Hedging in English texts written by lower secondary pupils attending Norwegian schools

James Jacob Thomson
{"title":"Hedging in English texts written by lower secondary pupils attending Norwegian schools","authors":"James Jacob Thomson","doi":"10.46364/NJMLM.V6I1.411","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study analyses the use of hedges in English texts written by year nine[1] pupils attending Norwegian lower secondary schools. Hedges are quantified in a corpus of 82 pupil texts using a taxonomy consisting of five hedging categories: Adaptors, Rounders, Plausibility Shields, Explicit Markers of Author Involvement and Verbal Fillers (Prince et al., 1980; Salager-Meyer, 1994; Holmes, 1986). As the pupils are school-level second language learners of English, each device is also deemed to be either accurately or inaccurately used based on grammar, well-formedness and appropriateness (Fetzer, 2004). The analyses are compared across topic, holistic ratings and formality. Texts in the corpus are written about two topics: sports and literary analyses of the novel Holes (Sachar, 1998). Texts about sports contain significantly more hedges than texts about Holes. Comparing accurate and inaccurate categories across holistic ratings, different results were produced when considering topic. Informally written texts about sports contain higher frequencies of accurately used devices than formally written texts about sports. The results suggest that topic and formality are the most significant factors affecting hedging use in this corpus. While hedging frequency overall does not seem to correlate with holistic ratings, overuse and inaccurate use of hedges seems to affect quality. Based on the results, it is argued that pupils may benefit from exposure to a wide range of accurately used devices. [1] “Year 9” is a term usually used in the UK, synonymous with “9th grade” used in the United States, for pupils aged 13-14.","PeriodicalId":438323,"journal":{"name":"Nordic Journal of Modern Language Methodology","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nordic Journal of Modern Language Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46364/NJMLM.V6I1.411","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

This study analyses the use of hedges in English texts written by year nine[1] pupils attending Norwegian lower secondary schools. Hedges are quantified in a corpus of 82 pupil texts using a taxonomy consisting of five hedging categories: Adaptors, Rounders, Plausibility Shields, Explicit Markers of Author Involvement and Verbal Fillers (Prince et al., 1980; Salager-Meyer, 1994; Holmes, 1986). As the pupils are school-level second language learners of English, each device is also deemed to be either accurately or inaccurately used based on grammar, well-formedness and appropriateness (Fetzer, 2004). The analyses are compared across topic, holistic ratings and formality. Texts in the corpus are written about two topics: sports and literary analyses of the novel Holes (Sachar, 1998). Texts about sports contain significantly more hedges than texts about Holes. Comparing accurate and inaccurate categories across holistic ratings, different results were produced when considering topic. Informally written texts about sports contain higher frequencies of accurately used devices than formally written texts about sports. The results suggest that topic and formality are the most significant factors affecting hedging use in this corpus. While hedging frequency overall does not seem to correlate with holistic ratings, overuse and inaccurate use of hedges seems to affect quality. Based on the results, it is argued that pupils may benefit from exposure to a wide range of accurately used devices. [1] “Year 9” is a term usually used in the UK, synonymous with “9th grade” used in the United States, for pupils aged 13-14.
在挪威学校就读的初中学生所写的英语课文中的模糊限制语
本研究分析了挪威初中九年级[1]学生在英语文本中模糊限制语的使用情况。在82篇学生文本的语料库中,模糊限制语被量化,使用的分类包括五个模糊限制语类别:Adaptors, Rounders, Plausibility Shields, Explicit Markers of Author Involvement和Verbal filler (Prince et al., 1980;Salager-Meyer, 1994;福尔摩斯,1986)。由于学生是学校级别的英语第二语言学习者,因此每个设备也被认为是基于语法,格式良好和适当性的准确或不准确的使用(Fetzer, 2004)。这些分析是跨主题、整体评级和形式进行比较的。语料库中的文本是关于两个主题的:体育和小说霍尔的文学分析(Sachar, 1998)。关于体育的文本包含的模糊限制语明显多于关于洞的文本。在整体评分中比较准确和不准确的类别,在考虑主题时产生不同的结果。关于体育的非正式写作文本比关于体育的正式写作文本包含更高频率的准确使用设备。结果表明,主题和形式是影响该语料库模糊限制语使用的最重要因素。虽然套期保值频率总体上似乎与整体评级无关,但过度使用和不准确使用套期保值似乎会影响质量。基于这些结果,有人认为,学生可能会受益于接触各种准确使用的设备。[1]“Year 9”通常在英国使用,与美国使用的“9th grade”同义,指13-14岁的学生。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信