Abstract This article proposes a novel treatment of cataphoric shell nouns (SNs) as instances of grammatical metaphor serving to reconstruct human experience into knowledge through the discipline-specific construal of different transitivity processes. Based on a two-million-word corpus of research articles in physics and aeronautic engineering, we investigated the sub-disciplinary variation in the use of SNs between science and engineering. While the two disciplines are found to demonstrate similar preferences for SN items evidenced by a large set of common SNs, the empirical study has uncovered significant differences. Firstly, physics favours finite clauses while aeronautic engineering favours non-finite clauses as preferred SN complementation types. Secondly, physics primarily chooses identifying relational processes to characterise fact-like propositions while aeronautic engineering tends to prefer attributive relational processes to express dynamic modality and mental processes of volition to highlight desirability of potential activities under specific conditions. Thirdly, physics resorts to verbal processes of assertion to argue for the discovery of discipline-internal theories while aeronautic engineering relies on material processes to construe laboratory-based activities. These findings reveal the fundamental differences between science and engineering as two discourse types and demonstrate SNs as significant manifestations of cognitive construals underpinning linguistic variations across the two registers.

中文翻译：

---

贝壳名词作为知识解释中的语法隐喻：科学和工程话语的变异

摘要 本文提出了一种将隐喻外壳名词 (SN) 作为语法隐喻实例的新处理方法，用于通过不同及物性过程的特定学科解释将人类经验重建为知识。基于 200 万字的物理学和航空工程研究文章语料库，我们调查了科学和工程之间使用 SN 的子学科差异。虽然发现这两个学科对 SN 项目表现出相似的偏好，但大量常见 SN 证明了这一点，但实证研究发现了显着差异。首先，物理学偏爱有限子句，而航空工程偏爱非有限子句作为首选的 SN 补充类型。第二，物理学主要选择识别关系过程来表征类似事实的命题，而航空工程往往更喜欢属性关系过程来表达意志的动态模态和心理过程，以突出特定条件下潜在活动的可取性。第三，物理学诉诸断言的口头过程来论证学科内部理论的发现，而航空工程则依靠材料过程来解释基于实验室的活动。这些发现揭示了科学和工程作为两种话语类型之间的根本差异，并证明了 SNs 作为认知解释的重要表现形式，支持两种语域的语言变化。