医学和工程研究文章中的模糊限制语和助推器:基于语料库的比较研究

M. Sepehri, Mehrnnoosh Hajijalili, Ehsan Namaziandost
{"title":"医学和工程研究文章中的模糊限制语和助推器:基于语料库的比较研究","authors":"M. Sepehri, Mehrnnoosh Hajijalili, Ehsan Namaziandost","doi":"10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to compare the use of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles. To fulfil this objective, the researcher provided 30 medical and 30 engineering research articles to identify the hedging and boosting devices used in them. The research articles were analysed according to lexical devices classification, focusing on hedges and boosters. The AntConc concordance software was used to identify the instances of hedges and boosters in both disciplines. Frequency, percentage and the Chi-square test were run to analyse the data. The results indicated that the difference between the frequency of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles was significant and meaningful. Moreover, the outcomes indicated that the most frequent hedges were epistemic modality verbs, quantifiers and nouns and the most frequent boosters were nouns, lexical verbs, modal verbs and adjectives. These discoveries of this paper may have some implications for the teaching of academic writing, especially to EFL learners. \nKeywords: Boosters, engineering research articles, hedges, medical research articles","PeriodicalId":381886,"journal":{"name":"Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching","volume":"284 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hedges and boosters in medical and engineering research articles: A comparative corpus-based study\",\"authors\":\"M. Sepehri, Mehrnnoosh Hajijalili, Ehsan Namaziandost\",\"doi\":\"10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aimed to compare the use of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles. To fulfil this objective, the researcher provided 30 medical and 30 engineering research articles to identify the hedging and boosting devices used in them. The research articles were analysed according to lexical devices classification, focusing on hedges and boosters. The AntConc concordance software was used to identify the instances of hedges and boosters in both disciplines. Frequency, percentage and the Chi-square test were run to analyse the data. The results indicated that the difference between the frequency of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles was significant and meaningful. Moreover, the outcomes indicated that the most frequent hedges were epistemic modality verbs, quantifiers and nouns and the most frequent boosters were nouns, lexical verbs, modal verbs and adjectives. These discoveries of this paper may have some implications for the teaching of academic writing, especially to EFL learners. \\nKeywords: Boosters, engineering research articles, hedges, medical research articles\",\"PeriodicalId\":381886,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching\",\"volume\":\"284 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

本研究旨在比较限制语和助推器在医学和工程研究文章中的使用。为了实现这一目标,研究人员提供了30篇医学和30篇工程研究文章,以确定其中使用的对冲和增强装置。根据词汇装置分类对研究文章进行分析,重点分析了模糊限制语和助动词。使用AntConc一致性软件来识别两个学科中对冲和促进的实例。采用频率、百分比和卡方检验对数据进行分析。结果表明,在医学和工程研究论文中,模糊限制语和助推器的使用频率存在显著性差异。此外,研究结果还表明,限制语的使用频率最高的是认知情态动词、量词和名词,而促进语的使用频率最高的是名词、词汇动词、情态动词和形容词。这些发现对学术写作教学,尤其是对英语学习者具有一定的启示意义。关键词:助推器,工程研究文章,模糊限制语,医学研究文章
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Hedges and boosters in medical and engineering research articles: A comparative corpus-based study
This study aimed to compare the use of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles. To fulfil this objective, the researcher provided 30 medical and 30 engineering research articles to identify the hedging and boosting devices used in them. The research articles were analysed according to lexical devices classification, focusing on hedges and boosters. The AntConc concordance software was used to identify the instances of hedges and boosters in both disciplines. Frequency, percentage and the Chi-square test were run to analyse the data. The results indicated that the difference between the frequency of hedges and boosters in medical sciences and engineering research articles was significant and meaningful. Moreover, the outcomes indicated that the most frequent hedges were epistemic modality verbs, quantifiers and nouns and the most frequent boosters were nouns, lexical verbs, modal verbs and adjectives. These discoveries of this paper may have some implications for the teaching of academic writing, especially to EFL learners. Keywords: Boosters, engineering research articles, hedges, medical research articles
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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