This work is characterized by a theoretical-expository imprint on the issue of text genres, and also an illustration from a specific perspective: Text Linguistics. The aim of the article is to present a brief overview of the different theoretical approaches to text genres and provide a thorough description of a perspective originated in the German Text Linguistics, while illustrating the main theoretical notions and concepts through a small corpus from an Argentine public hospital, collected during the process of treating cardiac emergencies. Henceforth, the intention is showing, albeit in a minimalist way, contemporary angles of analysis and how the knowledge generated from this perspective can be used for theoretical-descriptive and applied purposes.

Genre as a concept is multifaceted and it is the subject matter of different Human and Social Sciences; at the same time, Linguistics are indebted to a broad range of traditions that developed founding ideas for contemporary research: Rhetoric, Stylistics, works conducted within the areas of folklore and Linguistic Anthropology (the seminal work of the Russian formalist PROPP, 1958 [1928][1]), and within the area of the Ethnography of Communication (HYMES, 1972[2]), among others. In my view, there are two crucial antecedents in the elaboration of the concept for Linguistics, which have been —and still are— influential and valid: the Prague Linguistic Circle and the contributions of Mikhail Bakhtin and Valentin Voloshinov circle. Firstly, I will briefly refer to them and, secondly, I will present a short overview of notable contemporary approaches.

In their transcendental Thesen (1929[3]), the linguists of the Prague Circle emphasized the need to study the language by differentiating its several manifestations, with the concept of linguistic functions as a starting point. The intention of the speaker is the explanatory and natural event that indelibly marks linguistic productions: the elaboration of a functional stratification of language, direct antecedent of the concept of text genre, is an achievement of this school. To account for the functionally conditioned linguistic varieties, the Prague linguists coined the concept of functional styles: language provides a set of linguistic resources (in the broad sense) and speakers, according to their purpose, situation, social sphere, among other factors, select the appropriate stylistic variant. One of its most illustrious representatives, Havránek (1964[4]), suggested distinguishing four functional styles: everyday language, referential language, scientific language and journalistic language. Functional languages are determined by spheres of use and this results in the “dominant styles”, which are characterized following the classic categories proposed by Bühler (1961 [1934][5]): the representative function prevails in the specialized style; the appellative function, in the directive style; and the expressive function has supremacy in the emotional style. The Prague school has had an enormous influence on Functional Systemic Linguistics and Text Linguistics —two approaches that have made important contributions to the study of text genres (CIAPUSCIO, 2005[6]).

The concept of genre attributed to Bakhtin (1979[7])1 was developed between 1926 and 1930, within the framework of the production of his circle on the dialogism of the statement: on the one hand, it is always responsibility of an individual and is oriented toward an interlocutor; but on the other hand, it is inextricably linked to the social sphere in which it is employed. Each sphere of language use gives rise to its relatively stable types of utterances: genres. The complexity, richness and dynamism of the genres lie in the vital and complex nature of human praxis. Bakhtin distinguished primary (or simple) and secondary (or complex) genres: the former, linked to everyday communication and directly related to experience; the latter, linked to more complex cultural contexts —science, literature, journalism—, predominantly manifest in written form. The relationship between style, function and genre is clearly stated by Bakhtin: a specific function (technical, journalistic, everyday use) combined with certain conditions for each sphere of use result in particular genres, which he defines as “relatively stable thematic, compositional, and stylistic types of utterances” (p. 252). The Bakhtinian conception of genre is reasonably still enduring and widely accepted, due to both its general character and, at the same time, its precision, by combining what the most diverse research traditions and contemporary approaches share: the conjunction of stability and dynamism present in its nature. That is, on the one hand, the stability of the discursive functions they perform, of the communicative contexts and spheres in which they are used, of the thematic range, and of the compositional and stylistic forms that characterize their structure and materiality; and on the other hand, the vitality and dynamism that constitute them, based on the variability of communication tasks —in different socio-historical contexts— that they undertake and that explain the changes, hybridizations and generic combinations as well as the emergence of new genres. The Bakhtinian conception of genre is latent in the different approaches, although its presence is more significant in the French tradition and very characteristic in Brazilian Linguistics.

Maingueneau (2010[8]) justifiably asserts that genre, like every category in the Human and Social Sciences, is subject to socio-historical conditioning; there are, as is well known, different conceptualizations and definitions for it and a plurality of approaches that respond to different research interests. Frequently, in this discipline there is little dialogue between the different orientations, comparative works are very scarce (cf. CIAPUSCIO, 2005[6]), and relatively few works gather contributions from different theoretical sources (cf. BAZERMAN; BONINI; FIGUEREIDO, 2009[9]; SHIRO; CHARAUDEAU; GRANATO, 2012[10]).

Discarding any possibility of a comprehensive rapport, I will make a brief mention of the main approaches with merely illustrative references. In the Anglophone tradition, the most relevant theoretical backgrounds are the studies of Variationist Sociolinguistics and Corpus Linguistics (BIBER, 1988[11]), and Systemic Functional Linguistics (HASAN, 1984[12]). The latter provided the fundamental framework for the interesting theoretical re-elaboration of the concept of genre within the theory, with projections applied especially in education, developed by the Sydney School in Australia (for example, MARTIN; ROSE, 2008[13]; MARTIN, 2015[14]), among many others. Genres were and are intensively studied within the framework of Applied Linguistics, especially that of ESP (English for Specific Purposes), English as a Second Language and English for Academic Purposes (BHATIA, 2004[15]; 2015[16]; SWALES, 1990[17]; 2004[18]; VENTOLA, 1997[19]). Finally, it is necessary to mention the New Rhetoric School in North America (for instance, BAZERMAN, 1988[20]; BERKENKOTTER; HUCKIN, 1995[21]), that produced tenacious developments (BAZERMAN; DEVITT, 2014[22]; BAWARSHI; REIFF, 2010[23]); this line has been enthusiastically received by discourse analysts from Brazil, a country that hosts the SIGET events (International Symposium on Text Genre Studies)2 since 2013, which summon experts from different American countries. Bazerman, Bonini and Figuereido (2009[9]) present an overview of the works of authors from different countries arising within this framework. The works of Brazilian researchers that are framed in text studies (VILLAÇA KOCH, 2008[24]; MARCUSCHI, 2008[25]; CAVALCANTE et al., 2010[26], for example) are also very relevant. What is more, the contributions of the Francophone tradition are worth mentioning (ADAM, 2001[27]; BRONCKART, 1997[28]; CHARAUDEAU, 2012[29]; MAINGUENEAU, 2004[30]; 2010[8]), with a strong focus on the socio-communicative and structural aspects of genres.

Even though little is known about the reflection and work on genres in the German tradition, they are vast and it is absolutely impossible to mention them even at the representational level; however, it is curious that references to this tradition are generally reduced to the works produced during the 1970s, and particularly aimed at creating a text typology in terms of an abstract, static and deductive representation. In fact, in the early 1970s, the initial research within the framework of Text grammar cast the spotlight on the issue of text typology (GÜLICH; RAIBLE, 1977[31]). However, from then on, countless typological proposals have been presented with growing dynamism and flexibility, nurtured by several generic studies, and that developed in accordance with the dominant paradigms in Linguistics (cf. HEINEMANN; VIEHWEGER, 1991[32]) into what is known as Genre Linguistics (ADAMZIK, 2004[33]).

Text genres emerge from the activity of talking itself, originated and made possible because speakers have knowledge on how to adapt their utterances (texts) to their aims, considering specific situational factors, according to the traditions of verbal communication. Eugenio Coseriu created a specific theory category which he called “expressive knowledge”, different from “knowing a language”, and which he explained as our ability to produce texts based on traditions and historic models (COSERIU, 1981[34]; KABATEK, 2006[35]; 2018[36]; KOCH, 2008[37]). That competence is based on the availability of historically coined text models or schemes —with partial or full scope—, which are reused and recontextualized in every verbal communication. Consequently, there are completely fixed texts (courtesy formulae, insults, idioms, proverbs); texts with fixed components (letterheads, legal documents), formal schemes for traditionally established texts (sonnets, contracts) or those defined by technology (Twitter, Instagram), and finally, formal schemes, types of relatively standardized contents and formulation models, according to the genre (research paper, journalistic chronicle, inaugural speech). The repeated and traditional aspect found in the concept of genre is related to that of discursive traditions, which emerged within the context of the Romance Philology (SCHLIEBEN-LANGE, 1982[38]; COSERIU, 1981[34]), oriented to the diachronic study of language. Nowadays, the differentiation of both concepts is an object of reflection (KABATEK, 2018[36]).

With a similar orientation, contemporary models with cognitive and communicative characteristics (HEINEMANN; VIEHWEGER, 1991[32]; HEINEMANN, 2000[39]) study a “knowledge about text classes or generic knowledge” acquired by speakers together with language during their socialization; it is a knowledge on how to create and adapt texts and/or speeches to objectives, situations and the interlocutor, for these aspects to be appropriate and effective for their aims. These are the so called global text schemes, which will be analysed in the following sections.

Linguistic activities result in verbal and multimodal products that reflect, to a greater or lesser extent, distinctive and characteristic features of the different genres in its materiality of meaning. For almost sixty years, Linguistics have tried to address such regularities by suggesting different classification systems, which have radically varied over time as knowledge saw progress: from relatively rigid systems based on certain types of features (inside or outside the text) to systems of different dimensions and parameters, open and flexible, able to generate complex generic descriptions and undergo generic changes and relations (HEINEMANN; VIEHWEGER, 1991[32]; HEINEMANN, 2000[39]; ADAMZIK, 2004[33]; CIAPUSCIO, 2009[40], among others). However, despite the relative stability of genres and the possibility of systematization, it is important to consider their inherent dynamism, present from their origin: genres emerge from communicative and social needs in historical, political conditions and also specific practices that are not permanent; genres change over time and can also avail hybridization processes and the emergence of new genres (MATTHEIER, 1986[41]; ECKKRAMMER, 2004[42]; MIRANDA, 2010[43]).

In summary, it is important to distinguish two complementary perspectives in the research on genres: the perspective of the speaker’s activity, who produce and interpret texts or speeches, and the point of view of the classification of products resulting from these activities, that is, (individual) characterisation of genres and the text system or typology as an attempt to organise generic diversity (CIAPUSCIO, 2021[44]).

When talking and writing about genres, it is impossible to avoid the terminology problem, as it has gathered a considerable portion of theoretical discussions. The nouns genre, type and class preceded by the noun text and the adjective discursive are the most commonly used denominations. In German text linguistics, the distinction between “text type” (Texttyp) and “text class” (Textsorte) was consistently put into consideration when the discussion on typology was just starting: text type denotes a category within a theory; text class is related to intuitive distinctions made by common speakers. This distinction started to fade with the evolution of research toward a more empirical perspective, and the name text class has prevailed in current literature (it can be considered —and will be in this paper— a synonym for text genre).

In this context and as anticipated, text class was defined in different ways throughout its development. Brinker (1988[45]) suggested a specific conceptualization that became a classic definition:

As can be noticed in that definition, Brinker combines “internal” and “external” features of genres: from the internal-analytic point of view, he emphasises its complex operating nature, which can be explained from a typical combination of situational, functional and structural conditions. Furthermore, the author highlights the importance of historical and cultural aspects and, additionally, its cognitive basis.

Other authors within this line suggest conceptual characterisations that emphasise the cognitive-social aspect and that, in my opinion, achieve a descriptive and explanatory adaptation by distinguishing three concepts at different abstraction levels: text, genre (text classes) and text schemes (SANDIG, 2000[46]; HEINEMANN, 2000[39]). Texts are complex objects with a prototypical nature, characterized by textuality achieved by adhering to certain criterions or norms (BEAUGRANDE; DRESSLER, 1997[47]), related to different analytical dimensions (communicative-functional, thematic —content, its organization and presentation— and the linguistic form, in HEINEMANN; HEINEMANN, 2002, p. 104[48]). Texts are always samples of a text genre, a category that consists of sets of text units that share common features and have a prototypical nature, linked to their different constitutive dimensions. The distinction between text genres and the schemes that generate them (HEINEMANN, 2000[39]) points at a more abstract dimension. Speakers have knowledge on global text schemes, which they have acquired during their communicative experiences and that play a central role in the production and understanding of texts. Daily, speakers face regular communicative activities that they preferably address in a similar way. Text schemes are pre-built resources of social and structural order to “solve” recurring communication tasks; they are general guidelines about text attributes, and they vary based on the communicative experience of the speakers, their academic background and field of activity —which is consistent across different types of communicative processes, most of which have a systemic structure, namely, a field of communicative genres (a “communicative budget”, BERGMANN; LUCKMANN, 1995, p. 301[49]). In sum, genres are representations shared by the community of speakers, with a certain degree of abstraction, but linked to text realizations with prototypical features within the different dimensions.

In recent years, interest has mostly lied on the study of generic relations: in fact, texts are always included in major communicative processes, hence specific relations with other texts and genres are established. This is the reason why, beyond the typological framework, there is a sustained interest in suggesting global representation models that encompass intergeneric relations, mostly named after metaphors, as generic networks (ADAMZIK, 2011[50]; BRINKER; CÖLFEN; PAPPERT, 2014[51]), or biological-social metaphors, such as “family of genres” or “kinship” (BERGMANN; LUCKMANN, 1995[49]; CIAPUSCIO, 2009[40]), that are consequence of the evidence that different genres used by different linguistic communities are interrelated. Analysts are challenged by the systematisation of different genres that can constitute networks of genres (BRINKER; CÖLFEN; PAPPERT, 2014, p.149[51]). Their connection can be diverse: thematic, functional, situational and/or formal, that is, they can refer to the different text dimensions. For instance, speeches on the COVID-19 pandemic, climate change or abortion are respectively organised in constellations of genres that are essentially constituted on the base of common contents. Generic functional interrelations constitute “chains”: texts belonging to specific genres are sequentially linked, namely, they constitute the necessary steps within a communicative process.

Typological suggestions evolved from options that aimed to find opposing features for the contrastive characterization into multidimensional complex, flexible systems, which include different interrelated subsystems. Notions based on groups of features used to contrast individual text types through the representation in grids constitute “internal” and “external” text features (see, for instance, WEINRICH, 1972[52]; LOUREDA, 2003[53]). The comparison is drawn from pretty general features related to certain dimensions of speech, and it results in a global vision of those features. The decision on which features to include and the additional procedure generates fruitful discussions, which in the case of many authors resulted in the search of “superior” criteria for the typology of texts. For instance, Brinker (1988[45]) suggests a typology based on a functional, situational and structural criteria hierarchy, in which the former is considered the predominant parameter. The prototype theory, refurbished for the text and genre theory (SANDIG, 2000[46]) offers an interesting alternative: generic features in different dimensions are relevant as prototypes; namely, a text genre does not encompass all the features of potential text units within a certain genre, but only those features relevant for the specific constitution of the text in the given context.

Cognitive-communicative models developed within the German context explicitly favoured typologies of several dimensions at the interactional level, which would account for the typological knowledge of speakers. This approach focuses not on the text as a product, but on its processing. It postulates a schematic knowledge about genre that is added to the encyclopaedic knowledge (knowledge about the world), linguistic knowledge (lexicon and grammar) and interactional-situational knowledge (HEINEMANN; VIEHWEGER, 1991[32]). Knowledge about genres is multidimensional, in the sense that it comprehends prototypical qualities related to the different text dimensions, which can also achieve a different relevance based on genre. Text typologies are, from this perspective, representations of generic knowledge, which can incidentally be used as reference models to characterise texts. Heinemann and Heinemann (2002[48]) suggested a typology with a considerable influence on the Spanish speaking context (e.g., CUBO DE SEVERINO, 2005). It comprehends the function, situation, theme and structure, and formulae adaptation levels, which enable describing the object and accounting for textuality. Likewise, levels comprehend parameters that are instantiated in certain linguistic features. This strategy makes it possible to describe and contrast different genres, based on category distinctions of text levels and their particular ‘values’ as specific features. It is a holistic typology that includes partial typologies for each dimension. The following table provides a general representation that combines the aforementioned proposals and my own research, focused on specialised discourse (CIAPUSCIO, 2003[54]; 2016[55]). Such representation may be read in dynamic or processual terms (namely, as decisions taken by the interacting parts when they produce or interpret texts), and in static terms (when characterising or typologizing specific text units or genres):

Typological levels should not be interpreted as static compartments; there are overlapping, transitions and reciprocal conditioning relations among them. Although the current typological proposals present a high degree of generality, flexibility and openness —which allows to accommodate variation, changes and even generic hybridization—, the representation by levels could transmit a classifying image, which overshadows the dynamic character of genres, and partly for this reason it is common to find mentions of the "impossibility" of typologies (COUTINHO; MIRANDA, 2009, p. 36[57]) in the literature. Indeed, typologies are limited instruments due to the object they must "categorize", which is subject to permanent variation and expansion, so that current trends based on an approximation of a prototypical, multidimensional and dynamic order achieve greater theoretical and descriptive adaptation (cf. BERNÁRDEZ, 1995, p. 185[58]) than models based on the presence versus the absence of features.

The following section aims to illustrate the previous concepts and reflections by way of presenting examples, based on a set of texts belonging to the corpus gathered for analysis in a research project focused on studying the communication of cardiac crises in the hospital context.

The corpus examined in the research was collected in the public Hospital "El Cruce Néstor Kirchner", a tertiary care hospital and model medical centre, which admits patients only by referral from other health units, located in Gran Buenos Aires3. The patients are mostly people from highly vulnerable social backgrounds, who have suffered a severe cardiac episode, generally a heart attack, and are treated due to an emergency situation, which requires surgery with different degrees of complexity. The complete data corpus consists of 12 face-to-face interviews between cardiologists and cardiac patients (six interviews on admission and six on discharge), and six written texts that belong to the epicrisis genre (a written report, quite standardized, in which patient data, diagnosis and treatment in hospital, together with therapeutic and pharmacological indications for medical discharge are recorded). In summary, the texts belong to three genres, which can be placed at the initial and final terms of the hospitalization process to handle the medical emergency, as can be seen in the following diagram: