英语学术研究论文中两个领域的认知情态标记

Q2 Arts and Humanities Brno Studies in English Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.5817/bse2019-2-6
Renáta Panocová, Lukáš Lukačín
{"title":"英语学术研究论文中两个领域的认知情态标记","authors":"Renáta Panocová, Lukáš Lukačín","doi":"10.5817/bse2019-2-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper we compare the combinations of epistemic modal markers in research articles in medicine and humanities written in English. In our analysis, we focus on three aspects. First, we look at the distribution of combinations of MODAL AUXILIARY + MODAL ADVERB (emphasizer) used in an epistemic sense in two subdomains of academic writing, ACAD: Medicine and ACAD: Humanities in COCA (Davies, 2008–2018). Second, we investigate the statistical significance of the differences between the two subdomains. Finally, we consider the relevance of the epistemic modal markers in presenting the argumentation line in research articles in medicine and humanities. The results demonstrate the difference in preference in co-occurrences of the selected modal markers in the two distinct academic subcorpora and indicate to what extent they are a significant feature to be included in developing academic writing skills, which is crucial for the effective and convincing communication of research","PeriodicalId":35227,"journal":{"name":"Brno Studies in English","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemic modal markers in two domains of academic research papers in English\",\"authors\":\"Renáta Panocová, Lukáš Lukačín\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/bse2019-2-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In this paper we compare the combinations of epistemic modal markers in research articles in medicine and humanities written in English. In our analysis, we focus on three aspects. First, we look at the distribution of combinations of MODAL AUXILIARY + MODAL ADVERB (emphasizer) used in an epistemic sense in two subdomains of academic writing, ACAD: Medicine and ACAD: Humanities in COCA (Davies, 2008–2018). Second, we investigate the statistical significance of the differences between the two subdomains. Finally, we consider the relevance of the epistemic modal markers in presenting the argumentation line in research articles in medicine and humanities. The results demonstrate the difference in preference in co-occurrences of the selected modal markers in the two distinct academic subcorpora and indicate to what extent they are a significant feature to be included in developing academic writing skills, which is crucial for the effective and convincing communication of research\",\"PeriodicalId\":35227,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brno Studies in English\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brno Studies in English\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/bse2019-2-6\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brno Studies in English","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/bse2019-2-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文比较了英语医学和人文科学研究论文中认知情态标记的组合。在我们的分析中,我们主要关注三个方面。首先,我们研究了在学术写作的两个子领域中,在认知意义上使用情态助动词+情态副词(强调符)的组合分布,即COCA中的ACAD: Medicine和ACAD: Humanities (Davies, 2008-2018)。其次,我们研究了两个子域之间差异的统计显著性。最后,我们考虑了认知模态标记在医学和人文学科研究文章中呈现论证线的相关性。结果表明,在两种不同的学术子语料库中,所选择的情态标记在共现方面的偏好存在差异,并表明它们在多大程度上是培养学术写作技能的重要特征,而学术写作技能对于有效和令人信服的研究交流至关重要
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
Epistemic modal markers in two domains of academic research papers in English
In this paper we compare the combinations of epistemic modal markers in research articles in medicine and humanities written in English. In our analysis, we focus on three aspects. First, we look at the distribution of combinations of MODAL AUXILIARY + MODAL ADVERB (emphasizer) used in an epistemic sense in two subdomains of academic writing, ACAD: Medicine and ACAD: Humanities in COCA (Davies, 2008–2018). Second, we investigate the statistical significance of the differences between the two subdomains. Finally, we consider the relevance of the epistemic modal markers in presenting the argumentation line in research articles in medicine and humanities. The results demonstrate the difference in preference in co-occurrences of the selected modal markers in the two distinct academic subcorpora and indicate to what extent they are a significant feature to be included in developing academic writing skills, which is crucial for the effective and convincing communication of research
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
Brno Studies in English
Brno Studies in English Arts and Humanities-Literature and Literary Theory
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Carnage, medicine and "The Woman Question" : representations of the Crimean war in neo-Victorian fiction J. M. Coetzee’s Foe : a narrative of dislocation through assimilation Functions and distribution of determiners in Old English genitive noun phrases On the adjective/adverb interface: subject-related -ly News translation and national image in the time of Covid-19
×
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