Academic Features Among the Non-academic: A Case of Chinese Argumentative Texts as Compared to BaREnLoB

Z. Xin, Shaoyun Long
{"title":"Academic Features Among the Non-academic: A Case of Chinese Argumentative Texts as Compared to BaREnLoB","authors":"Z. Xin, Shaoyun Long","doi":"10.7176/jlll/71-02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Compared with different degrees of academic corpora(RC): BaREnLoB, this study conducted a CIA analysis to find out whether the usage features owned by Chinese English majors in their argumentative texts in WECCL2.0 (the observation corpus,OC henceforth) can demonstrate different academic features except for non academic ones. Results show some academic features among the non-academic(i.e.almost the same strong narrative features, and insufficient epistemic comments, rare depiction and classification of particular things, i.e. similar to previous findings). It shows: (i) NN2 (mostly followed by should ) and we (the usual form to refer to the author himself /herself or the research group themselves) are usually incorporated as subjects; (ii) The standard frequency (PMW) of the top 20 verbs(including be, have, find, know, become, see, etc.) and all the 55 pointed common stative ones(Zhang Z.B, 2003) between OC and RC differ much although the standard frequency(PMW) of stative verbs among the 20 top between differs slightly. (iii) the occurrences of “ they/he/she + modal verbs” in OC are many times more than those in RC, even “we/you/I + modal verbs” between show the nonnatives employ much less than the natives. (iv) there are 4 out of 19 carefully-picked abstract nouns before modal verbs are in OC while none in RC. In short, this research finds that the English argumentative writings by Chinese English majors display some academic features as mirrored by the reference corpus except for some non-academic features as we found before. Finally, some implications for the teaching and research of modal verbs are discussed. Keywords: deontic and epistemic modality, academic feature among non academic, Chinese argumentative texts DOI: 10.7176/JLLL/71-02 Publication date: August 31 st 2020","PeriodicalId":355193,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics","volume":"26 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Literature, Languages and Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7176/jlll/71-02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Compared with different degrees of academic corpora(RC): BaREnLoB, this study conducted a CIA analysis to find out whether the usage features owned by Chinese English majors in their argumentative texts in WECCL2.0 (the observation corpus,OC henceforth) can demonstrate different academic features except for non academic ones. Results show some academic features among the non-academic(i.e.almost the same strong narrative features, and insufficient epistemic comments, rare depiction and classification of particular things, i.e. similar to previous findings). It shows: (i) NN2 (mostly followed by should ) and we (the usual form to refer to the author himself /herself or the research group themselves) are usually incorporated as subjects; (ii) The standard frequency (PMW) of the top 20 verbs(including be, have, find, know, become, see, etc.) and all the 55 pointed common stative ones(Zhang Z.B, 2003) between OC and RC differ much although the standard frequency(PMW) of stative verbs among the 20 top between differs slightly. (iii) the occurrences of “ they/he/she + modal verbs” in OC are many times more than those in RC, even “we/you/I + modal verbs” between show the nonnatives employ much less than the natives. (iv) there are 4 out of 19 carefully-picked abstract nouns before modal verbs are in OC while none in RC. In short, this research finds that the English argumentative writings by Chinese English majors display some academic features as mirrored by the reference corpus except for some non-academic features as we found before. Finally, some implications for the teaching and research of modal verbs are discussed. Keywords: deontic and epistemic modality, academic feature among non academic, Chinese argumentative texts DOI: 10.7176/JLLL/71-02 Publication date: August 31 st 2020
非学术中的学术特征:以中国论辩文本与BaREnLoB比较为例
对比不同程度的学术语料库(RC): BaREnLoB,本研究进行了CIA分析,以了解中国英语专业学生在WECCL2.0(观察语料库,以下简称OC)议论文语篇中所具有的使用特征,除了非学术特征外,是否能表现出不同的学术特征。结果显示,非学术性(即:几乎相同的强烈叙事特征,缺乏认识论的评论,对特定事物的罕见描述和分类,即与之前的发现相似)。它表明:(i) NN2(通常后跟should)和we(通常指作者本人或研究小组本身)通常被合并为主题;(ii)前20个动词(包括be、have、find、know、become、see等)的标准频率(PMW)与前20个动词(张志波,2003)的55个点共同静态动词的标准频率(PMW)差异很大,但前20个动词的标准频率(PMW)略有差异。(3)汉语中“他们/他/她+情态动词”的出现次数比汉语多很多倍,甚至“我们/你/我+情态动词”之间的出现次数也显示非英语母语者比英语母语者少得多。(4)在19个精心挑选的情态动词前抽象名词中,有4个在汉语中出现,而在汉语中没有出现。总之,本研究发现,除了我们之前发现的一些非学术特征外,中国英语专业学生的英语议论文还呈现出参考语料库所反映的一些学术特征。最后,对情态动词教学和研究的启示进行了探讨。关键词:义务与认知情态,非学术的学术特征,中文论辩文本DOI: 10.7176/ jll /71-02出版日期:2020年8月31日
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信