The sociology of technology and the sociology of science still make little use of findings in rhetorical and linguistic fields. This article analyzes the conditions under which an invention might become an innovation, paying particular attention to the symbolic level. The article, thus, analyzes the role of communication in the social process of innovation and proposes to use the concepts of discourse community and communicative genre to tackle the symbolic dimension of innovation processes, applying them to the case of e-books, taken as an invention that has not yet become a true social innovation. A textual analysis, together with the discussion of the results of two empirical studies, is proposed to analyze the social, linguistic, and communicative aspects of the innovation process.
Allen, R. (1989). Bursting bubbles: “Soap opera” audiences and the limits of genre. In E. Seiter, H. Borchers, G. Kreutzner, & E.-M. Warth (Eds.), Remote control: Television, audiences and cultural power (pp. 44-55) London: Routledge.
2.
Bazerman, C. (1994a). Constructing experience. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.
3.
Bazerman, C. (1994b, May). Genre as habitat for social action. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Modern Language Association, San Diego, California.
4.
Bazerman, C. (1994c). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P. Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 79-101). London: Taylor & Francis.
5.
Bazerman, C. (1999). The languages of Edison Light. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
6.
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of a sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? (pp.196-223). London: Routledge.
7.
Callon, M. (1989). Society in the making: The study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In W. E. Bijker, T. P. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 83-103). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
8.
Cavalli, N. (2005). Systemic approach to digital publishing. In M. Dobreva & J. Engelen (Eds.), ELPUB2005: From author to reader: Challenges for the digital content chain: Proceedings of the 9th ICCC International Conference on Electronic Publishing (pp. 307-309) Leuven, Belgium: Peeters.
9.
Denning, P. (2004). The social life of innovation. Communications of the ACM, 47(4), 15-19.
10.
Drucker, P. (1993). Innovation and entrepreneurship. New York: Harper Business.
11.
Erickson, T. (2000). Making sense of computer-mediated communication (CMC): Conversations as genres, CMC systems as genre ecologies. In J. F. Nunamaker Jr. & R. H. Sprague Jr. (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirty-Third Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society Press.
12.
Latour, B. (1987) Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
13.
Miller, C. R. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 151-167.
14.
Orlikowski, W., & Yates, Y. (1994). Genre repertoire: The structuring of communicative practices in organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 541-574.
15.
Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D., & Huntingdon, P. (2004a). Scholarly communication in the digital environment: What do authors want?Learned Publishing, 17(4), 261-273.
16.
Rowlands, I., Nicholas, D.Huntingdon, P. (2004b). Scholarly communication in the digital environment: What do authors want? Findings of an international survey of author opinion: Project report. London: Ciber.
17.
Schumpeter, J. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
18.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Wilson, R. (2002). Defining ebooks, Project EBONI (Electronic Ebook On Screen Interface). Retrieved February 2006 from http://ebooks.strath.ac.uk/eboni/documents/definition.html
20.
Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. (1992). Genres of organizational communication: A structurational approach to studying communication and media. Academy of Management Review, 17(2), 299-326.
21.
Yearley, S. (2005). Making sense of science: Understanding the social study of science. London: Sage.
