基于语料库的市场营销和经济学研究论文中信号名词研究

IF 3.1 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Hongmiao Gao , Chunmei Lu , Chunyu Hu
{"title":"基于语料库的市场营销和经济学研究论文中信号名词研究","authors":"Hongmiao Gao ,&nbsp;Chunmei Lu ,&nbsp;Chunyu Hu","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Signalling nouns (SNs, hereinafter) as grammatical metaphors serve as effective clues to disciplinary epistemology. Based on self-built corpora, this study explores disciplinary variation in the use of SNs by investigating marketing and economics research articles (RAs, hereinafter). The results show that marketing RAs employ SNs with significantly higher frequency than economics RAs. In terms of grammatical patterns, marketing RAs prefer the “SN+ <em>to</em>-infinitive” pattern, whereas economics RAs tend to use the “SN+ <em>that</em>-clause” structure. Semantically, marketing researchers prefer <em>modal fact</em> and <em>idea</em> nouns to show a greater tendency for writer visibility, greater interest in factors influencing consumer purchasing behaviors, and the more empirical and experimental nature of marketing. In contrast, economics researchers prefer <em>fact</em> and <em>idea</em> nouns to explore the decision-making process of economic agents, and reveal the more hypothetical, econometrical, and abstract reasoning nature of this discipline. The choices of SNs reflect distinct disciplinary epistemologies between marketing and economics. This study sheds new light on the significance of SNs in revealing disciplinary variations, and creates a database of detailing the characteristics of SNs used in both disciplines, which can aid EFL learners and EAP practitioners to better use SNs to construct interpersonal relations with readers in academic writing.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":"67 ","pages":"Article 101318"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158523001042/pdfft?md5=7ea1b9d154a5f28803dc144887ef0760&pid=1-s2.0-S1475158523001042-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A corpus-based study of signalling nouns in marketing and economics research articles\",\"authors\":\"Hongmiao Gao ,&nbsp;Chunmei Lu ,&nbsp;Chunyu Hu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Signalling nouns (SNs, hereinafter) as grammatical metaphors serve as effective clues to disciplinary epistemology. Based on self-built corpora, this study explores disciplinary variation in the use of SNs by investigating marketing and economics research articles (RAs, hereinafter). The results show that marketing RAs employ SNs with significantly higher frequency than economics RAs. In terms of grammatical patterns, marketing RAs prefer the “SN+ <em>to</em>-infinitive” pattern, whereas economics RAs tend to use the “SN+ <em>that</em>-clause” structure. Semantically, marketing researchers prefer <em>modal fact</em> and <em>idea</em> nouns to show a greater tendency for writer visibility, greater interest in factors influencing consumer purchasing behaviors, and the more empirical and experimental nature of marketing. In contrast, economics researchers prefer <em>fact</em> and <em>idea</em> nouns to explore the decision-making process of economic agents, and reveal the more hypothetical, econometrical, and abstract reasoning nature of this discipline. The choices of SNs reflect distinct disciplinary epistemologies between marketing and economics. This study sheds new light on the significance of SNs in revealing disciplinary variations, and creates a database of detailing the characteristics of SNs used in both disciplines, which can aid EFL learners and EAP practitioners to better use SNs to construct interpersonal relations with readers in academic writing.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"volume\":\"67 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101318\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158523001042/pdfft?md5=7ea1b9d154a5f28803dc144887ef0760&pid=1-s2.0-S1475158523001042-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158523001042\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158523001042","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

信号名词作为语法隐喻,是学科认识论研究的有效线索。本研究以自建的语料库为基础,通过调查市场营销和经济学研究文章(以下简称ra),探索社交网络使用的学科差异。结果表明,市场营销人员使用社交网络的频率显著高于经济学人员。在语法模式方面,市场营销专家更倾向于使用“SN+ to-不定式”结构,而经济学专家则倾向于使用“SN+ that-从句”结构。从语义上讲,营销研究者更喜欢使用模态事实和概念名词,因为它们更倾向于作者可见性,对影响消费者购买行为的因素更感兴趣,而且营销更具有经验和实验性质。相比之下,经济学研究者更喜欢使用事实和概念名词来探索经济主体的决策过程,并揭示这一学科更具假设性、计量性和抽象推理性的本质。SNs的选择反映了市场营销和经济学之间不同的学科认识论。本研究揭示了社交网络在揭示学科差异方面的重要意义,并创建了一个详细描述两个学科使用社交网络特征的数据库,这可以帮助英语学习者和EAP从业者在学术写作中更好地使用社交网络构建与读者的人际关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A corpus-based study of signalling nouns in marketing and economics research articles

Signalling nouns (SNs, hereinafter) as grammatical metaphors serve as effective clues to disciplinary epistemology. Based on self-built corpora, this study explores disciplinary variation in the use of SNs by investigating marketing and economics research articles (RAs, hereinafter). The results show that marketing RAs employ SNs with significantly higher frequency than economics RAs. In terms of grammatical patterns, marketing RAs prefer the “SN+ to-infinitive” pattern, whereas economics RAs tend to use the “SN+ that-clause” structure. Semantically, marketing researchers prefer modal fact and idea nouns to show a greater tendency for writer visibility, greater interest in factors influencing consumer purchasing behaviors, and the more empirical and experimental nature of marketing. In contrast, economics researchers prefer fact and idea nouns to explore the decision-making process of economic agents, and reveal the more hypothetical, econometrical, and abstract reasoning nature of this discipline. The choices of SNs reflect distinct disciplinary epistemologies between marketing and economics. This study sheds new light on the significance of SNs in revealing disciplinary variations, and creates a database of detailing the characteristics of SNs used in both disciplines, which can aid EFL learners and EAP practitioners to better use SNs to construct interpersonal relations with readers in academic writing.

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
6.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of English for Academic Purposes provides a forum for the dissemination of information and views which enables practitioners of and researchers in EAP to keep current with developments in their field and to contribute to its continued updating. JEAP publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges in the linguistic, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic description of English as it occurs in the contexts of academic study and scholarly exchange itself.
×
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