ABSTRACT
The context of situation will influence the appropriacy of communication style within cultures. A purely transactional situation based entirely on the transmission of facts, such as a catalogue of screw sizes, a price list or invoice is hardly likely to engage the reader at a personal level – whatever the culture. Clearly, a request, an invitation, a refusal and any form of negotiation involves engagement at a more personal level, as does all phatic communication. Invariably, native speakers and writers will adapt their style according to the context. It must be stressed, of course, that these contexts are never totally clear-cut, and like text-typologies, appear in blend forms. In communication there are 2 levels at which contexting takes place. We ha ve already mentioned the play off between expressed information and shared (background, contextual) information. The second level of contexting has to do with the text itself. How much text needs to be written or spoken “to express information”? American-English guides stress the ‘KISS principle’: keep it short and simple, or ‘the C-B-S style’: clarity, brevity and sincerity. The British English equivalents are to be found in the language of the writer Jonathan Swift: “Proper words in proper places make the true definition of style”, or Sir Ernest Gowers: “Be short, be simple, be human”.
