A genre-based analysis of questions and comments in Q&A sessions after conference paper presentations in computer science. (April 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Xu, Xiaoyu
• Is Part Of: English for specific purposes. Volume 66(2022)
• Page Start: 63
• Page End: 76
• Publication Date: 2022-04
• Subjects: Academic speaking -- Move analysis -- Conference discussion sessions -- Question types -- Corpus analysis -- Computer science; English language -- Study and teaching -- Foreign speakers -- Periodicals; English language -- Business English -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; English language -- Technical English -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals; Anglais (Langue) -- Étude et enseignement -- Allophones -- Périodiques; Enseignement professionnel -- Périodiques; Anglais (Langue) -- Anglais commercial -- Étude et enseignement -- Périodiques; Anglais (Langue) -- Anglais technique -- Étude et enseignement -- Périodiques; English language -- Business English -- Study and teaching; English language -- Study and teaching -- Foreign speakers; English language -- Technical English -- Study and teaching; Periodicals; 428.007
• DOI: 10.1016/j.esp.2021.12.002
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0889-4906

Abstract

Abstract: Asking questions and making comments in conference Q&A sessions can be challenging for novice academics. Discussants not only try to seek answers or exchange ideas with the presenter but also endeavour to project a positive image of themselves by asking the 'right' questions in the 'right' way. However, many novice academics fear looking foolish because of unfocused and convoluted questions. Surprisingly, little guidance is available for how to formulate Q&A questions. This study attempts to address the gap by investigating the forms, functions and generic moves of 268 turns taken by discussants in 80 computer science conference Q&A sessions. Certain forms (i.e., question and comment) were found to be associated with certain pragmatic functions. This study reveals that different types of question/comment have major moves in common. The study also shows that the more evaluative and face-threatening the question is, the more important it is for the discussant to make the moves of building rapport with the presenter, and contextualising and justifying the main question/statement. The importance of justifying the main question/statement also resonates with the persuasive nature of scientific argumentative discourse. The findings can offer novice academics detailed explanations of the communicative purposes and strategies for this important conference interaction. Highlights: The two forms (question & comment) are associated with different functions. All types of questions/comments were found to share the major generic moves. Evaluative/critical questions entail building rapport as a move. Evaluative/critical questions entail justifying the question as a move. The importance of justification resonates with scientific argumentative discourse.