Evaluation in research article abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences  

Oleh:

Stotesbury, Hilkka

Jenis: Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi: Journal of English for Academic Purposes (Full Text) vol. 2 no. 4 (2003), page 327–341.
Topik: Evaluation; Attitudinal lexis; Research article abstract; Narrative science; Hard science; Interdisciplinary
Fulltext: Stotesbury_Hilkka.pdf (172.47KB)

Isi artikel

Conventional wisdom on abstracts has it - and is strongly supported by the guidelines provided by international abstracting standards [American National Standards for Writing Abstracts (1979) New York: American Standards Institute] as well as guidebooks on academic writing- that the abstract only provides the main points of a study as briefly, concisely and ‘objectively’ as possible. Yet abstracts may include a surprising number of evaluative speech acts. Such evaluations may take place not only implicitly, in metaphoric terms, as e.g. Hunston [Hunston, S. (1993). Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: theory and practice. London: Pinter, 57–73] has shown in her study of evaluation in research articles, but also more explicitly, as realizations of personal judgements by means of attitudinal lexis and modal constructions. This article reports on a study of evaluation in research article abstracts across disciplines. The results of the study revealed differences in the manifestation, number and type of explicit evaluations in the abstracts belonging to different disciplines in the field of the humanities, social and natural sciences. The abstracts also revealed differences in the rhetorical structure of abstracts, in particular, in the human sciences. Such interdisciplinary differences need to be taken into account when teaching abstract writing to students entering the academic discourse community.

Opini Anda

Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!

Kembali