978), in fact, build up the core of the vocabulary of international
scientific communication.

How can these layers be revealed in the text? In this respect the method of linguostyl-
istic analysis of a text can be helpful, as it includes the semantic and metasemiotic levels
for the study of the vocabulary of a text as a whole.

On the semantic level, we treat the linguistic units (words, word-combinations, gram-
matical forms, patterns of major syntax) as such, as parts of the emic system of language.
In other words, we concentrate on the general semantic content, or the so-called nomina-
tive (direct) meanings of these units. But all this is a preliminary linguistic investigation
from which we necessarily have to pass to the metasemiotic, or stylistic analysis proper.

After having analysed the semantic level, we proceed to the analysis on the metasemi-
otic level.  Now let us study the connotations which words acquire in oral or written
speech. The linguostylistic study of the text would be incomplete without the analysis in
terms of rhythm and timbre suprasyntactics. We must understand what the text actually
sounds  like,  how emotional-expressive-evaluative overtones are expressed in the oral
form of speech.

The two levels, though basically different, are in constant interaction, because the
relationship between them is dialectical. The metasemiotic level is based on the seman-
tic one and cannot exist without the latter. At the same time the semantic level as such is
unable to reveal the refinements of textual analysis.

The method of linguostylistic analysis is universal in the sense that it can be applied
to all kinds of texts, irrespective of register. Even intellective texts, which by definition
aim at disseminating information, may contain a certain amount of metasemiotic utter-
ances.  This method can be easily taught to undergraduate students and all learners in
general. This simple, step-by-step methodology gives the learners an idea of how to work
with the text so as to be able to reveal and take into consideration those properties which
are superimposed on the semantic content proper (Akhmanova, Alexandrova 1989).

As the method of linguostylistic analysis is universally applicable to any kind of  text
(no matter what functional style it belongs to), we will attempt to use it for the study of
the following extract from a literary critical text where the author expresses his own
viewpoints on E. Hemingway’s style of writing: “Hemingway’s style of writing is strik-
ing. His sentences are short, his words simple, yet they are often filled with emotion. A
careful reading can show us, furthermore, that he is a master of the pause. That is, if we
look closely, we see how the action of his stories continues during the silences, during
the times his characters say nothing. There are times when the most powerful effect
comes from restraint. Such times occur often in Hemingway’s fiction. He perfected the
art of conveying emotion with words.

In contrast to the Romantic writer, who often emphasizes abundance and even excess,
Hemingway is a Classicist in his restraint and understatement. He believes, with many
other Classicists, that the strongest effect comes with an economy of means.

This is not to say that his work is either emotionless or dull. “In Another Country”,
the short story is filled with emotional overtones. Its dominant feeling is one of pity for

Armenian Folia AnglistikaLinguistics

21



misfortunes that can never be remedied. A hand crippled is, and will always be, a hand
crippled. A beloved wife lost through death is lost indeed. Perhaps we should be resigned
to such misfortunes, but the Italian major in this story laments that he cannot be resigned.
The tragedies of life cannot really be remedied” (Curry, 1995).

Our first step will be semantic analysis. We must make sure that we understand the
general semantic content of all linguistic units.

The words of this text (as in any other intellective text) fall into 3 groups: 1) words
of general language; 2) general scientific vocabulary; 3) terms proper.

The first group of words - words of general language, comprises such examples as:
life, emotion, action, wife, master, etc. 

Words like sentences, reading, writing, writer, means, etc. can be referred to the sec-
ond group that is to say, the units of general scientific vocabulary.  The following terms
and terminological combinations are referred to the third group: style of writing, short
story, fiction, Classicist, Romantic writer, etc.

A considerable number of units with obvious expressive-emotional-evaluative conno-
tations are found in the following extract: “Hemingway’s style of writing is striking, the
most powerful effect, misfortunes that can never be remedied, lament, crippled, a master
of pause, action continues during the silences ...”

The sentence “The tragedies of life cannot be really remedied”, used by the literary
critic in his piece of critical writing, is a result of the influence of Hemingway’s style
itself, and the critic, actually, agrees with the author of the short story in expressing the
opinion that ‘the misfortunes of life are difficult to overcome and are impossible to for-
get.’ 

It goes without saying that the linguostylistic analysis of the text will be incomplete
without the study of both syntactic and rhythmical structures of the passage. On the
whole, this text is constituted with the help of short, concise and clear sentences which
are characterized by a monotonous rhythm peculiar to the language of science.

However, the present extract (taken from a literary critical text) has some stylistic
properties similar to those of fiction. Therefore, in the extract we come across not only
sentences with serious, monotonous rhythm, but also those which require a specific
prosodic coloring and sound categorical. For instance, let us see how the intonations of
the following sentences differ from each other: 1. A careful reading can show us further-
more, that he is a master of pause. 2. His sentences are short, his words simple, yet they
are often filled with emotion. In the first example the intonation should be serious. As far
as the second example is concerned, the intonation there should sound with some prosod-
ic coloring, as here we come across the succession of the following: “sentences are short,
his words are simple, yet they are often filled with emotion”.       

Let’s analyze another piece of the extract: “In contrast to Romantic writer, who often
emphasizes abundance and even excess, Hemingway is a classicist in his restraint and
understatement.” In this passage the author expresses his critical, somewhat categorical
attitude to the differences between the style of writing of a Romantic writer and that of a
Classicist. On the whole, the extract serves to realize an informative function. Now let us
compare this extract with the one brought bellow and try to reveal the stylistic differences

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics

22



between them: “Curtis writes with a razor-sharp intelligence that grabs the reader by
heart and never lets go. His utterly believable depiction of the self-reliant charm and
courage of Bud, not Buddy, puts this highly recommended title at the top of the list of
books to be read again and again” (Curtis, 2002).

The critic’s words about the author of the book “Bud, Not Buddy” include  emotion-
al-expressive-evaluative units such as: razor-sharp intelligence, grabs the reader by
heart… etc, which serve to perform the function of impact. However, in this piece of
writing the  critic does not aim at expressing aesthetic values since  on the whole, he actu-
ally intends to  give information about Curtis’ style of writing.

Thus, we can state that the emotionally colored elements used in literary critical texts dif-
fer from those used in fiction in quality. It is just a matter of the author’s (critic’s) personal
style of writing. In connection with the aim of the present article, it is important to mention
that the connotative elements should be included into the vocabulary of international scien-
tific communication. It is an acknowledged fact that the study of texts in terms of connota-
tion shows that human speech can basically be divided into intellective and imaginative.
Researches have been done to draw a distinct line between the informative function of
speech and verbal art (based predominantly on the function of impact). It has always been
assumed that in intellective communication the speaker or writer, whose basic aim is to send
information, does not rely on the connotative values of words and utterances.

Thus, the  research on how Scientific English can serve as a means of international
scientific communication brings us to the following conclusion: all the 3 layers of the
vocabulary of Scientific Prose can serve as a sort of “shared code” for scientists to com-
municate in this or that scientific environment. In fact, this refers to all the languages for
specific purposes.

Consequently, it can be assumed that the core of the language of science, i.e. the three
layers of the vocabulary of scientific prose, can serve as a “shared code” for all those who
are involved either in oral or written communication in the sphere of science, otherwise
stated, it can serve as a “shared code” for international scientific communication.

References:

1. Akhmanova, O.; Alexandrova, O. (Eds) (1989) A Manual of English. M.: Moscow
University Press.

2. Akhmanova, O.; Idzelis, R. (1972/1978) What is the English We Use? M.: Moscow
University Press.

3. Bareikite, Z.  Ustoichivost’ slovosochetanij v nauchnoi rechi (k voprosu ob optimizat-
sii nauchnogo teksta). / Avtoreferat dis. kand. fil. nauk. Moskva.

4. Bragina, N.N.; Dodrokhotova T.A. (1988) Funktsionalnie asimetrii cheloveka. M.:
Medicina.

5. Budagov R.A. (1976) Chelovek i yego yazik. M.: Nauka.  
6. Gasparyan, S.K. (2008) Lingvopoetica obraznogo sravneniya. (2-oe izd.). Yerevan:

Lusakn.

Armenian Folia AnglistikaLinguistics

23



7. Gasparyan, S.K. (2000) Figura sravneniya v funktsionalnom osveshchenii. Yerevan:
YGU.

8. Gasparyan S.; Knyazian A. (2002) Academic English for Linguists. Yerevan: YSU
Press.

9. Hutchinson, T.; Waters A. (1987) English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-centered
Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

10. Kostomarov, V.G.; Mitrofanova, O.D. (1984) Metodicheskoe rukovodstvo dlya prepo-
davateley russkogo yazika inostrantsam. M.: Russkij yazik.  

11. Poghosyan, O. (2009) Grakanagitakan sharadranqi gortsarakan-haghordaktsakan
hayetsakerpy. / Teknatsuakan atenakhosutiun. Yerevan.

12. Robinson, P.C. (1980) ESP (English for Specific Purposes). Oxford: Oxford
University Press. 

13. Strevens, P. (1977) New Orientations in Teaching English. Oxford: Oxford University
Press. 

14. Ter-Minasova, S.G. (1986) Sintagmatika funktsionalnikh stilei i optimizatsiya prepo-
davaniya inostrannikh yazikov. M.: MGU.

15. Widdowson, H.G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford
Universitiy Press.

²Ý·É»ñ»ÝÁ áñå»ë ÙÇç³½·³ÛÇÝ ·Çï³Ï³Ý ѳÕáñ¹³ÏóÙ³Ý ÙÇçáó

²Ûëûñ ù³Õ³ù³Ï³Ý, ïÝï»ë³Ï³Ý, ·Çï³Ï³Ý, Ùß³ÏáõóÛÇÝ ¨ ³ÛÉ áÉáñïÝ»-
ñáõÙ μ³½ Ù³μÝáõÛà ËݹÇñÝ»ñÇ ÉáõÍÙ³ÝÝ »Ý Ýå³ëïáõÙ ³ß˳ñÑÇ ï³ñμ»ñ
»ñÏñÝ»ñÇ ÙÇç¨ ûñ»óûñ Ëáñ³óáÕ ß÷áõÙÝ»ñÁ: ²ÏÝѳÛï ¿, áñ ³ÛëåÇëÇ Çñ³íÇ׳ -
ÏáõÙ ³Ý·É»ñ»ÝÇÝ, Ù³ëݳíáñ³å»ë ·Çï³Ï³Ý ³Ý·É»ñ»ÝÇÝ ïÇñ³å»ï»ÉÁ Ññ³-
ï³å ¿ ¹³éÝáõÙ: ²Û¹ ³ éáõÙáí ëáõÛÝ Ñá¹í³ÍáõÙ ÷áñÓ ¿ ³ñíáõ٠ϳï³ñí³Í μ³½ -
Ù³μáí³Ý¹³Ï áõëáõÙݳëÇñáõÃÛáõÝÝ»ñÇ ÑÇÙ³Ý íñ³ áñáß³ÏdzóÝ»É áõ í»ñѳݻÉ
É»½í³Ï³Ý áõ á׳ Ï³Ý ³ÛÝ ÙÇçáóÝ»ñÁ, áñáÝó ïÇñ³å»ï»ÉÁ ÏÝå³ëïÇ ï³ñμ»ñ
³½ ·áõÃÛ³Ý ·ÇïݳϳÝÝ»ñÇ ÙÇç³½·³ ÛÇÝ Ñ³Õáñ¹³ÏóÙ³ÝÁ Ù³ëݳÏÇó ¹³éݳ-
ÉáõÝ:

Armenian Folia Anglistika Linguistics

24