Ideology in positivist research articles on issues of teaching English as a foreign language

IF 0.6 Q3 COMMUNICATION Journal of Argumentation in Context Pub Date : 2020-10-28 DOI:10.1075/jaic.19006.kha
Ali Khadivar, Mahmoud Samaie, M. Ahmadian
{"title":"Ideology in positivist research articles on issues of teaching English as a foreign language","authors":"Ali Khadivar, Mahmoud Samaie, M. Ahmadian","doi":"10.1075/jaic.19006.kha","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The research articles(RAs) as the dominant genre of academic writing can be accounted as the sites of reproduction of unequal power relations and dominance. Through critical discourse analysis of epistemological and ontological underpinnings and subsequently methodological aims and values of positivist paradigm as social structures, this article aims to foreground power and ideology stricken latent aspects of empiricist RAs. Research as a social practice mediates between the social structures and the RAs as social events. Textual analysis of practical arguments presented mostly in the pedagogical implications part revealed that the scientific world views manifest themselves as the premises of these arguments. The premises can provide reasons for actions (Searle’s,2010, social ontology theory). The reasons can signify the empiricist interests as the global concerns. They exclude the rival paradigms or ways of understanding the world. These world views maintain the dominance of Western societies on global academic and social discourses.","PeriodicalId":41908,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","volume":"9 1","pages":"283-301"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Argumentation in Context","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.19006.kha","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The research articles(RAs) as the dominant genre of academic writing can be accounted as the sites of reproduction of unequal power relations and dominance. Through critical discourse analysis of epistemological and ontological underpinnings and subsequently methodological aims and values of positivist paradigm as social structures, this article aims to foreground power and ideology stricken latent aspects of empiricist RAs. Research as a social practice mediates between the social structures and the RAs as social events. Textual analysis of practical arguments presented mostly in the pedagogical implications part revealed that the scientific world views manifest themselves as the premises of these arguments. The premises can provide reasons for actions (Searle’s,2010, social ontology theory). The reasons can signify the empiricist interests as the global concerns. They exclude the rival paradigms or ways of understanding the world. These world views maintain the dominance of Western societies on global academic and social discourses.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
英语作为外语教学问题实证主义研究文章中的意识形态
摘要研究论文作为学术写作的主导体裁,是不平等权力关系和支配地位的再现场所。本文通过对实证主义范式作为社会结构的认识论和本体论基础的批判性话语分析,以及随后的方法论目标和价值,旨在揭示经验主义RAs的权力和意识形态潜在方面。作为社会实践的研究在社会结构和作为社会事件的RAs之间起中介作用。对主要在教学意义部分提出的实践论证的文本分析表明,科学世界观是这些论证的前提。前提可以为行动提供理由(Searle’s,2010,社会本体论)。其原因可以表明经验主义的利益作为全球关注。他们排斥敌对的范式或理解世界的方式。这些世界观维持了西方社会在全球学术和社会话语中的主导地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
12.50%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Journal of Argumentation in Context aims to publish high-quality papers about the role of argumentation in the various kinds of argumentative practices that have come into being in social life. These practices include, for instance, political, legal, medical, financial, commercial, academic, educational, problem-solving, and interpersonal communication. In all cases certain aspects of such practices will be analyzed from the perspective of argumentation theory with a view of gaining a better understanding of certain vital characteristics of these practices. This means that the journal has an empirical orientation and concentrates on real-life argumentation but is at the same time out to publish only papers that are informed by relevant insights from argumentation theory.
期刊最新文献
Tweeting fallacies The epistemological orientation of Ottoman argumentation theory and its relation to kalām Review of Wu (2023): Responding to questions at press conferences: Confrontational maneuvering by Chinese spokespersons Review of Serafis (2023): Authoritarianism on the front page: Multimodal discourse and argumentation in times of multiple crises in Greece Covid-19 and public debate over gain-of-function research on potentially pandemic pathogens
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1