A Functional Investigation of Self-mention in Soft Science Master Theses
محورهای موضوعی : language teaching
سمیه افسری
1
(
Department of English Language, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
)
داوود کوهی
2
(
Department of English Language, Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
)
کلید واژه: Metadiscourse, self-mention, interpersonal resource, master thesis, soft science,
چکیده مقاله :
This study is a quantitative and functional corpus-based study of self-mention in soft science Master theses. One important purpose of this study was to find out the functions of self-mention in soft science Master theses. For this purpose, 20 soft science Master theses in four disciplines (Applied linguistics, Psychology, Geography, and Political sciences), were randomly selected out of the library of four American universities. Five Master theses were selected in each discipline, in a period of seven years (2007-2014). The present study analyzed only the discussion section of these Master theses. The quantitative analysis of the corpus showed that the frequency of the various forms of self-mention in soft science Master theses is quite different. Among the analyzed resources, “I” with the frequency of 49 was the most frequently used first person pronouns. Based on Tang and John’s (1999) taxonomy of the discourse roles of personal pronouns, self- mentions were functionally analyzed. The findings of the functional dimension of the present study showed that the most frequent discoursal role of self-mentions in the corpus was the recounter of research process, whereas the least frequent role was originator.
این تحقیق به بررسی کمی و کارکردی اشاره به خود در پایان نامه های کارشناسی ارشد در علوم نرم می پردازد. یکی از اهداف مهم این تخقیق یافتن کارکرد اشاره به خود در در پایان نامه های کارشناسی ارشد در علوم نرم بود. بدین منظور، بیست پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد در علوم نرم ، در چهار رشته ی دانشگاهی به طور تصادفی از کتابخانه های چهار دانشگاه طراز اول انتخاب شدند. در هر رشته دانشگاهی، پنج مورد در بازه ی زمانی هفت سال (2014-2007) انتخاب شدند. این تحقیق، صرفا بخش مباحثه پایان نامه ها را مورد بررسی قرار داد. بررسی کمی این نوشته جات نشان داد که فراوانی انواع مختلف عناصر اشاره به خود، در علوم نرم کاملا متفاوت می باشد. میان این عناصر، ضمیر "من" با فراوانی 49 ، پر کاربردترین ضمیر اول شخص بود. همچنین این عناصر اشاره به خود، به طور کارکردی، براساس طبقه بندی نقش ضمایر شخصی در کلام Tang and John(1999)، مورد تجزیه وتحلیل قرار گرفتند. یافته های تحقیق حاضر، از بعد کارکردی نشان داد که پر کاربردترین نقش کلامی عناصر اشاره به خود در این نوشته جاتRecounter of research process وکمکاربردترین Originator بود.
Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton.
Basal. A., & Bada. E. (2012). Use of first person pronouns: A corpus based study of journal articles. Energy Education Science and Technology Part B: Social and Educational Studies, 4(3), 1777-1788.
Casanave, C. P. (2003). Looking ahead to more sociopolitically-oriented case study research in L2 Writing scholarship. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12, 85-102.
Chavez Munoz, M. (2013). The “I” in interaction: authorial presence in academic writing.Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Revista de Lingüística y LenguasAplicadas, 8, 49-58.
Harris, Z. (1959). The transformational model of language structure. Anthropological Linguistics, 1(1), 27-29.
Harwood, N. (2005a). Nowhere has anyone attempted ... In this article I aim to do just that. A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatic, 37, 1207-1231. doi: 10.1016/j. pragma
Harwood, N. (2005b). We do not seem to have a theory ... the theory I present here attempts to fill this gap: Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistic, 26, 343- 375. doi:10.1093/applin/ami012
Hyland, K. (1998a). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455.
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207-226. doi: S0889-4906(00)00012-0
Hyland, K. (2002 a). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1091-1112. doi: S0378-2166(02)00035-8
Hyland, K. (2002 b). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56, 351-358.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2008). Persuasion, interaction, and the construction of knowledge: Representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies,8 (2), 1-23.
Hyland, K. (2009).Writing in the disciplines: Research evidence for specificity. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 1(1), 5-22.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177.
Ivanic, R. (1998) Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Kuo, C. H. (1999). The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 121 138.
Martinez, I. A. (2005). Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Language Writing, 14, 174-190.
Swales, J.M & Feak, C.B (2003). Academic writing for graduate student. (2ndedition). The University of Michigan press.
Tang, R., & John. S. (1999). The ‘I’ in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing through the first person pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 23-39. doi: 10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00009-5
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Discourse about discourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93.
Vande Kopple, W. (2002). Metadiscourse, discourse, and issues in composition and rhetoric. In F. Bar-ton & C. Stygall (Eds.), Discourse studies in composition (pp. 91–113). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (2002). Conceptual and communicative functions in written discourse, Applied Linguistics.
