非英语人士面临的挑战:影响乌克兰生物科学作者写作的语言间和语言内因素

Q4 Agricultural and Biological Sciences
Mariya Kozolup, Olha Patiyevych, Halyna Kryzhanivska, Olesya Antokhiv-Skolozdra
{"title":"非英语人士面临的挑战:影响乌克兰生物科学作者写作的语言间和语言内因素","authors":"Mariya Kozolup, Olha Patiyevych, Halyna Kryzhanivska, Olesya Antokhiv-Skolozdra","doi":"10.30970/sbi.1703.728","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Nowadays, almost all indexed journals expect submissions in English, which is a great challenge for exophonic authors. Code-switching context, where cross-language effects, especially native language interference, are well distinct, is critical for approaching the dilemma. Navigating the complicated issues of language-related challenges will be impossible without referring to three crucial levels of written production: lexical, syntactic, and textual. In our investigation, we address the nature of potential errors and their inter- and intralingual origins. In particular, we identify and interpret the deviations from Standard English in scholarly research writing of Ukrainian authors in the field of life sciences, exemplify and classify errors into categories based on the type of language misuse. Materials and Methods. Language material for the study comprised 50 manuscripts submitted by authors from Ukraine to the journal “Studia Biologica”. This research is a mixed-method study encompassing descriptive qualitative and descriptive quantitative methods. Content analysis was employed as the data gathering technique. The analysis of texts was focused on tracing deviations from consistent principles and rules of Standard English and linguistic features of English research discourse and encompassed such steps as highlighting the error, cross-checking and stating the deviation, listing and classifying the errors, and tracing a possible connection of the error to authors’ first language interference. Results. The study identified language areas where Ukrainian authors fail to effectively communicate their ideas to the global academic community. At the textual level, the problem areas encompass defective paragraph structure and excessive verbosity. At the syntactic level, the most critical deviations from the language and stylistic norm comprised misuses of word order and clauses, wordy and confusing sentences with multiple issues that hinder the readability of text. The most widespread grammatical mistakes include missing predicates, faulty subject-verb agreement, incorrect forms of the verb, and inappropriate use of articles, pronouns, demonstratives and quantifiers. At the lexical level, the prevalent errors relate to various types of loan translation, but also include improper word choices and poor vocabulary. Orthographic mistakes, though in minority, refer to the spelling of toponyms, capitalisation, switching from American to British orthographic standards and other random spelling errors. Conclusions. An insight into the nature of the analysed deviations suggests the presence of both intra- and interlingual factors that cause mistakes in papers submitted for publication in the field of life sciences. The error analysis can be beneficial in the educational process for both educators and practitioners. Proper understanding of the functional mechanism of the mistakes might increase the awareness of the potential pitfalls and consequently help avoid them. The classification of errors can be adopted in the educational process and contribute to the development of error pedagogy.","PeriodicalId":32510,"journal":{"name":"Biologichni studiyi","volume":"198 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Challenges for non-English speakers: inter- and intralingual factors shaping the writing of Ukrainian authors in biologial sciences\",\"authors\":\"Mariya Kozolup, Olha Patiyevych, Halyna Kryzhanivska, Olesya Antokhiv-Skolozdra\",\"doi\":\"10.30970/sbi.1703.728\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background. Nowadays, almost all indexed journals expect submissions in English, which is a great challenge for exophonic authors. Code-switching context, where cross-language effects, especially native language interference, are well distinct, is critical for approaching the dilemma. Navigating the complicated issues of language-related challenges will be impossible without referring to three crucial levels of written production: lexical, syntactic, and textual. In our investigation, we address the nature of potential errors and their inter- and intralingual origins. In particular, we identify and interpret the deviations from Standard English in scholarly research writing of Ukrainian authors in the field of life sciences, exemplify and classify errors into categories based on the type of language misuse. Materials and Methods. Language material for the study comprised 50 manuscripts submitted by authors from Ukraine to the journal “Studia Biologica”. This research is a mixed-method study encompassing descriptive qualitative and descriptive quantitative methods. Content analysis was employed as the data gathering technique. The analysis of texts was focused on tracing deviations from consistent principles and rules of Standard English and linguistic features of English research discourse and encompassed such steps as highlighting the error, cross-checking and stating the deviation, listing and classifying the errors, and tracing a possible connection of the error to authors’ first language interference. Results. The study identified language areas where Ukrainian authors fail to effectively communicate their ideas to the global academic community. At the textual level, the problem areas encompass defective paragraph structure and excessive verbosity. At the syntactic level, the most critical deviations from the language and stylistic norm comprised misuses of word order and clauses, wordy and confusing sentences with multiple issues that hinder the readability of text. The most widespread grammatical mistakes include missing predicates, faulty subject-verb agreement, incorrect forms of the verb, and inappropriate use of articles, pronouns, demonstratives and quantifiers. At the lexical level, the prevalent errors relate to various types of loan translation, but also include improper word choices and poor vocabulary. Orthographic mistakes, though in minority, refer to the spelling of toponyms, capitalisation, switching from American to British orthographic standards and other random spelling errors. Conclusions. An insight into the nature of the analysed deviations suggests the presence of both intra- and interlingual factors that cause mistakes in papers submitted for publication in the field of life sciences. The error analysis can be beneficial in the educational process for both educators and practitioners. Proper understanding of the functional mechanism of the mistakes might increase the awareness of the potential pitfalls and consequently help avoid them. The classification of errors can be adopted in the educational process and contribute to the development of error pedagogy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32510,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Biologichni studiyi\",\"volume\":\"198 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Biologichni studiyi\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30970/sbi.1703.728\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Agricultural and Biological Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biologichni studiyi","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30970/sbi.1703.728","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Agricultural and Biological Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景。目前,几乎所有的索引期刊都要求用英文投稿,这对母语作者来说是一个巨大的挑战。语码转换的语境中,跨语言的影响,尤其是母语的干扰,是非常明显的,是解决困境的关键。如果不参考书面作品的三个关键层面:词汇、句法和文本,就不可能解决与语言相关的复杂问题。在我们的调查中,我们解决了潜在错误的性质及其语言间和语言内的起源。特别是,我们识别和解释乌克兰作者在生命科学领域的学术研究写作中与标准英语的偏差,举例说明并根据语言误用的类型将错误分类。材料与方法。这项研究的语言材料包括来自乌克兰的作者提交给《生物学研究》杂志的50篇手稿。本研究是一种混合方法研究,包括描述性定性和描述性定量方法。采用内容分析作为数据收集技术。文本分析的重点是找出与标准英语一致的原则和规则以及英语研究语篇的语言特征之间的偏差,包括突出错误,交叉检查和说明偏差,列出并分类错误,以及找出错误与作者的第一语言干扰之间的可能联系。结果。该研究确定了乌克兰作者无法有效地与全球学术界交流他们的想法的语言领域。在文本层面,问题领域包括有缺陷的段落结构和过度的冗长。在句法层面,对语言和文体规范的最严重的偏离包括词序和分句的误用,冗长和混乱的句子以及多种问题,阻碍了文本的可读性。最普遍的语法错误包括缺少谓语、主谓一致错误、动词形式不正确以及冠词、代词、指示词和量词的不当使用。在词汇层面,普遍存在的错误不仅涉及各种借译类型,还包括用词不当和词汇量不足。正字法错误虽然是少数,但指的是地名拼写、大写、从美式正字法标准到英式正字法标准的转换以及其他随机拼写错误。结论。对所分析的偏差的性质的洞察表明,在生命科学领域提交发表的论文中,存在导致错误的语言内和语言间因素。误差分析对教育工作者和实践者在教育过程中都是有益的。正确理解错误的作用机制可能会增加对潜在陷阱的认识,从而有助于避免它们。错误分类可以在教学过程中采用,有助于错误教育学的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Challenges for non-English speakers: inter- and intralingual factors shaping the writing of Ukrainian authors in biologial sciences
Background. Nowadays, almost all indexed journals expect submissions in English, which is a great challenge for exophonic authors. Code-switching context, where cross-language effects, especially native language interference, are well distinct, is critical for approaching the dilemma. Navigating the complicated issues of language-related challenges will be impossible without referring to three crucial levels of written production: lexical, syntactic, and textual. In our investigation, we address the nature of potential errors and their inter- and intralingual origins. In particular, we identify and interpret the deviations from Standard English in scholarly research writing of Ukrainian authors in the field of life sciences, exemplify and classify errors into categories based on the type of language misuse. Materials and Methods. Language material for the study comprised 50 manuscripts submitted by authors from Ukraine to the journal “Studia Biologica”. This research is a mixed-method study encompassing descriptive qualitative and descriptive quantitative methods. Content analysis was employed as the data gathering technique. The analysis of texts was focused on tracing deviations from consistent principles and rules of Standard English and linguistic features of English research discourse and encompassed such steps as highlighting the error, cross-checking and stating the deviation, listing and classifying the errors, and tracing a possible connection of the error to authors’ first language interference. Results. The study identified language areas where Ukrainian authors fail to effectively communicate their ideas to the global academic community. At the textual level, the problem areas encompass defective paragraph structure and excessive verbosity. At the syntactic level, the most critical deviations from the language and stylistic norm comprised misuses of word order and clauses, wordy and confusing sentences with multiple issues that hinder the readability of text. The most widespread grammatical mistakes include missing predicates, faulty subject-verb agreement, incorrect forms of the verb, and inappropriate use of articles, pronouns, demonstratives and quantifiers. At the lexical level, the prevalent errors relate to various types of loan translation, but also include improper word choices and poor vocabulary. Orthographic mistakes, though in minority, refer to the spelling of toponyms, capitalisation, switching from American to British orthographic standards and other random spelling errors. Conclusions. An insight into the nature of the analysed deviations suggests the presence of both intra- and interlingual factors that cause mistakes in papers submitted for publication in the field of life sciences. The error analysis can be beneficial in the educational process for both educators and practitioners. Proper understanding of the functional mechanism of the mistakes might increase the awareness of the potential pitfalls and consequently help avoid them. The classification of errors can be adopted in the educational process and contribute to the development of error pedagogy.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
5 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:604180095
Book学术官方微信