“在这篇文章中,我认为……”:在学术法律博客文章中构建议论文

IF 0.7 4区 文学 Q3 CULTURAL STUDIES European Journal of English Studies Pub Date : 2021-09-02 DOI:10.1080/13825577.2021.1988256
G. Diani
{"title":"“在这篇文章中,我认为……”:在学术法律博客文章中构建议论文","authors":"G. Diani","doi":"10.1080/13825577.2021.1988256","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This study is based on the analysis of scholarly law blog posts written by British and American law professors commenting on legal cases relating to US and UK court decisions. The aim is to investigate how law professor bloggers construct their argumentative discourse while communicating with their scholarly legal community. The analysis reveals interesting argumentative strategies and language features which shed light on the argumentative dimension of the genre under examination. More specifically, it emerges that reporting a judge’s or a court’s decision on legal cases is a point of departure for the blogger’s development of his/her argumentative discourse. The overall findings show that bloggers are responding to individual purpose when they engage in the discourse of scholarly legal blogging: while offering personal opinion on legal cases, they try to introduce context of knowledge discussion within the discipline.","PeriodicalId":43819,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of English Studies","volume":"25 1","pages":"369 - 384"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘In this post, I argue that…’: constructing argumentative discourse in scholarly law blog posts\",\"authors\":\"G. Diani\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13825577.2021.1988256\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This study is based on the analysis of scholarly law blog posts written by British and American law professors commenting on legal cases relating to US and UK court decisions. The aim is to investigate how law professor bloggers construct their argumentative discourse while communicating with their scholarly legal community. The analysis reveals interesting argumentative strategies and language features which shed light on the argumentative dimension of the genre under examination. More specifically, it emerges that reporting a judge’s or a court’s decision on legal cases is a point of departure for the blogger’s development of his/her argumentative discourse. The overall findings show that bloggers are responding to individual purpose when they engage in the discourse of scholarly legal blogging: while offering personal opinion on legal cases, they try to introduce context of knowledge discussion within the discipline.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43819,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of English Studies\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"369 - 384\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of English Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13825577.2021.1988256\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CULTURAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of English Studies","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13825577.2021.1988256","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CULTURAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

摘要本研究基于对英美法学教授撰写的学术法律博客文章的分析,这些博客文章评论了与美国和英国法院判决有关的法律案件。目的是调查法学教授博客作者在与学术法律界交流时如何构建他们的议论文。该分析揭示了有趣的议论文策略和语言特征,从而揭示了所研究体裁的议论文维度。更具体地说,报道法官或法院对法律案件的裁决是博主发展其辩论话语的出发点。总体研究结果表明,博客作者在参与学术法律博客的话语时,是对个人目的的回应:在对法律案件发表个人意见的同时,他们试图在学科中引入知识讨论的背景。
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
‘In this post, I argue that…’: constructing argumentative discourse in scholarly law blog posts
ABSTRACT This study is based on the analysis of scholarly law blog posts written by British and American law professors commenting on legal cases relating to US and UK court decisions. The aim is to investigate how law professor bloggers construct their argumentative discourse while communicating with their scholarly legal community. The analysis reveals interesting argumentative strategies and language features which shed light on the argumentative dimension of the genre under examination. More specifically, it emerges that reporting a judge’s or a court’s decision on legal cases is a point of departure for the blogger’s development of his/her argumentative discourse. The overall findings show that bloggers are responding to individual purpose when they engage in the discourse of scholarly legal blogging: while offering personal opinion on legal cases, they try to introduce context of knowledge discussion within the discipline.
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
1.00
自引率
20.00%
发文量
17
期刊最新文献
Reading transformations: from David Garnett’s Lady into Fox (1922) to Sarah Hall’s “Mrs Fox” (2013) The mind is all the animals it has attended: limitrophy and porous borders in the poetry of Robert Bringhurst Root identity–relation identity in Inga Simpson’s Understory: a life with trees Deconstructing human-canine relations in Richard Adams’s The Plague Dogs Hospitality and liminality in the time of the Anthropocene: Jenn Ashworth’s Fell
×
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