A Contrastive Genre-Based Approach to the Rhetorical Structure and Use of Interactional Metadiscourse in the Results and Discussion Section of Food Science & Technology Research Articles

Q2 Arts and Humanities
Milagros Del Saz-Rubio
{"title":"A Contrastive Genre-Based Approach to the Rhetorical Structure and Use of Interactional Metadiscourse in the Results and Discussion Section of Food Science & Technology Research Articles","authors":"Milagros Del Saz-Rubio","doi":"10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20196337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes a genre-based exploration of the rhetorical structure and use of interpersonal metadiscourse features in the Results and Discussion sections of 32 research articles written in English from the discipline of Food Science & Technology. The rhetorical moves and steps enacted in this section are first looked into. Following this, I have quantitatively assessed the researchers’ use of some interactional metadiscoursal units, drawing on Hyland’s framework (2005a, 2005b). As the corpus of analysis is made up of 16 papers authored by English L1 researchers, while another 16 have been written by Spanish researchers with English as their L2, it is also my aim to account for any differences with regard to the presence and frequency of use of the different moves/steps identified, and of the interactional metadiscoursal features selected for analysis in each of the two sub-corpora. Possible cross-cultural variations identified in the L1 and L2 corpus will be discussed. Findings indicate that results are presented and discussed mainly through obligatory Moves 2 and 3, and, to a lesser extent, Move 1. This exploratory approach has shown statistically significant differences for the categories of hedges and authorial presence, making them the strategies most often deployed by researchers with English as their L1.","PeriodicalId":35132,"journal":{"name":"Miscelanea","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Miscelanea","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20196337","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper describes a genre-based exploration of the rhetorical structure and use of interpersonal metadiscourse features in the Results and Discussion sections of 32 research articles written in English from the discipline of Food Science & Technology. The rhetorical moves and steps enacted in this section are first looked into. Following this, I have quantitatively assessed the researchers’ use of some interactional metadiscoursal units, drawing on Hyland’s framework (2005a, 2005b). As the corpus of analysis is made up of 16 papers authored by English L1 researchers, while another 16 have been written by Spanish researchers with English as their L2, it is also my aim to account for any differences with regard to the presence and frequency of use of the different moves/steps identified, and of the interactional metadiscoursal features selected for analysis in each of the two sub-corpora. Possible cross-cultural variations identified in the L1 and L2 corpus will be discussed. Findings indicate that results are presented and discussed mainly through obligatory Moves 2 and 3, and, to a lesser extent, Move 1. This exploratory approach has shown statistically significant differences for the categories of hedges and authorial presence, making them the strategies most often deployed by researchers with English as their L1.
基于体裁对比的食品科技研究论文结果与讨论部分互动元语篇修辞结构与使用研究
本文对32篇来自食品科学与技术学科的英文研究论文的结果和讨论部分的修辞结构和人际元话语特征的使用进行了基于体裁的探索。本文首先探讨了本节中所采用的修辞手法和步骤。在此之后,我利用Hyland的框架(2005a, 2005b)定量评估了研究人员对一些互动元话语单位的使用。由于分析语料库由英语第一语言研究者撰写的16篇论文组成,而另外16篇论文是西班牙语研究者以英语为第二语言撰写的,因此我的目标也是解释所识别的不同动作/步骤的存在和使用频率,以及在两个子语料库中选择用于分析的相互作用元语篇特征的差异。我们将讨论在第一语言和第二语言语料库中发现的可能的跨文化差异。研究结果表明,结果主要通过强制性的步骤2和步骤3来呈现和讨论,并且在较小程度上通过步骤1来呈现和讨论。这种探索性方法在统计上显示了模糊限制语和作者存在的显著差异,使它们成为以英语为母语的研究人员最常使用的策略。
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
Miscelanea
Miscelanea Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
审稿时长
32 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