语言专家著作中的范例化和重新表述:学科性与个性之间的阐释性元话语

IF 3.1 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Nesrine Triki
{"title":"语言专家著作中的范例化和重新表述:学科性与个性之间的阐释性元话语","authors":"Nesrine Triki","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Exemplification and reformulation are key elaborative strategies that empower clarity and argumentation in academic writing. Most research investigating their use in academic writing argues that writers’ choices in terms of frequency and marker type are conditioned by disciplinary variations and the level of expertise of the writers. This has led to an understanding of discourse communities as being homogeneous groups of novice versus expert writers and of separate soft versus hard disciplines. Through the analysis of 90 research articles and book chapters single-authored by six leading linguists, this study shows that these successful authors deviate from the common practices in linguistics and their choices deviate from each other significantly. However, the data does not reveal any steady increasing or decreasing frequencies in the use of exemplification and reformulation throughout their career stages, which makes it hard to claim that the frequency of using the two discourse functions evolves with experience. The study argues that individuality and style preferences within the same discourse community should be acknowledged as an additional variable affecting discursive choices and calls for a more nuanced understanding of disciplinarity and writing expertise.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":"71 ","pages":"Article 101407"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158524000754/pdfft?md5=ac1fb97520d403a6640fa7717bafbbd7&pid=1-s2.0-S1475158524000754-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exemplification and reformulation in expert linguists’ writings: Elaborative metadiscourse between disciplinarity and individuality\",\"authors\":\"Nesrine Triki\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101407\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Exemplification and reformulation are key elaborative strategies that empower clarity and argumentation in academic writing. Most research investigating their use in academic writing argues that writers’ choices in terms of frequency and marker type are conditioned by disciplinary variations and the level of expertise of the writers. This has led to an understanding of discourse communities as being homogeneous groups of novice versus expert writers and of separate soft versus hard disciplines. Through the analysis of 90 research articles and book chapters single-authored by six leading linguists, this study shows that these successful authors deviate from the common practices in linguistics and their choices deviate from each other significantly. However, the data does not reveal any steady increasing or decreasing frequencies in the use of exemplification and reformulation throughout their career stages, which makes it hard to claim that the frequency of using the two discourse functions evolves with experience. The study argues that individuality and style preferences within the same discourse community should be acknowledged as an additional variable affecting discursive choices and calls for a more nuanced understanding of disciplinarity and writing expertise.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47717,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of English for Academic Purposes\",\"volume\":\"71 \",\"pages\":\"Article 101407\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158524000754/pdfft?md5=ac1fb97520d403a6640fa7717bafbbd7&pid=1-s2.0-S1475158524000754-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/S1475158524000754\",\"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/S1475158524000754","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

例证和重述是学术写作中提高清晰度和论证能力的关键阐述策略。对学术写作中使用这两种策略进行调查的大多数研究认为,写作者对使用频率和标记类型的选择受到学科差异和写作者专业知识水平的制约。这导致人们将话语社区理解为新手与专家写作者、软学科与硬学科的同质群体。本研究通过对六位顶尖语言学家单篇撰写的 90 篇研究文章和书籍章节的分析,发现这些成功的作者偏离了语言学的常规做法,而且他们的选择也有很大的偏差。然而,数据并没有显示他们在整个职业生涯阶段使用例证和重述的频率有任何稳定的增加或减少,因此很难说这两种话语功能的使用频率是随着经验的积累而变化的。本研究认为,同一话语群体中的个性和风格偏好应被视为影响话语选择的额外变量,并呼吁对学科性和写作专长有更细致入微的理解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Exemplification and reformulation in expert linguists’ writings: Elaborative metadiscourse between disciplinarity and individuality

Exemplification and reformulation are key elaborative strategies that empower clarity and argumentation in academic writing. Most research investigating their use in academic writing argues that writers’ choices in terms of frequency and marker type are conditioned by disciplinary variations and the level of expertise of the writers. This has led to an understanding of discourse communities as being homogeneous groups of novice versus expert writers and of separate soft versus hard disciplines. Through the analysis of 90 research articles and book chapters single-authored by six leading linguists, this study shows that these successful authors deviate from the common practices in linguistics and their choices deviate from each other significantly. However, the data does not reveal any steady increasing or decreasing frequencies in the use of exemplification and reformulation throughout their career stages, which makes it hard to claim that the frequency of using the two discourse functions evolves with experience. The study argues that individuality and style preferences within the same discourse community should be acknowledged as an additional variable affecting discursive choices and calls for a more nuanced understanding of disciplinarity and writing expertise.

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