Two types of main hall discussions at an ecology conference were studied. Analysis indicated that the plenary lecture discussion may be identified as an accepted, established spoken research process genre with its own conventions and characteristics. The poster session discussion, however, seemed to represent a fragile, embryonic research process genre struggling for definition.
In both types of discussion, the role of the chairperson as director of the interaction was central, although more procedural speech acts were needed in the poster session discussion.
The article describes the main characteristics of the two genres, uses “content focuses” to describe the discussion, and suggests that delegates may unconsciously refer to these as a scheme of critique for scientific evaluation of research.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados