From persuasive to authoritative speech genres

Purpose - – The purpose of this paper is to contrast the speech genres in the original and the published versions of an article written by academic researchers and published in the US practitioner-oriented journal,Strategic Finance. The original version, submitted by the researchers, was rewritten by a professional editor in the USA before it was published. Design/methodology/approach - – The paper analyses the “persuasive” speech genre of the original version and the “authoritative” speech genre of the published version. Findings - – Although it was initially thought that the differences between the two versions were due to differences in the forms communication used by academics and practitioners, as the analysis progressed it became clear that the differences the authors were observing could be traced to more profound differences in philosophical assumptions about the “way of understanding and constructing a world”. Research limitations/implications - – The choice of language and argumentation should be given careful attention when the authors craft the accounting frameworks and research papers, and especially when the authors seek to communicate the findings of the research to practitioners. However, the authors have focused on just one instance in which a text written by academics was re-written for publication in a practitioner journal. Originality/value - – The paper contrasts the rationalism of the persuasive speech genre and the pragmatism of the authoritative speech genre. It cautions academic researchers against uncritically adopting specific speech genres, whether they are academic or practitioner speech genres, without carefully reflecting on their relevance and implications for understanding the nature of the phenomenon being discussed.