结论中普遍性的认知特征:以应用语言学和动力系统工程为例

H. Jalali, Momene Ghadiri, MIna Zehtab
{"title":"结论中普遍性的认知特征:以应用语言学和动力系统工程为例","authors":"H. Jalali, Momene Ghadiri, MIna Zehtab","doi":"10.22099/JTLS.2021.39549.2936","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This comparative corpus-based study was launched to analyze the use of intensifiers and indefinite pronouns indicating generality in two disciplines of applied linguistics (AL) and power system engineering (PSE). Accordingly, four corpora were considered in this study: two corpora representing English articles written by L1-English writers in applied linguistics (L1-English AL corpus) and power system engineering (L1-English PSE corpus), and two other corpora (L1-Persian AL corpus and L1-Persian PSE corpus) belonging to English articles written by L1-Persian writers in the same two disciplines. The findings revealed that the indefinite pronouns were used more frequently than intensifiers in all corpora; on the other hand, the use of qualified-generalization markers in the two L1-persian corpora exceeded that in the L1-English corpora. As for disciplinary differences, the AL conclusions contained more generalization and qualified-generalization stance markers, as compared to their PSE counterparts. The study concludes with some implications regarding the representation of authorial voice.","PeriodicalId":150431,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Teaching Language Skills","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemic Features of Generality in Conclusions: The Case of Applied Linguistics and Power System Engineering\",\"authors\":\"H. Jalali, Momene Ghadiri, MIna Zehtab\",\"doi\":\"10.22099/JTLS.2021.39549.2936\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This comparative corpus-based study was launched to analyze the use of intensifiers and indefinite pronouns indicating generality in two disciplines of applied linguistics (AL) and power system engineering (PSE). Accordingly, four corpora were considered in this study: two corpora representing English articles written by L1-English writers in applied linguistics (L1-English AL corpus) and power system engineering (L1-English PSE corpus), and two other corpora (L1-Persian AL corpus and L1-Persian PSE corpus) belonging to English articles written by L1-Persian writers in the same two disciplines. The findings revealed that the indefinite pronouns were used more frequently than intensifiers in all corpora; on the other hand, the use of qualified-generalization markers in the two L1-persian corpora exceeded that in the L1-English corpora. As for disciplinary differences, the AL conclusions contained more generalization and qualified-generalization stance markers, as compared to their PSE counterparts. The study concludes with some implications regarding the representation of authorial voice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":150431,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Teaching Language Skills\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Teaching Language Skills\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22099/JTLS.2021.39549.2936\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Teaching Language Skills","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22099/JTLS.2021.39549.2936","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

本研究以比较语料库为基础,分析了应用语言学(AL)和电力系统工程(PSE)两个学科中表示一般性的强化语和不定代词的使用。因此,本研究考虑了四个语料库:两个语料库代表应用语言学(L1-English AL语料库)和动力系统工程(L1-English PSE语料库)的l1 -英语作家的英语文章,另外两个语料库(l1 -波斯语AL语料库和l1 -波斯语PSE语料库)属于同一两个学科的l1 -波斯语作家的英语文章。结果表明,在所有语料库中,不定代词的使用频率都高于强化词;另一方面,两个l1 -波斯语语料库中限定泛化标记的使用超过l1 -英语语料库。在学科差异方面,与PSE相比,AL结论包含更多的泛化和限定泛化立场标记。本研究最后对作者声音的表现提出了一些启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Epistemic Features of Generality in Conclusions: The Case of Applied Linguistics and Power System Engineering
This comparative corpus-based study was launched to analyze the use of intensifiers and indefinite pronouns indicating generality in two disciplines of applied linguistics (AL) and power system engineering (PSE). Accordingly, four corpora were considered in this study: two corpora representing English articles written by L1-English writers in applied linguistics (L1-English AL corpus) and power system engineering (L1-English PSE corpus), and two other corpora (L1-Persian AL corpus and L1-Persian PSE corpus) belonging to English articles written by L1-Persian writers in the same two disciplines. The findings revealed that the indefinite pronouns were used more frequently than intensifiers in all corpora; on the other hand, the use of qualified-generalization markers in the two L1-persian corpora exceeded that in the L1-English corpora. As for disciplinary differences, the AL conclusions contained more generalization and qualified-generalization stance markers, as compared to their PSE counterparts. The study concludes with some implications regarding the representation of authorial voice.
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