Bir Metin Türü Olarak Düğün Davetiyeleri

Wedding ceremonies, which announce the marriage of a couple to the other members of a speech community are universal social practices. And wedding invitations serve the communicative purpose of inviting others to these ceremonies. Such widely circulating texts however, have hardly been subject to linguistic investigation. Çubukçu (2005a) in her sociolinguistic study of Turkish wedding invitations discusses the fuzziness in the discourse of wedding invitations, and suggests that, however short and formulaic these texts may be, they are communicative texts and that they need to be further studied. In line with this opinion, this paper aims to describe wedding invitations as a distinct genre and to identify their generic features with specific focus on the functional-rhetorical categories. To this end, 250 invitations that have been used between 1970 and 2005 (collected by the researcher) were analyzed based on the inductive method employed in studies such as Swales (1990); Bhatia, (1993) and Paltridge (1995) analyzing different genres.

___

1. Bhatia, V. K (1993). Analyzing Genre: Language Use In Professional Settings. New York:Longman.

2. Bloor, T. (1999). Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis. Birmingham: Aston University Press.

3. Christie, F. & Rothery, J. (1989). Genres and writing: A response to Michael Roses. English in Australia, 90, .3-13.

4. Çubukçu, H. (2001). Yönlendirici söylemde edimsel yapılanmalar. Basılmamış Doktora Tezi.İstanbul Üniversitesi, Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, İstanbul.

5. Çubukçu, H. (2005a). (basımda). Davetiyelerin söylemi: Toplumdilsel bir inceleme. V.Uluslararası Dil, Yazın ve Deyişbilim Sempozyumu, 24/26 Haziran 2005,Marmara Üniversitesi, İstanbul.

6. Dijk, T. Van (1988). Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. London: Sage Publications.

7. Hasan, R. (1978). Texts in systemic functional model. In Dressier W. V.(ed), Current Trends in Textlinguistics. Berlin: De Grayer.

8. Kress, G. (1982). Learning to Write. London: Routledge & Keagan Paul.

9. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Politeness. London: Longman.

10.Maier, P. (1992): Politeness strategies in business letters by native and non-native speakers of English. English For Specific Purposes, 11, 185-205.

11.Martin, J.R. (1989). Factual Writing: Exploring and Challenging Social Reality. 2nd Ed.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12.Martin J. R. & Rothery, J. (1981). Writing project reports: 1980 and 1981. Working Papers in Linguistics, 1/2. Sydney: Sydney University Press.

13.Me Carthy, M. & Carter, R. (1994). Language as Discourse: Perspectives for Language Teaching. New York:Longman.

14.Mitchell, T. F. (1957). The language of buying and selling in Cyrenaica: A situational statement. Hesperis, 44, 31-71. Reprinted in Mitchell, T. F. (1975), Principles of Firtian Linguistics, 167-200. London: Longman.

15.Mulkan van M. & Meer, W. (2005). A genre analysis of American and Dutch Company replies to customer inquiries. English for Specific Purposes, (24)1, 93-109.

16.Özön, M. N, (1959). Osmanlıca-Türkçe Sözlük. Istanbul: inkılap Yayınları.

17.Paltridge, B. (1995). Working with genre: A pragmatic perspective. Journal of Pragmatics, 24,393-406.

18.Sami, Ş. (1985). Temel Türkçe Sözlük (Kamus-i Türlü, sadeleştirilmiş ve genişletilmiş).İstanbul: Tercüman yayınları.

19.Santos, V. B. dos (1994). Language awareness of non-native speakers in the business field.Languge Awareness, 5,201-208.

20.Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to Discourse. Cambridge: Blackwell.

21.Searle J. (1969). Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

22.Swales, J. M. (1981). Aspects of Article Introductions: ESP Resaerch Reports No. 1.Birmingham: Aston University Press.

23.Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic Research Settings. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.

24.Swales, J. M. (1993). Genre and Engagement. Revue de Philogue etD'ottoire, 71,587-698.

25.Swales, J..& Feak, B. C. (2003). English Today in Research World. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press.