研究论文中的议论文修辞模式:语料库分析

Faith Amuzie
{"title":"研究论文中的议论文修辞模式:语料库分析","authors":"Faith Amuzie","doi":"10.56907/gcknyu3o","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Academic writing is an argumentative entity carefully crafted to project specific desired knowledge claims. Writers engage in the use of particular rhetorical structure devices to advance arguments and negotiate knowledge in order to persuade and convince an academic audience. This corpus based study examined the rhetorical schemeta (e.g. definition, evaluation, centrality claim) often deployed by Nigerian academics in the cross disciplinary fields of language arts and natural science to advance arguments in research articles. The study aimed at identifying how academic writers project knowledge claims in the research article. Three key objectives underlying this study were to identify elements used in staking claims, determine the patterns such elements follow and their communicative functions. The data for the study were 20 comparable research articles derived from two academic sub-corpora (10 academic writing humanities and 10 academic writing natural sciences) of the International Corpus of English Nigeria (ICE). Analysis of the data was done using AntMover software analyser. The study revealed, for instance, that the academics frequently used specific types of rhetorical devices that varied in their schemes more than some other types. The study has implications for academic writing and reader comprehensibility.","PeriodicalId":362245,"journal":{"name":"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Rhetorical Pattern of Argumentation in the Research Article: A Corpus Approach\",\"authors\":\"Faith Amuzie\",\"doi\":\"10.56907/gcknyu3o\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Academic writing is an argumentative entity carefully crafted to project specific desired knowledge claims. Writers engage in the use of particular rhetorical structure devices to advance arguments and negotiate knowledge in order to persuade and convince an academic audience. This corpus based study examined the rhetorical schemeta (e.g. definition, evaluation, centrality claim) often deployed by Nigerian academics in the cross disciplinary fields of language arts and natural science to advance arguments in research articles. The study aimed at identifying how academic writers project knowledge claims in the research article. Three key objectives underlying this study were to identify elements used in staking claims, determine the patterns such elements follow and their communicative functions. The data for the study were 20 comparable research articles derived from two academic sub-corpora (10 academic writing humanities and 10 academic writing natural sciences) of the International Corpus of English Nigeria (ICE). Analysis of the data was done using AntMover software analyser. The study revealed, for instance, that the academics frequently used specific types of rhetorical devices that varied in their schemes more than some other types. The study has implications for academic writing and reader comprehensibility.\",\"PeriodicalId\":362245,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"7 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56907/gcknyu3o\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLAREP Journal of English and Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56907/gcknyu3o","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

学术写作是一种争论性的实体,精心设计以表达特定的所需知识主张。作者使用特殊的修辞结构手段来推进论点和协商知识,以说服和说服学术读者。这个基于语料库的研究考察了尼日利亚学者在语言艺术和自然科学的跨学科领域中经常使用的修辞图式(如定义、评价、中心性主张),以推进研究文章中的论点。该研究旨在确定学术作者如何在研究文章中投射知识主张。本研究的三个关键目标是确定在声明中使用的要素,确定这些要素遵循的模式及其交际功能。该研究的数据来自尼日利亚国际英语语料库(ICE)的两个学术子语料库(10个学术写作人文科学和10个学术写作自然科学)的20篇可比较的研究文章。采用AntMover分析软件对数据进行分析。例如,研究表明,学者们经常使用特定类型的修辞手段,这些修辞手段在他们的计划中比其他类型的修辞手段更多样化。该研究对学术写作和读者可理解性具有启示意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Rhetorical Pattern of Argumentation in the Research Article: A Corpus Approach
Academic writing is an argumentative entity carefully crafted to project specific desired knowledge claims. Writers engage in the use of particular rhetorical structure devices to advance arguments and negotiate knowledge in order to persuade and convince an academic audience. This corpus based study examined the rhetorical schemeta (e.g. definition, evaluation, centrality claim) often deployed by Nigerian academics in the cross disciplinary fields of language arts and natural science to advance arguments in research articles. The study aimed at identifying how academic writers project knowledge claims in the research article. Three key objectives underlying this study were to identify elements used in staking claims, determine the patterns such elements follow and their communicative functions. The data for the study were 20 comparable research articles derived from two academic sub-corpora (10 academic writing humanities and 10 academic writing natural sciences) of the International Corpus of English Nigeria (ICE). Analysis of the data was done using AntMover software analyser. The study revealed, for instance, that the academics frequently used specific types of rhetorical devices that varied in their schemes more than some other types. The study has implications for academic writing and reader comprehensibility.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信