An exploration of metadiscourse usage in book review articles across three academic disciplines: a contrastive analysis of corpus-based research approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 126 (4) ◽  
pp. 2885-2902
Author(s):  
Amare Tesfie Birhan
1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-241
Author(s):  
Mahmood Messkoub
Keyword(s):  

1991 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 374-378
Author(s):  
Geoff Hodgson
Keyword(s):  

1993 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 227-231
Author(s):  
Thomas R. Michl
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Yury Garmaev ◽  
Kim Dmitry

The authors analyze the history of the emergence and development of the corresponding criminological research and special criminalistic theory of overcoming the counteraction to criminal prosecution (preliminary investigation) to research its present condition, examine its potential for improving the effectiveness of fighting crime while strictly observing the rights and lawful interests of citizens. The authors use systemic, interdisciplinary and situational approaches, the methods of comparative jurisprudence and a number of sociology methods to update the current (to speak conventionally, accusatory) paradigm of the theory. The essence of this update (the new concept) is to ensure the adversarial nature of the judicial process, as well as in other types of court procedures, for the prosecution and the defense. The presented theory concept includes the idea that counteraction to prosecution could be not only unlawful and amoral, but also lawful and ethically admissible. The motives of persons involved in this counteraction could include their subjective confidence in their total or partial innocence, as well as the unlawful and (or) amoral, in that persons opinion, actions of some law enforcement employees. These clauses are developed through the authors own definition of counteraction and the classification of its acts. They have formulated six theses that form the basis of the updated paradigm of the theory. The authors conclude that the presented research approach, the concept reflected in the didactics of university law schools, could instill in students and practitioners a deep and stable personal motivation to study not only the corresponding academic disciplines, but the whole criminalistics and criminology as well as other theories and disciplines of the anti-criminal cycle. The suggested approach and the practical recommendations based on it could be used in the conceptually new syllabus (and subjects) already taught in the leading Russian universities, like «Counteracting Crime», «Criminalistic Support of Business Security», «Tactics of Protection against Unlawful Actions of Government Employees», «Tactics of Interaction between Business Structures and Controlling Bodies».


Kalbotyra ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (70) ◽  
pp. 60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuliana Diani

Drawing on a corpus-based approach, this paper explores the mitigation strategies used to soften criticism in English and Italian book review articles in the disciplinary field of linguistics. Most corpus-based analyses on academic criticism have focused on the use and function of politeness strategies in English academic review genres, mainly book reviews. Recently, an increasing number of studies on academic book reviews have examined the issue from a cross-cultural perspective. This study attempts to contribute to the area of cross-cultural research on reviewing practices by exploring how criticisms are managed in a somewhat neglected review genre in academic discourse studies – the book review article. Criticisms will be identified on the basis of their lexico-grammatical features and further categorized into “direct” and “mitigated” (Itakura & Tsui 2011, 1369). The mitigation strategies identified in both language corpora mainly involve the use of sequences of speech acts such as praise-criticism, criticism-praise, criticism-suggestion, praise-suggestion, and hedging. However, their distributions reveal differences in the two languages. While praise is prominently used in both English and Italian book review articles, Italian-speaking linguistics reviewers employ a lower proportion of hedges than their English-speaking colleagues and are more likely to opt for suggestions as a form of indirect criticism. The results demonstrate that linguistics reviewers writing in English and Italian deploy a considerable range of linguistic devices when expressing mitigated criticism of peers. Their use and distribution are discussed in relation to national/cultural writing conventions, but also differences between “large” and “small” disciplinary cultures (Holliday 1999). Some implications for EAP learners and practitioners are also considered.


2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (4) ◽  
pp. 327
Author(s):  
Rachel Wexelbaum

A wide variety of academic disciplines have recognized “food studies” as a legitimate area of study. Sociologists, historians, psychologists, nutritionists, media studies scholars, scientists, and culinarians—to name a few—have all published authoritative works in the realm of food studies. Because food studies encompasses such a broad range of topics, and the language of food studies varies from discipline to discipline, publication of a print food studies encyclopedia is an ambitious undertaking. Dr. Ken Albala, world-renowned food studies scholar, has taken up this challenge.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document