This article investigates the introductions of 40 professional speeches from a rhetorical perspective to address the problems audiences seem to have with presentations about engineering. The authors use an exordial model that they derived from classical manuals on rhetoric. This model enumerates and groups rhetorical exordial techniques into 3 main functions: attentum, benevolum, and docilem . The study shows that rhetorically complete introductions are rare. Most of the speakers seemed to prefer a content-oriented, direct approach (docilem) in their introductions and seldom used techniques to garner the audience's attention (attentum) or sympathy (benevolum). The article concludes with an evaluation of the exordial model and a discussion of the study's pedagogical implications.
Andeweg, B.A., & De Jong, J.C. (2004a). De eerste minuten: Attentum, benevolum en docilem parare in de inleiding van toespraken [The first minutes: Attentum, benevolum and docilem parare in the introductions of speeches]. Doctoral dissertation, Radboud University Nijmegen, 2004. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from /www.deeersteminuten.nl/
2.
Andeweg, B.A., & De Jong, J.C. (2004b). Geen clichés, excuses en moppen! Klassieke en moderne afraders voor de inleidingen van toespraken [No clichés, excuses, or jokes! Classical and modern vitia for the introductions of speeches]. Onze Taal, 11, 318—320.
3.
Andeweg, B.A., & De Jong, J. (2006). Start with a story: Theory versus practice of the anecdote as speech introduction technique. In P. Gillaerts & P. Shaw (Eds.), The map and the landscape: Norms and practices in genre (pp. 169—196). Bern, Switzerland: Lang.
4.
Andeweg, B.A., De Jong, J.C., & Hoeken, H. (1998). “May I have your attention?” Exordial techniques in informative oral presentations. Technical Communication Quarterly, 7, 271—284.
5.
Andeweg, B.A., De Jong, J.C., Van Oyen, K., & Wehrmann, C. (2000). Survey: Mondelinge presentaties van Nederlandse ingenieurs [Survey: Oral presentations of Dutch engineers]. In R. Neutelings, N. Ummelen , & A. Maes (Eds.), Over de grenzen van de taalbeheersing: Onderzoek naar taal, tekst en communicatie [Beyond the frontiers of language proficiency: Research in language, text and communication] (pp. 81—94). Den Haag, the Netherlands: Sdu Uitgevers.
6.
Bovée, C.L., & Thill, J.V. (2000). Business communication today. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Discourse analysis. Cambridge , England: Cambridge University Press.
8.
De Bree, S. (1998, November 14). Ingenieurs moeten meer aan communicatie doen [Engineers should communicate more]. Chemisch Weekblad [Chemical Weekly], 94, 1.
9.
Denzin, N.K. (1970). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. Chicago: Aldine.
10.
Farkas, D.K. (2006). Toward a better understanding of PowerPoint deck design. Information Design Journal + Document Design, 14, 162—171.
11.
Flick, U. (1992). Triangulation revisited: Strategy of or alternative to validation of qualitative data. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 22, 175—197.
12.
Goethe, J. W. von. (1973). Maximen und reflexionen [Maxims and reflections] . In E. Trunz (Ed.), J. W. Goethe: Werke, Hamburger Ausgabe [J.W. Goethe: Works, Hamburger edition] , (7th ed., pp. 365—547). Hamburg , Germany: Wegner.
13.
Harms, L.S. (1961). Listener judgments of status cues in speech. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 47, 164—168.
14.
Locker, K.O. (2003). Business and administrative communication (6th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
15.
Locker, K.O., & Kaczmarek, S.K. (2001). Business communication: Building critical skills. New York: McGraw-Hill.
16.
Ochs, E. (1979). Transcription as theory. In E. Ochs & B. B. Schieffelin (Eds.), Developmental pragmatics (pp. 43—72). New York: Academic Press.
17.
Paradis, J., Dobrin, D., & Miller, R. (1985). Writing at Exxon ITD: Notes on the writing environment of an R&D organization. In L. Odell & D. Goswami (Eds.), Writing in nonacademic settings (pp. 281—308). New York : Guilford Press.
18.
Scheiber, H.J., & Hager, P.J. (1994). Oral communication in business and industry: Results of a survey on scientific, technical, and managerial presentations. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 24, 161—180.
19.
Van De Mieroop, D. (2003). De wisselwerking tussen eigen en institutionele identiteit [The interplay between own and institutional identity]. In L. Van Waes, P. Cuvelier, G. Jacobs, & I. De Ridder (Eds.), Studies in taalbeheersing 1 [Studies in language proficiency 1] (pp. 330—342). Assen , the Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
20.
Van De Mieroop, D. (2004). Hoe creëren sprekers een positieve bedrijfsidentiteit [How do speakers create a positive company identity]?Tijdschrift voor Taalbeheersing, 26, 193—208.
21.
Van De Mieroop D. (2005a). Identiteitsconstructie in informatieve speeches: Een multi-methodologische analyse [Identity construction in informative speeches: A multi-methodological analysis]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Antwerp, Belgium.
22.
Van De Mieroop, D. (2005b). An integrated approach of quantitative and qualitative analysis in the study of identity in speeches. Discourse & Society, 16, 107—130.
23.
Van De Mieroop, D. (2006a). Identity construction in institutional speeches: The crucial role of pronouns. Lodz Papers in Pragmatics, 2, 81—103.
24.
Van de Mieroop, D. (2006b). The implications of identity and fact construction for the genre of informative speeches. In P. Gillaerts & P. Shaw (Eds.), The map and the landscape: Norms and practices in genre (pp. 147—168). Bern, Switzerland: Lang.
25.
Van De Mieroop, D. (2007). The complementarity of two identities and two approaches: Quantitative and qualitative analysis of institutional and professional identity. Journal of Pragmatics, 39, 1120—1142.
26.
Van der Meiden, A. (1991). Over spreken gesproken: Aspecten van moderne retorica [Speaking about speaking: Aspects of modern rhetoric]. Groningen, the Netherlands: Wolters-Noordhoff.
27.
Veltman, W., Andeweg, B.A., & de Jong, J.C. (2003). Alleen het gesproken woord telt: In hoeverre en waarom sprekers afwijken van speechteksten geschreven door professionele speechschrijvers [Only the spoken word counts: To what extent and why do speakers deviate from the speech texts written by professional speech writers?]? In L. Van Waes, P. Cuvelier , G. Jacobs, & I. De Ridder (Eds.), Studies in taalbeheersing 1 [Studies in language proficiency 1] (pp. 463—475). Assen , the Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
28.
Weller, M., & Stuiveling, G. (1961). Moderne welsprekendheid: Handboek voor mondelinge taalbeheersing [Modern eloquence: Manual for oral language proficiency]. Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier .
29.
Wetherell, M., & Potter, J. (1992). Mapping the language of racism: Discourse and the legitimation of exploitation. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
30.
Yates, J., & Orlikowski, W. (2007). The PowerPoint presentation and its corollaries: How genres shape communicative action in organizations . In M. Zachry & C. Thralls (Eds.), Communicative practices in workplaces and the professions: Cultural perspectives on the regulation of discourse and organizations (pp. 67—92). Amityville, NY: Baywood. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from /http://seeit.mit.edu/Publications/YatesOrlikowski-PP.pdf/
