英语it - clet和法语C - clet在研究语篇中的作用

Charlotte Bourgoin
{"title":"英语it - clet和法语C - clet在研究语篇中的作用","authors":"Charlotte Bourgoin","doi":"10.4000/DISCOURS.9366","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite extensive work on cleft constructions, little attention has been given to their functions in specialised discourse. Using a collection of 40 research articles from the KIAP corpus, this study aims at establishing the role of clefts in English and French research discourse. The quantitative analysis reveals a higher frequency of clefts in French. The study also shows that clefts can help authors increase semantic continuity, reinforce the structure of articles and increase discursive coherence. Clefts thus facilitate the readership’s understanding of the argumentation. From a contrastive viewpoint, the study of the different authorial roles – writer, researcher, arguer, quoter, presenter – reveals that English-speaking researchers tend to be more reader-oriented than French-speaking ones. This study thus gives new insight into the way argumentation is built in research articles and paves the way for further research on the differences between French and English research discourse.","PeriodicalId":51977,"journal":{"name":"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Role of the English It-Cleft and the French C’est-Cleft in Research Discourse\",\"authors\":\"Charlotte Bourgoin\",\"doi\":\"10.4000/DISCOURS.9366\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Despite extensive work on cleft constructions, little attention has been given to their functions in specialised discourse. Using a collection of 40 research articles from the KIAP corpus, this study aims at establishing the role of clefts in English and French research discourse. The quantitative analysis reveals a higher frequency of clefts in French. The study also shows that clefts can help authors increase semantic continuity, reinforce the structure of articles and increase discursive coherence. Clefts thus facilitate the readership’s understanding of the argumentation. From a contrastive viewpoint, the study of the different authorial roles – writer, researcher, arguer, quoter, presenter – reveals that English-speaking researchers tend to be more reader-oriented than French-speaking ones. This study thus gives new insight into the way argumentation is built in research articles and paves the way for further research on the differences between French and English research discourse.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51977,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4000/DISCOURS.9366\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discours-Revue de Linguistique Psycholinguistique et Informatique","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/DISCOURS.9366","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

尽管对裂缝结构进行了大量的研究,但对其在专业语篇中的作用却关注甚少。本研究利用KIAP语料库中的40篇研究文章,旨在确定裂隙在英语和法语研究语篇中的作用。定量分析表明,法语中出现断裂带的频率较高。研究还表明,裂缝可以帮助作者增加语义连续性,加强文章结构,提高语篇连贯。因此,裂缝有助于读者对论证的理解。从对比的角度来看,对不同作者角色——作者、研究者、论证者、引语者、演讲者——的研究表明,讲英语的研究者比讲法语的研究者更倾向于以读者为导向。因此,本研究为研究论文中的论证方式提供了新的见解,并为进一步研究法语和英语研究话语的差异铺平了道路。
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
The Role of the English It-Cleft and the French C’est-Cleft in Research Discourse
Despite extensive work on cleft constructions, little attention has been given to their functions in specialised discourse. Using a collection of 40 research articles from the KIAP corpus, this study aims at establishing the role of clefts in English and French research discourse. The quantitative analysis reveals a higher frequency of clefts in French. The study also shows that clefts can help authors increase semantic continuity, reinforce the structure of articles and increase discursive coherence. Clefts thus facilitate the readership’s understanding of the argumentation. From a contrastive viewpoint, the study of the different authorial roles – writer, researcher, arguer, quoter, presenter – reveals that English-speaking researchers tend to be more reader-oriented than French-speaking ones. This study thus gives new insight into the way argumentation is built in research articles and paves the way for further research on the differences between French and English research 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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊最新文献
Référence multimodale dans les narrations d’enfants : les gestes servent-ils à clarifier les expressions référentielles ambiguës ? Subject Clitics and the Dynamics of Writing: A Perspective Based on Bursts « Be proud, and loud » : marqueurs de fierté dans les discours oraux de drag queens Ancrage spatial d’un nouveau référent dans le récit en français et en chinois : perspective informationnelle et organisation discursive Anaphoric Distance in Oral and Written Language: Experimental Evidence
×
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