Book review

Science Communication on the Internet, by Luzón and Pérez-Llantada (2019), deals with traditional, new, incipient trends and genres in scientific online communication that have arisen due to the evolution of the Web 2.0 technologies. In this light, these new tendencies and genres are addressed as the combination of Web 2.0 technologies and the communicative processes of disciplinary communities. This book is addressed to researchers and members of the scientific community who are interested in the area of English for Specific Purposes (ESP). In this sense, this publication analyses the broadening environment of online genres so as to comprehend matters concerning scientific communication nowadays. Within this book, a deep investigation considering several issues is explored: the transformation of some conventional printed genres into digital ones, the evolution of some genres into modernized digital hybrids, and lastly, the origins and the development of the emerging genres as a response to the current requests of our society. Therefore, a significant view into the linkages among traditional and incipient genres should be carried out in order to comprehend these new trends and genres. Other aspects that should be taken into consideration have to do with mechanisms and procedures involved in the constitution of new genre bonds, series and linkages that play a significant role in the dissemination of science research to scholars and different public. Through the examination of different online science genres, this book aims at determining the rising heterogeneity of genre nature and its subjacent plans in relation to the community, the discipline and the individuals.

This volume, composed of a collection of eleven chapters, can be divided into three main sections with a specific topic explored in each of them:

Part 1: Scientific Research Articles evolution into digital genres (Chapters 1–3).

Part 2: Emergent genres arising from digital affordances (Chapters 4, 5, 7, 8 and 9).

Part 3: Digital genres interconnection among public audience and the scientific community (Chapters 6, 10 and 11).

Chapters 1, 2 and 3 of this volume focus on the relevance of scientific research articles as meaningful tools thanks to digitalisation. In this sense, through this procedure the most relevant features of science research articles are analysed, whereas developing digital genres are contrasted with the conventional written genres in terms of formal and functional aspects. This section of the book is based on previous studies that are concerned with several methods of scientific publishing dating from the 17th to the 21st century (Atkinson, 1999; Banks, 2008; Bazerman, 1988; Gross & Harmon, 2016; Gross et al., 2002; Owen, 2007). In such a way, the authors do not just contemplate how the genre idea has resulted into a more complex concept generated by technological components, but also broadens this perspective, assimilating rhetorical points. Another point that should be pointed out is the perception of the processes of the new genre responding to fluctuations in social interactions and situations. For this reason, a deep insight into the authentic language for specific purposes has been addressed. In accordance to Luzón (2017), Pérez-Llantada (2013), Gross et. al. (2002), and Mehlenbacher (2017), the research article has remained stable in its significance with reference to its formal and functional aspects regardless its shifts to the Internet, e.g.: e-journals, being identified as preserving and extending existing functions and values, complementing and fostering them, instead of displaying a wholesale reinvention that radically transforms a communicative practice.

In view of the previous issues, it is worth mentioning that the contemporary science genre does not appear to be an independent, detached system. On the contrary, it constitutes a part of, as well as cooperating within, a “broader ecology of genres” as Mehlenbacher (2017) indicated. With this in mind, this approach portrays a view of particular digital genres and their connection with other genres. As the authors of these chapters describe, contemporary articles assuredly do adopt original formal features, as for instance the IMRAD model functioning with a prevalent pragmatic approach due to their ongoing epistemic engagement and their agreement with social rules. However, these scholars also present an attractive explanation on the development of the relationship between the visual and the verbal text in the evolution of the Internet. By doing so, this strong phenomenon has allowed all participants to delve into new opportunities of communication. Furthermore, there is a special focus on the underpinning term of progress and evolution argued throughout all these chapters of the volume constituting a standard track.

Chapters from 4-9 -excluding chapter 6- approach the emergent genres appearing from the usage of digital permissions, especially the graphical abstract (GA) (Hendges & Florek, 2019), videos as for instance three-minute thesis (3M-thesis) presentation or author videos and podcasts (Rowley-Jolivet & Carter-Thomas, 2016), and lastly, multimodal reframing of scientific documents throughout ideas as hyperlinks. Following this line, Maier and Engberg (2016) examine the issue of knowledge mediation and adjusting strategies bearing in mind specifically the aim of explanatory extent demanded for diverse public so as to control the knowledge asymmetry amidst them. Additionally, a special note must be taken into the modern context directed to the trend amongst the current genres conveying robust features divided on divulgatory and advertising genres (Rowley-Jolivet & Carter-Thomas, 2016). With regard to this new divulgatory purpose, multimodal rising aspects are analysed; for instance, the frequent usage of colour and images with the aim of appealing to a larger public. On top of that, there is an explanation of the advantages and drawbacks of the process of democratisation of science transforming it into a public value. In connection with the concept of interconnectivity, there is a specific outlook on interoperability, open debate and a profound significant assessment.

Chapters 6, 10 and 11 provide a rather distinct perspective on digital genres. Open peer review is regarded by Breeze (2016) as a relevant issue to research since it has led to significant advances in the manner editors interact with authors as well as in the manner authors communicate their feedback or counterarguments. Aside from that, the progress of the notion of science and technology receives a fascinating interpretation by (Smart & Falconer, 2019) on their research of Vatican discourse Laudato Si. In this way, the previous mentioned work comprises a linking genre located amongst the digital and print genre. Lastly, multi-contextuality and context breakdown regards a specific attention in Internet-mediated public science (Anson & Dannels, 2004; Reid, 2017). In contrast to the previous chapters, these final sections of the volume target more thoughtfully on the evolving interconnected social language and knowledge formation between, correspondingly, author replies and referees, some Popes and the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, and ultimately, the public audience and the professional community in scientific digital, oral and printed genres. All in all, the enhanced perceptibility and dissemination of these procedures as a result of the Internet afford a powerful insight into the research on the way these participants, namely, experts, semi-experts and a larger anonymous audience, collaborate and play a relevant part on the construction of scientific publishing and knowledge.

Last but not least, this volume presents a very practical and genuine appreciation of the sophisticated environment of digital genres in science, centering its attention on the outbreak of modern models and characteristics allowed by the Internet which is likely to arrange new genre rules. Furthermore, there is also a special focus on the developing of reciprocal communicative schemes and the manner they are employed with scientists and a larger open access public. In the light of this matter, diverse interrelated subjacent issues are approached such as the topic of control of quality within digital media, as well as the extreme decline of scientific content, which is unreachable for the general public. Yet, along the chapters of this book, it appears a clear and powerful issue regarding the positive aspects of digital media, specifically, the remarkable power of digital media to disseminate knowledge as well as the chances these media provide in order to strengthen the proactive inclusion of the entire online community.

1. REFERENCES

Anson, C. M., & Dannels, D. (2004). Writing and Speaking in Conditional Rhetorical Space. In E. Nagelhout, and C. Rutz (Eds.), Classroom Space(s) and Writing Instruction (pp. 55-70). Hampton Press.

Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context. The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975.

Banks, D. (2008). The Development of Scientific Writing: Linguistic Features and Historical Context. Equinox Publishing.

Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. University of Wisconsin Press.

Breeze, R. (2016). Tracing the Development of an Emergent Part-Genre: The Author Summary. English for Specific Purposes, 42, 50–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.11.003

Gross, A. G., & Harmon, J.E. (2016). The Internet Revolution in the Sciences and Humanities. Oxford University Press.

Gross, A. G., & Harmon, J. E., & Reidy, M. (2002). Communicating Science: The Scientific Article from the 17th Century to the Present. Oxford University Press.

Luzón, M. J. (2017). Connecting Genres and Languages in Online Scholarly Communication: An Analysis of Research Group Blogs. Written Communication, 34(4), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088317726298

Luzón, M. J., & Pérez-Llantada, C. (Eds.). (2019). Science Communication on the Internet: old genres meet new genres. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Maier, C. D., & Engberg, J. (2016). Challenges in the New Multimodal Environment of Research Genres: What Future do Articles of the Future Promise Us? In N. Artemeva, and A. Freedman (Eds.), Genre Studies around the Globe. Beyond the Three Traditions (pp. 225-250). Inkshed Publications.

Mehlenbacher, A. R. (2017). Crowdfunding Science: Exigencies and Strategies in an Emerging Genre of Science Communication. Technical Communication Quarterly, 26(2), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572252.2017.1287361

Owen, J. M. (2007). The Scientific Article in the Age of Digitization. Springer.

Pérez-Llantada, C. (2013). The Article of the Future: Strategies for Genre Stability and Change. English for Specific Purposes, 32(4), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.06.004

Reid, G. (2017). Shifting Networks of Science: Citizen Science and Scientific Genre Change. In H. Yu, and K. Northcut (Eds.) Scientific Communication: Practices, Theories, and Pedagogies. Routledge Publishing.

Rowley-Jolivet, E., & Carter-Thomas, S. (2016). La vraie histoire de la recherche expérimentale? Comparaison entre la narration de la recherche dans les cahiers de laboratoire et dans les articles de recherche. In C. Resche (Ed.) La mise en récit dans les discours spécialisés (pp. 97-120). Peter Lang.

Smart, G., & Falconer, M. (2019). The representation of science and technology in genres of Vatican discourse. In Science Communication on the Internet: Old genres meet new genres (pp. 308-195). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Received: 09 June 2022

Accepted: 12 July 2022