当前位置: X-MOL 学术Engl. Specif. Purp. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The rhetoric of negation in research articles: A cross-disciplinary analysis of appraisal resources
English for Specific Purposes ( IF 2.417 ) Pub Date : 2023-01-12 , DOI: 10.1016/j.esp.2022.12.007
Fatemeh Zolfaghari

Research on negation has generally explored the cross-linguistic similarities and differences of a host of widely spoken languages with little attention to its nuances within academic genres and disciplines. Accordingly, and given the co-articulation of negation with various interpersonal and evaluative resources, this study examined appraisal subsystems in 360 research articles on astrophysics, chemistry, geology, psychology, linguistics, and political science (60 papers from each discipline) published between 2018 and 2020. Comparative analyses of appraisal resources revealed significantly greater employment of total engagement and graduation, acknowledge, concede, counter, denial, distance, entertain, pronounce, justifying, affect, judgment, positive polarity of attitude, force, and softening devices in soft disciplines. However, hard sciences allowed denser employment of appreciation, neutral polarity of attitude, and sharpening resources. The results of the text/pragmatic analysis of denial further indicated a stronger preference for disalignment, cautious detachment, and unfulfilled expectations functions in soft sciences and varying negation patterns across both subcorpora. The line-by-line annotations revealed either the independent use of denial markers or their co-articulation with other appraisal options. An important implication of this study is awareness-raising about the rhetorical conventions of maintaining an authorial stance and promoting a sense of disciplinary community.



中文翻译:

研究文章中的否定修辞:评估资源的跨学科分析

对否定的研究通常探索许多广泛使用的语言的跨语言相似性和差异性,而很少关注其在学术流派和学科中的细微差别。因此,鉴于否定与各种人际关系和评价资源的共同表达,本研究检查了 2018 年发表的 360 篇关于天体物理学、化学、地质学、心理学、语言学和政治学的研究文章(每个学科 60 篇)中的评价子系统和 2020 年。评估资源的比较分析显示,总体参与和毕业、承认、承认、反击、否认、距离、娱乐、发音、证明、影响、判断、态度的积极极性、力量和软化手段的使用显着增加学科。然而,硬科学允许更密集地运用欣赏、中立的态度和锐化资源。拒绝的文本/语用分析的结果进一步表明,在软科学中更倾向于不一致、谨慎的分离和未实现的期望功能,以及两个子语料库中不同的否定模式。逐行注释揭示了拒绝标记的独立使用或它们与其他评估选项的共同表达。这项研究的一个重要意义是提高人们对保持作者立场和促进纪律社区意识的修辞惯例的认识。拒绝的文本/语用分析的结果进一步表明,在软科学中更倾向于不一致、谨慎的分离和未实现的期望功能,以及两个子语料库中不同的否定模式。逐行注释揭示了拒绝标记的独立使用或它们与其他评估选项的共同表达。这项研究的一个重要意义是提高人们对保持作者立场和促进纪律社区意识的修辞惯例的认识。拒绝的文本/语用分析的结果进一步表明,在软科学中更倾向于不一致、谨慎的分离和未实现的期望功能,以及两个子语料库中不同的否定模式。逐行注释揭示了拒绝标记的独立使用或它们与其他评估选项的共同表达。这项研究的一个重要意义是提高人们对保持作者立场和促进纪律社区意识的修辞惯例的认识。

更新日期:2023-01-12
down
wechat
bug