Nominal Stance in Cross-disciplinary Academic Writing of L1 and L2 Speakers in Noun + that Constructions

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Ozkan Kirmizi, Gülin Dağdeviren Kırmızı
{"title":"Nominal Stance in Cross-disciplinary Academic Writing of L1 and L2 Speakers in Noun + that Constructions","authors":"Ozkan Kirmizi, Gülin Dağdeviren Kırmızı","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.12252","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Literature indicates that in academic writing, authors are expected to demonstrate a noticeable stance so that they can make their meaning clear. Therefore, differences between native and non-native writers along with cross-disciplinary academic writing assume great significance. \nPurpose. The interactional, dialogic, and reflective nature of academic writing requires writers to utilize stance-establishing tools in their writing, the most prominent ones being stance nouns. In addition, the that-clause construction plays a vital role in conveying the author’s stance. Studies that compare L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers regarding academic writing are rather scarce. As such, the present paper aims to analyze L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers in eight disciplines from natural and social sciences in terms of the use of stance nouns in that-clause constructions. \nMethods. The study employs Jiang and Hyland's (2016) functional classification model in exploring the nominal stance in cross-disciplinary writing of L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers. To this end, journals with high impact in eight disciplines from social and natural sciences were scanned and a total of 320 articles were included in the corpus. The social sciences included in the present study cover applied linguistics, history, psychology, and sociology while the natural sciences cover medicine, engineering, astronomy, and biology. In total, a corpus of 2.232.164 words was formed. \nResults and Implications. The study found significant differences not only in terms of natural and social sciences but also in terms of L1/L2 distinction. In addition, a secondary purpose of the study was to see whether writers in social and natural sciences differed in terms of empiricist and interpretive rationality. The results indicated that writers in social sciences tended to use more status and cognition nouns, indicating that they tend to be more interpretive. With significant differences between Turkish and English writers from a cross-disciplinary perspective, the present study offers important insights into how writers weave their stance in academic writing. Moreover, the present study also confirmed that writers in social sciences, whether L1 or L2, tend to use more stance nouns compared with writers in natural sciences.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.12252","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Literature indicates that in academic writing, authors are expected to demonstrate a noticeable stance so that they can make their meaning clear. Therefore, differences between native and non-native writers along with cross-disciplinary academic writing assume great significance. Purpose. The interactional, dialogic, and reflective nature of academic writing requires writers to utilize stance-establishing tools in their writing, the most prominent ones being stance nouns. In addition, the that-clause construction plays a vital role in conveying the author’s stance. Studies that compare L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers regarding academic writing are rather scarce. As such, the present paper aims to analyze L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers in eight disciplines from natural and social sciences in terms of the use of stance nouns in that-clause constructions. Methods. The study employs Jiang and Hyland's (2016) functional classification model in exploring the nominal stance in cross-disciplinary writing of L1 Turkish writers of English and L1 English writers. To this end, journals with high impact in eight disciplines from social and natural sciences were scanned and a total of 320 articles were included in the corpus. The social sciences included in the present study cover applied linguistics, history, psychology, and sociology while the natural sciences cover medicine, engineering, astronomy, and biology. In total, a corpus of 2.232.164 words was formed. Results and Implications. The study found significant differences not only in terms of natural and social sciences but also in terms of L1/L2 distinction. In addition, a secondary purpose of the study was to see whether writers in social and natural sciences differed in terms of empiricist and interpretive rationality. The results indicated that writers in social sciences tended to use more status and cognition nouns, indicating that they tend to be more interpretive. With significant differences between Turkish and English writers from a cross-disciplinary perspective, the present study offers important insights into how writers weave their stance in academic writing. Moreover, the present study also confirmed that writers in social sciences, whether L1 or L2, tend to use more stance nouns compared with writers in natural sciences.
名词+that结构中一、二语使用者跨学科学术写作的名词立场
背景。文献表明,在学术写作中,作者应该表现出明显的立场,这样他们才能清楚地表达自己的意思。因此,母语和非母语作者之间的差异以及跨学科学术写作具有重要意义。目的。学术写作的互动性、对话性和反思性要求作者在写作中使用立场建立工具,其中最突出的是立场名词。此外,that从句的结构在传达作者的立场方面起着至关重要的作用。比较母语土耳其语英语作家和母语英语作家在学术写作方面的研究相当少。因此,本文旨在分析母语土耳其语英语作家和母语自然科学和社会科学八个学科的英语作家在that从句结构中立场名词的使用情况。方法。本研究采用Jiang和Hyland(2016)的功能分类模型来探讨母语土耳其语英语作家和母语英语作家在跨学科写作中的名义立场。为此,对社会科学和自然科学八个学科中具有高影响力的期刊进行了扫描,共将320篇文章纳入了语料库。本研究涵盖的社会科学涵盖应用语言学、历史学、心理学和社会学,而自然科学涵盖医学、工程学、天文学和生物学。总共形成了2.232.164个单词的语料库。结果和意义。研究发现,不仅在自然科学和社会科学方面存在显著差异,而且在L1/L2区分方面也存在显著差异。此外,该研究的第二个目的是了解社会科学和自然科学作家在经验主义和解释理性方面是否存在差异。结果表明,社会科学领域的作者倾向于使用更多的地位名词和认知名词,这表明他们更倾向于解释性。从跨学科的角度来看,土耳其作家和英语作家之间存在显著差异,本研究为作家如何在学术写作中编织立场提供了重要的见解。此外,本研究还证实,与自然科学作家相比,社会科学作家,无论是第一语言还是第二语言,都倾向于使用更多的立场名词。
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
Journal of Language and Education
Journal of Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
33
审稿时长
18 weeks
×
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