研究论文摘要中的参与资源

Katarina M. Ilić
{"title":"研究论文摘要中的参与资源","authors":"Katarina M. Ilić","doi":"10.21618/fil2225240i","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper investigates engagement resources employed in research article abstracts in the field of English for Specific Purposes. Engagement resources comprise rhetorical strategies by which authors allow for or dismiss alternative viewpoints. Excluding the dialogic space for alternative opinions is termed dialogic contraction, while opening up the possibility for dialogic alternatives is dialogic expansion. These strategies are described within Appraisal theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics. We conducted a corpus-based qualitative analysis on 50 ESP abstracts using Martin and White’s analytical method (Martin and White 2005), in order to investigate the dialogic space occupied by the writer and reader in the sample. All abstracts were written in English and published by Taylor & Francis Group in the period from 2015 to 2020. Engagement resources were identified and explicated in each move structure of abstracts we analysed. The results of the study will show what kind of lexicogrammatical structures are employed in order to achieve the rhetorical effects of dialogic expansion and contraction in ESP research article abstracts. The awareness of the evaluative strategies can help novice ESP academic authors in modeling their own abstracts and academic texts in general.","PeriodicalId":197643,"journal":{"name":"Филолог – часопис за језик књижевност и културу","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"ENGAGEMENT RESOURCES IN ESP RESEARCH ARTICLE ABSTRACTS\",\"authors\":\"Katarina M. Ilić\",\"doi\":\"10.21618/fil2225240i\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper investigates engagement resources employed in research article abstracts in the field of English for Specific Purposes. Engagement resources comprise rhetorical strategies by which authors allow for or dismiss alternative viewpoints. Excluding the dialogic space for alternative opinions is termed dialogic contraction, while opening up the possibility for dialogic alternatives is dialogic expansion. These strategies are described within Appraisal theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics. We conducted a corpus-based qualitative analysis on 50 ESP abstracts using Martin and White’s analytical method (Martin and White 2005), in order to investigate the dialogic space occupied by the writer and reader in the sample. All abstracts were written in English and published by Taylor & Francis Group in the period from 2015 to 2020. Engagement resources were identified and explicated in each move structure of abstracts we analysed. The results of the study will show what kind of lexicogrammatical structures are employed in order to achieve the rhetorical effects of dialogic expansion and contraction in ESP research article abstracts. The awareness of the evaluative strategies can help novice ESP academic authors in modeling their own abstracts and academic texts in general.\",\"PeriodicalId\":197643,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Филолог – часопис за језик књижевност и културу\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Филолог – часопис за језик књижевност и културу\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21618/fil2225240i\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Филолог – часопис за језик књижевност и културу","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21618/fil2225240i","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

本文对专用英语领域的研究论文摘要中所使用的参与资源进行了研究。参与资源包括作者允许或驳回不同观点的修辞策略。排除不同意见的对话空间是对话的收缩,开辟不同意见的对话空间是对话的扩展。系统功能语言学的评价理论描述了这些策略。我们使用Martin and White的分析方法(Martin and White 2005)对50篇ESP摘要进行了基于语料库的定性分析,以调查样本中作者和读者所占据的对话空间。所有摘要均为英文,由Taylor & Francis Group出版,出版时间为2015 - 2020年。在我们分析的摘要的每个移动结构中,确定并说明了参与资源。研究结果将揭示在ESP研究文章摘要中,为了达到对话扩展和收缩的修辞效果,采用了什么样的词汇语法结构。对评价策略的认识可以帮助新ESP学术作者对自己的摘要和学术文本进行建模。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
ENGAGEMENT RESOURCES IN ESP RESEARCH ARTICLE ABSTRACTS
This paper investigates engagement resources employed in research article abstracts in the field of English for Specific Purposes. Engagement resources comprise rhetorical strategies by which authors allow for or dismiss alternative viewpoints. Excluding the dialogic space for alternative opinions is termed dialogic contraction, while opening up the possibility for dialogic alternatives is dialogic expansion. These strategies are described within Appraisal theory of Systemic Functional Linguistics. We conducted a corpus-based qualitative analysis on 50 ESP abstracts using Martin and White’s analytical method (Martin and White 2005), in order to investigate the dialogic space occupied by the writer and reader in the sample. All abstracts were written in English and published by Taylor & Francis Group in the period from 2015 to 2020. Engagement resources were identified and explicated in each move structure of abstracts we analysed. The results of the study will show what kind of lexicogrammatical structures are employed in order to achieve the rhetorical effects of dialogic expansion and contraction in ESP research article abstracts. The awareness of the evaluative strategies can help novice ESP academic authors in modeling their own abstracts and academic texts in general.
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