A Contrastive Investigation of Intertextuality in Research Articles Authored by Iranian vs. English Writers in Applied Linguistics
محورهای موضوعی : English Language Teaching (ELT)داود کوهی 1 , نسرین ملانقی زاده 2
1 - Department of English, Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
2 - Department of English, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
کلید واژه: intertextuality, Research Article, Applied Linguistics,
چکیده مقاله :
Academic discourse enables others' voices in a text to be realized through conventionalized citational patterns. However, form amongst a variety of factors, one thing which may influence the way others' voices are textualized is writers' affiliations to different cultures. Following this assumption, the present contrastive study attempted to explore manifest intertextual constructions across the academic articles written by English and Iranian writers in the field of applied linguistics in a ten-year period (2000-2010). The typology of citation elaborated by Swales (1990), and subcategorized by Thompson and Tribble (2001) and Thompson (2005) were explored as the analytical framework of this study. The analysis demonstrated the dominance of different strategies of citations in the two corpora. The findings of this research may be helpful for novice writers and researchers in applied linguistics.
گفتمان علمی این امکان را در اختیار مولفان قرار می دهد که از متون مولفان دیگر در قالبها و الگوهای قراردادی بهره جویند. با اینحال، یکی از عواملی که می تواند بر نحوه استفاده مولفان از متون دیگر تاثیر بگذارد تعلقات فرهنگی مولفان است. بر اساس فرض مذکور، این پژوهش به بررسی موضوع بینامتنیت آشکار در مقالات پژوهشی تالیف شده توسط مولفان ایرانی و انگلیسی در رشته زبان شناسی کاربردی در دوره زمانی سالهای 2000-2010 پرداخته است. در راستای این هدف، الگوی ارائه شده توسط سویلز (1990) که توسط تامپسون و تریبل (2000) و تامپسون (2005) گسترش یافته مورد استفاده قرار گرفته است. نتایج پژوهش حاضر حاکی از استفاده متفاوت مولفان دو گروه از استراتژیهای نقل قول است. نتایج به دست آمده می تواند مورد بهره برداری مولفان و محققان حوزه زبانشناسی کاربردی قرار گیرد.
Charles, M. (2006). Phraseological patterns in reporting clauses used in citation: A corpus-based study of theses in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 25(3), 310-331.
Connors, R. J. (1995). The new abolitionism: Toward a historical background.In J. Petraglia (Ed.).Reconceiving writing, rethinking writing instruction (pp. 3-26). Mahwah, New Jersey: Laurence Earlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Helali-Oskueia, M. &Kuhi, D. (2014). The use of citations in academic writing: Analysis of introduction sections of Iranian and native English master’s theses. Journal of Social Issues & Humanities, 2(3), 216-220.
Hunston, S. & Thompson, G. (2003).Evaluation in text, Authorial stance and the construction of discourse Oxford University Press Inc.: New York.
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 341-367.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic writing. Harlow: Longman.
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in RAs. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207-226.
Jalilifar, A. &Dabbi, R. (2012). Citation in applied linguistics: Analysis of introduction section of Iranian master's theses. Linguistik Online, 7. Available at https://bop.unibe.ch/linguistik online/article/view/252/337.
Mansourizadeh, K., & Ahmad, U. K. (2011). Citation practices among non-native expert and novice scientific writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), 152-161.
Papilova, R. (2014). Interweaving citations in academic discourse by (non)native (non)professionals. AFinLaveSoveltavanKielitieteenTutkimuksia, 6, 99-118.
Petri'c, B. (2007). Legitimate textual borrowing: Direct quotation in L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21(2), 102-117.
Salmi, E., &Dervin, F. (2009).Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural perspectives on academic discourse.Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Salager-Meyer, F.(1999). Referential behavior in scientific writing: Adiachronic study (1810–1995). English for Specific Purposes, 18(3), 279-305.
Salager-Meyer, F., AlcarazAriza, M. A. &Zambrano, N. (2003). The scimitar, the dagger and the glove: intercultural differences in the rhetoric of criticism in Spanish, French and English Medical Discourse (1930–1995).English for Specific Purposes, 22(3), 223–247.
Shaw, P. (1992). Reasons for the correlation of voice, tense, and sentence function in reporting verbs. Applied Linguistics, 13(3), 302-319.
Swales, J. (1990).Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. &Feak, C. (2004).Academic writing for graduate students (2nded). The University of Michigan Press.
The National Commission on Writing in America’s Schools and Colleges. (2003). The neglected “R”. The need for a writing revolution. April 2003. Available at http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/2523
Thomas, S., & Hawes, T. P. (1994).“Reporting verbs in medical journal articles.”English for Specific Purposes, 13, 129- 148.
Thompson, P. (2005). Points of focus and position: Intertextual reference in PhD theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,4, 307–323.
Thompson, G., & Ye, Y. (1991). Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12(4), 365-382.
Thompson, P. (2002). Manifesting intertextuality in the PhD theses.RevistaCanaria De EstudiosIngleses, 44, 97-114.
Thompson, P., &Tribble, C. (2001).Looking at citations: Using corpora in English for academic purposes”. Language Learning & Technology, 5(3), 91-105.
