通俗史和学术史中的证据(再)呈现和证据:为自己说话的事实和来源

Kalbotyra Pub Date : 2017-01-27 DOI:10.15388/KLBT.2016.10365
M. Bondi, A. Sezzi
{"title":"通俗史和学术史中的证据(再)呈现和证据:为自己说话的事实和来源","authors":"M. Bondi, A. Sezzi","doi":"10.15388/KLBT.2016.10365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper pivots around the different roles of evidentials and the different ways in which evidence is represented in the discourse of popular and academic history, thereby exploring the dynamics of both genres from a discourse analytical perspective. The analysis is based on two corpora of academic and popular articles on history. In particular, it is focused on those lexico-grammatical resources for tracing the speaker’s source and mode of information that constitute the distinguishing features of the two genres. The analysis shows that the high frequency of saw in popular articles refers to the narrative of history, and to the evidence provided by historical characters and sources, rather than by the speaker. The frequency of the attributor according in academic journal articles, on the other hand, clearly qualifies as evidentiality in the narrative of historiography, and acts as a marker of the importance of sources in historical reasoning. The different frequencies thus seem to be related to the different communicative and social functions of the two genres and to be closely connected with the triptych of narratives (Bondi 2015) involved in historical discourse.","PeriodicalId":30274,"journal":{"name":"Kalbotyra","volume":"69 1","pages":"7-28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence (re)presentation and evidentials in popular and academic history: facts and sources speaking for themselves\",\"authors\":\"M. Bondi, A. Sezzi\",\"doi\":\"10.15388/KLBT.2016.10365\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper pivots around the different roles of evidentials and the different ways in which evidence is represented in the discourse of popular and academic history, thereby exploring the dynamics of both genres from a discourse analytical perspective. The analysis is based on two corpora of academic and popular articles on history. In particular, it is focused on those lexico-grammatical resources for tracing the speaker’s source and mode of information that constitute the distinguishing features of the two genres. The analysis shows that the high frequency of saw in popular articles refers to the narrative of history, and to the evidence provided by historical characters and sources, rather than by the speaker. The frequency of the attributor according in academic journal articles, on the other hand, clearly qualifies as evidentiality in the narrative of historiography, and acts as a marker of the importance of sources in historical reasoning. The different frequencies thus seem to be related to the different communicative and social functions of the two genres and to be closely connected with the triptych of narratives (Bondi 2015) involved in historical discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30274,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Kalbotyra\",\"volume\":\"69 1\",\"pages\":\"7-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Kalbotyra\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15388/KLBT.2016.10365\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kalbotyra","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15388/KLBT.2016.10365","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文围绕证据的不同作用以及证据在大众史和学术史话语中的不同表现方式展开,从而从话语分析的角度探讨了这两种类型的动态。该分析基于两个关于历史的学术和流行文章的语料库。特别是,它关注的是那些用于追踪说话者信息来源和模式的词典语法资源,这些资源构成了这两个流派的区别特征。分析表明,流行文章中的高频率saw指的是对历史的叙述,以及历史人物和来源提供的证据,而不是说话者提供的证据。另一方面,学术期刊文章中属性者的频率显然符合史学叙事中的证据性,并标志着来源在历史推理中的重要性。因此,不同的频率似乎与这两种类型的不同交际和社会功能有关,并与历史话语中的叙事三联画(Bondi 2015)密切相关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Evidence (re)presentation and evidentials in popular and academic history: facts and sources speaking for themselves
The paper pivots around the different roles of evidentials and the different ways in which evidence is represented in the discourse of popular and academic history, thereby exploring the dynamics of both genres from a discourse analytical perspective. The analysis is based on two corpora of academic and popular articles on history. In particular, it is focused on those lexico-grammatical resources for tracing the speaker’s source and mode of information that constitute the distinguishing features of the two genres. The analysis shows that the high frequency of saw in popular articles refers to the narrative of history, and to the evidence provided by historical characters and sources, rather than by the speaker. The frequency of the attributor according in academic journal articles, on the other hand, clearly qualifies as evidentiality in the narrative of historiography, and acts as a marker of the importance of sources in historical reasoning. The different frequencies thus seem to be related to the different communicative and social functions of the two genres and to be closely connected with the triptych of narratives (Bondi 2015) involved in historical discourse.
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
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
19 weeks
期刊最新文献
Metadiscourse in Lithuanian linguistics research articles: A study of interactive and interactional features Poetic and theatrical occasionalisms: Creation of new morphologically complex words by Joseph von Eichendorff, Johann Nepomuk Nestroy, Peter Handke and Arno Schmidt A corpus-based analysis of light verb constructions with MAKE and DO in British English Rytą or ryte? Vakarą or vakare? A corpus analysis of Lithuanian time expressions denoting parts of the day A parallel corpus-based study of the French verb tomber ‘to fall’: Its semantic plurivocity and equivalents in Polish and Lithuanian
×
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