iReasearch学术科研网

摘要：It is widely recognized that academic discourse construes not only consensus, but also debate, which can sometimes be contentious. To gain a deeper insight into the rhetoric of disagreement in language studies, this article analyzes replies/responses, a genre whose primary communicative purpose is to challenge the counterclaims raised in previous publications. To rebut criticisms of their work or of the school/theory they associate themselves with, linguists use two strategies: first, they combine the arguments supporting their position with those discrediting criticism; and second, they provide only the arguments substantiating their views. Categorization of the arguments according to the rhetorical appeals they rely on reveals that the first strategy has two realizations -- basic and expanded. The basic realization pairs the arguments strengthening an author's logos and ethos with the arguments weakening a critic's logos. It can be expanded to include pathos appeals to emphasize an author's adherence to and/or a critic's flouting of the community expectations, as well as the arguments weakening a critic's ethos. The second strategy employs all three means of persuasion to support an author's logic, trustworthiness, and alignment with the disciplinary norms. These findings are relevant to the study of disciplinary rhetoric and advanced student training. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：A significant number of studies have examined the features of expert discoursal practices in science and academia, and many have focused on what happens to student writers working their way into the academic community. Less attention has been paid to how a scientific writer's voice continues to change after the Ph.D. dissertation. This study examines the shift in experienced scientific writers' disciplinary voice over the ten-year period following the doctoral dissertation. Using genre analysis triangulated with qualitative methods, a set of indexes that convey field geologists' disciplinary practices and concerns has been identified. Using a measure of standard deviation, the study then compares the use of these indexes by six writers from geology over ten years, and finds that disciplinary voice develops in similar ways. This paper contributes to ongoing discussions about how research on voice is useful for studies on second-language writing. In addition, using tools such as standard deviation allows for a closer analysis of the elusive notion of 'voice'. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：I mean typically marks the introduction of modifications or adjustments in discourse, including self-repair, which seems to be especially prevalent in ELF. The role of I mean in academic ELF speech has been recently investigated by Kaur (2011). Kaur focuses on academic dialogue and self-repair roles. However, I mean has been found to be a rather speaker-centred, monologic particle, playing a variety of different roles in discourse. This article sets out to provide a comprehensive description of the functions of I mean in the monologic context of conference presentations by ELF speakers. The data consists of the presentations module of the ELFA corpus. Results indicate that self-repair, for corrective or 'proactive' purposes, is indeed a major function of I mean in the present materials too. However, presenters also use this discourse marker for other purposes inherently related to scientific argumentation, such as introducing background knowledge, justifying claims, interacting with audiences, marking salience or reinforcing commitment. It is argued that, for all their contribution to the effectiveness of presentations, some of the uses ELF speakers make of I mean structures may also compromise their personal image as speakers and as researchers. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：Institutional and corporate writing have been widely investigated over the last two decades by applied linguists, educationalists and ESP scholars, with special attention given to business correspondence, annual reports, press releases and, more recently, email messages and other digital media. Some kinds of documents, however, still await scrutiny. This exploratory study turns to the customer-complaint form, a well-established but relatively unresearched genre that frames the reporting of critical incidents to service providers. Its structure and wording are described contrastively across a sample of texts produced by British and Italian organisations. The results highlight several differences between the two samples in terms of structure, wording of requests/instructions, and conventional indirectness. While many of these are language-driven, others may be interpreted as an expression of national perceptions of the duties and expectations of the parties involved. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：Intercultural studies have shown the existence of rhetorical variation in the prevalent discourse practices of multilingual scholars and those of English-speaking scholars. In this paper, we examine comparatively the typical rhetorical practices used in the Introduction section of 80 research articles written in English and 80 in Spanish in four disciplines in the fields of Health Sciences and Humanities/Social Sciences. We particularly examine how writers present their research studies in Move 3 (Swales, 2004), with a special focus on those steps that add promotional value to one's research. The results revealed that, within the same field, the English texts present a higher degree of rhetorical promotion than the Spanish texts in each of the disciplines analysed. However, when comparing the two broad fields, the Spanish texts in Health Sciences present a higher degree of promotion than the English (and Spanish) texts in Humanities/Social Sciences. This indicates that, in shaping the promotional features of the (sub)genre in question, when professional and national cultural variables interact simultaneously, cultural factors tend to override the influence of disciplinary context. However, when broad fields of knowledge are compared, it is the disciplinary conventions in specific professional subcultures that seem to prevail over national cultural factors. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：In lecture introductions, student engagement is important for receptivity of the lecture. The study examined the use of personal pronouns (we, I, you) in lecture introductions in the arts and science disciplines. The 37,373-word corpus was compiled from 47 lecture introductions delivered in English in a Malaysian university. You is the most frequently used personal pronoun, followed by I and we which both have similar frequencies. All three pronouns are used for activating prior knowledge and giving instructions or announcements, the two main activities of the lecture introductions. In addition to these discourse functions, you-audience is used when lecturers share personal experiences and direct students' attention but you-generalised occurs in explanations of subject matter. Inclusive-we is used for stating aims and objectives of the lecture and occurs more frequently than exclusive-we which sometimes surfaces in science lecturers' explanations of the subject matter when reviewing content covered in previous lectures. The results suggest a disciplinary difference in the use of personal pronouns for student engagement in lecture introductions because the science lecturers used you-audience, we for I, we for one and I more than arts lecturers but you-generalised is more frequent in arts lecture introductions. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：Most previous studies of epistemic modality in legal settings discuss epistemic modality as performing an interpersonal engagement or a positioning function. Via a probability test, the present corpus-driven study examined the way in which epistemic modality is employed in civil judgments to construct legal facts and to indicate legal probability. The study compared how different types of epistemic modality are used in judicial practice in different jurisdictions, namely Hong Kong, which is a common law jurisdiction, and Scotland, which is a mixed jurisdiction. Specifically, we examined the variation in the orientation of epistemic modality, that is, whether implicit or explicit and whether subjective or objective, and the variation in the value of epistemic modality, that is, high, median, or low. The findings suggest that both subjective epistemic modality and objective epistemic modality are employed in adjudication where the judges decide the degree of probability, and the value distribution of epistemic modality indicates that the same standard, that is, the balance of probability, is adopted in Hong Kong and Scotland. We propose an integrated framework of principle of proof and discuss the continuum of probability in law. Based on the conclusions, we propose pedagogical implications for English for Legal Purposes. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：In the last 20 years, technological advancement and increased multidisciplinarity has expanded the range of data regarded as within the scope of languages for specific purposes (LSP) research and the means by which they can be analyzed. As a result, the analytical work of LSP researchers has developed from a narrow focus on specialist terminology coupled with generic discourse analysis to a wide-ranging set of perspectives involving multiple methods and databases. This article aims to explore this 20-year expansion process by examining the development of the domains of LSP research in which certain methods have been particularly productive and by providing an outline of how each method has been applied within LSP research. Among the areas examined are lexical and register analysis, genre analysis, conversation analysis, ethnography, and multimethod approaches. It is argued that developments in LSP analysis have generally been in the direction of greater contextualization of discourse, moving away from a concentration on lexicogrammatical features of text to include analysis of spoken and written discourses of specific domains. The article concludes with some comments on the needs, priorities, and challenges for future research in the analysis of LSP. Adapted from the source document

摘要：无可用选项。

摘要：E-mail communication in business and professional contexts has been analysed with a focus on textual and communicative complexity, stylistic conventions, and the relation between e-mails and professional culture. The purpose of the present study is to compare the professional literacy in two professions by studying the use of intertextuality in the e-mail messages two professionals read or wrote in a number of discourse flows. Intertextuality is examined in terms of types and directionality of use. The findings show that while the use of intertextuality is prevalent across all of the e-mails, the types of intertextuality, and their relative frequencies of use, and the directionality of intertextuality are influenced by profession-specific communicative contexts and goals. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：无可用选项。

摘要：Performance on integrated tasks requires candidates to engage skills and strategies beyond language proficiency alone, in ways that can be difficult to define and measure for testing purposes. While it has been widely recognized that stimulus materials impact test performance, our understanding of the way in which test takers make use of these materials in their responses, particularly in the context of listening-speaking tasks, remains predominantly intuitive. Recent studies have highlighted the problems associated with content-related aspects of task fulfilment on integrated tasks, but little attempt has been made to operationalize the way in which content from the input material is integrated into speaking performances. Using discourse data from a trial administration of a pilot for an Oxford English language test, this paper investigates how test takers integrate stimulus materials into their speaking performances on an integrated listening-then-speaking summary task, whether these behaviours are reflected in the relevant rating scale and, by implication, whether the test scores assigned according to this scale reflect real differences in the quality of oral performances. An innovative discourse analytic approach was developed to analyse content-related aspects of performance in order to determine if such aspects represent an appropriate measure of the speaking ability construct. Results showed that the measures devised, such as the number of key points included from the input text, and the accuracy with which information was reproduced or reformulated, effectively distinguished participants according to their level of speaking proficiency. The study's findings support the use of this particular task-type and the appropriateness of the associated rating scale as a measure of speaking proficiency, as well as the utility of the devised discourse-based measures for the validation of integrated tasks in other assessment contexts. [Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications, Ltd., copyright holder.]

摘要：In my talk, I foreground what I and my colleagues have learned about discourse in the numerous classrooms we observed in a four-year research study at an urban high school. While Jefferson High had a student body that was linguistically and culturally diverse, it was homogeneous socioeconomically, being labeled 'low income'. Some of the research I address reveals how the classroom discourse both co-constructed and was influenced by these phenomena. Additionally, my survey of the research reveals that theoretical frameworks shape the research process and, ultimately, what we learn about classroom discourse. Adapted from the source document

摘要：无可用选项。

摘要：Evaluation in academic discourse has received considerable attention from researchers. Much of the work on evaluation has focused, however, on written genres, and less attention has been paid to how evaluation unfolds in spoken academic genres. In our present research, we are interested in disclosing how the interpersonal meaning of evaluation is expressed in the discussion session (hereafter DS) that follows conference paper presentations, since DS has already been defined as an "evaluative forum", when comparing its phraseological patterns with those of the presentation. Though the study of evaluation in spoken genres has been developed focusing exclusively on linguistic aspects, we assume the non-linguistic message that accompanies the linguistic message has an effect on the interpersonal meaning of the communication. Therefore, the aim of our research is to analyse the evaluative meaning conveyed in DSs that follow paper presentations in an applied linguistics conference. In the study, we draw on a social semiotic theory of language and of kinesics and paralanguage to frame a multimodal exploration of this interpersonal meaning. The comparative analysis between linguistic evaluation and multimodal evaluation reveals the significant contribution of non-linguistics features which are used to intensify linguistic evaluation or to express the speakers' attitude. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：无可用选项。

摘要：无可用选项。

摘要：This article examines the stance options used by writers responding to a data description task in the discipline of Statistics. Based on a small learner corpus, it uses inductive qualitative content analysis to explore both the content propositions that students included in their writing, and the ways in which they expressed evaluative stance vis-a-vis such propositions. In the light of an interview with a specialist informant, the article discusses the appropriacy of the content choices and stance options taken by students. It then discusses the potential exploitation of the learner corpus for pedagogic purposes. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：Evaluations of prior scholarship play a crucial role in the literature review (LR) of a research article by showing how the boundary of an area of inquiry can be further advanced by the writer's work. Yet, many inexperienced writers find evaluating others' work a major challenge. Although the task has received some attention in research and writing manuals, advice given tends to be rather general, often with little distinction made of practices followed in different paradigms. This gap could have resulted from the scarcity of empirical work in this regard. Motivated by both these gaps, this study examines how researchers in two paradigms evaluate others' work in LRs. LRs of 80 articles were collected from four journals of Information Systems. Forty of the articles were drawn from two journals that follow a strong behavioural science research paradigm while the other 40 were from two journals that show a strong design science research paradigm. Evaluations in the LRs were analyzed based on a conceptual framework developed from the CARS model (Swales, 1990) and the work on academic evaluations in Hunston (1993a, 1993b) and Hunston and Thompson (2000). The analysis aims to characterize and compare (a) the major types of evaluation acts performed by writers in the two research domains, (b) the entities that they evaluate and (c) the value parameters they employ. Results show marked cross-domain differences in the three areas. This article will discuss how the findings and the integrated conceptual framework can inform teaching of evaluations in LRs. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]

摘要：This paper presents an analysis of the major generic structures of empirical research articles (RAs), with a particular focus on disciplinary variation and the relationship between the adjacent sections in the introductory and concluding parts. The findings were derived from a close 'manual' analysis of 433 recent empirical RAs from high-impact English-language journals in 39 disciplines in the fields of engineering, applied sciences, social sciences and the humanities. This analysis reveals that while many empirical RAs follow the 'standard' Introduction -- Method -- Results -- Discussion (IMRD) pattern, this structure is not the default option for organizing such studies. The findings indicate that the most frequently used structural pattern is Introduction -- Literature Review -- Method -- Results and Discussion -- Conclusion (ILM[RD]C). The other prominent patterns found in the corpus are IM[RD]C, IMRDC, ILMRDC and ILMRD. The paper identifies and highlights the importance of the sections that are not fully accounted for in the conventional IMRD framework, namely the Literature Review (L), the merged (as opposed to separated) Results and Discussion [RD], and the Conclusion (C). The paper concludes by discussing the implications of the study for academic writing research as well as the design of RA writing courses and materials for research students and early-career academics. [Copyright The American University; published by Elsevier Ltd.]