scholarly journals A cross cultural analysis of conjuncts as indicators of the interaction and negotiation of meaning in research articles

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Povolná
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Negotiation Of Meaning ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Academic Communication

Abstract The role of English as a global lingua franca of academia has become indisputable in the on-going process of internationalization of all scholarship, even though the majority of writers and readers of academic texts are non-native speakers of English. Thus it is questionable whether there is any justification for imposing on international academic communication written in English the style conventions typical of the dominant Anglophone discourse community. Recommendations usually comprise qualities such as clarity, economy, linearity and precision in communication (cf. Bennett, 2015), which can be achieved, among other means, by certain overt guiding signals including conjuncts (Quirk et al., 1985). Accordingly, the aim of this paper is to reveal cross-cultural variation in the use of these important text-organizing means as it is believed that conjuncts can enhance the interaction and negotiation of meaning between the author and prospective readers of academic texts. The paper explores which semantic relations holding between parts of a text tend to be expressed overtly by conjuncts and which semantic classes, such as appositive, contrastive/concessive, listing and resultive conjuncts, contribute most to the interactive and dialogic nature of written academic discourse. The data are taken from research articles (RAs) selected from two journals, one representing academic discourse written by native speakers of English (Applied Linguistics) and the other representing academic texts written in English by Czech and Slovak scholars (Discourse and Interaction).

LEXICAL BUNDLES INDICATING AUTHORIAL PRESENCE: A CROSS-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF NOVICE CZECH AND GERMAN WRITERS’ ACADEMIC DISCOURSE

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Dontcheva-Navratilova
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Important Indicator ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Novice Writers

With the widespread use of English as the lingua franca of academia, there is a growing need of research into how non-native speakers striving to be socialized in target academic discourse communities deal with variation in meaning and organization of academic texts across fi elds, languages and cultures. An important indicator of competent linguistic production is the mastering of the register- and genre-specifi c formulaic expressions termed lexical bundles, which are defi ned as sequences of three or more words with frequent co-occurrence in a particular context (Biber et al. 1999). While recent studies have addressed disciplinary and novice-expert differences in the use of lexical bundles, cross-cultural variation in bundle use remains underexplored. This paper investigates lexical bundles indicating authorial presence in a specialized corpus of Master’s degree theses from the fi elds of linguistics and methodology written by German and Czech university students. The aim of the study is to compare how novice Czech and German authors use lexical bundles indicating authorial presence, to consider whether and to what extent the novice writers have adapted their writing style to the conventions of Anglo- American academic writing, and to discuss the role of the L1 academic literacy tradition and instructions received in writing courses for the modelling of novice writers’ academic discourse. The analysis shows that the variety and frequency of interpersonal bundles in Czech and German novice writers’ discourse do not approximate to the standard of published academic texts in English. The fi ndings also indicate that while the considerable similarities in the way Czech and German novice writers use the target structures for constructing authorial presence refl ect their common roots in the Central European tradition of academic discourse, the divergences may be attributed to a difference in the degree of adaptation to Anglo-American writing conventions.

scholarly journals CROSS-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF CONFERENCE ABSTRACTS

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Povolná
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Research Progress ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Conference Calls ◽  
Cultural Backgrounds ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Novice Writers

Writing an abstract in English, including an abstract for a conference presentation, has become an essential skill for all scholars who intend to present their research to an international academic audience. Now that English has become the dominant language of all academic and research communication, scholars from diff erent language and cultural backgrounds have to master the writing of this research-progress genre (Swales 1990) since otherwise they may risk being refused participation at conferences and publication of their research fi ndings in conference proceedings. The paper analyses the rhetorical structure of 80 conference abstracts with the aim of ascertaining whether there is any cross-cultural variation between abstracts written by Anglophone writers and non-native speakers of English. The latter are represented by researchers from the Czech Republic and some other countries where Slavonic languages are spoken, namely Slovakia, Poland and Ukraine. In addition, the rhetorical organization of the conference abstracts analysed is compared to that usually associated with research article (RA) abstracts. The fi ndings of this corpus-based genre analysis reveal cross-cultural diff erences in the rhetorical organization of conference abstracts (CAs) and provide evidence that CAs and RA abstracts diff er with regard to both number and types of moves. The study also provides recommendations for future conference calls and novice writers who intend to publish in English as an additional language.

ON SOME VARIATION IN THE USE OF DISCOURSE MARKERS BY CZECH AND GERMAN STUDENTS OF ENGLISH

2013 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 41
Author(s):  
Renata Povolná
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Discourse Markers ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Discourse Communities ◽  
Academic English ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Coherence Relations ◽  
Contrastive Discourse Markers ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Novice Writers

Since recent studies on academic English have shown considerable cross-cultural variation in texts written by non-native speakers (Clyne 1987, Ventola & Mauranen 1991, Čmejrková & Daneš 1997, Duszak 1997, Chamonikolasová 2005, Stašková 2005, Mur- Dueňas 2008, Wagner 2011, Dontcheva-Navratilova 2012, Povolná 2012), the paper investigates a corpus of diploma theses written by Czech and German students of English with the aim of fi nding out how novice non-native writers from different discourse communities (Swales 2004) use causal and contrastive discourse markers (DMs) associated with hypotactic and paratactic relations in order to build coherence relations (Taboada 2006) in academic texts. In addition, the author attempts to fi nd out whether there is any variation in the preferences of novice writers depending on the different fi elds of study, i.e. diploma theses written in the areas of linguistics and methodology, and whether the use of selected DMs by Czech and German students differs from the writing habits of native speakers of English.

scholarly journals Cross-Cultural Variation in the Use of Hedges and Boosters in Academic Discourse

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 163-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Dontcheva-Navratilova
Keyword(s):  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Rhetorical Structure ◽  
Rate Distribution ◽  
The Cross ◽  
Target Readership ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract Hedges and boosters are important metadiscoursal devices contributing to the construal of persuasion in academic discourse as they enable academic writers to distinguish facts from opinions, evaluate the views of others and convey a different degree of commitment to their assertions (cf. Hyland 1998a, Hyland 2004, 2005). This study explores cross-cultural variation in the use of lexical hedges and boosters in the academic discourse of non-native writers. The study is carried out on a specialized corpus of linguistics research articles published in the international journal Applied Linguistics and the national Czech English-medium journal Discourse and Interaction. The main purpose of the cross-cultural investigation is to analyze variation in the rate, distribution and choice of hedges and boosters across the rhetorical structure of research articles in order to shed light on ways in which Anglophone and Czech writers express different degrees of commitment in their assertions when striving to persuade their target readership to accept their views and claims.

scholarly journals On the Pedagogical Relevance of Strategic Competence

1986 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 53 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahereh Paribakht
Keyword(s):  
Native Speakers ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Esl Students ◽  
Negotiation Of Meaning ◽  
Identification Task ◽  
Strategic Competence ◽  
Adult Esl ◽  
Communication Situations ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Linguistic Material

This paper is a report on a study concerned with the identification of target language linguistic material essential for the learners' use of communication strategies (CS) in survival situations. Subjects were 40 adult ESL students and 20 native speakers of English. A concept-identification task was used to elicit these speakers' CS. Given that the taxonomy of CS developed in the study was based on the type of knowledge utilized by the speakers, it was possible to identify the semantic, as well as the typical syntactic patterns, required for their implementation. These linguistic manifestations of CS can serve as a basis for developing L2 teaching materials with the aim of preparing L2 learners to function successfully in problematic communication situations. An appropriate sequence for the presentation of such material is proposed based on the frequency of their application in the negotiation of meaning by the speakers in this study.

scholarly journals Syntactic Complexity in EFL and Native Learners' Undergraduate Thesis Abstracts

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Murniati Murniati
Keyword(s):  
English Language ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
The United States ◽  
Syntactic Complexity ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Complex Sentences ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Academic Year ◽  
Undergraduate Thesis

<p>This research aims to find syntactic complexity of the abstracts in the undergraduate thesis written down by university learners in Indonesia and the ones written down by native speakers of English. The characteristics of syntactic complexity produced by Indonesian learners and the learners who are the native speakers should also be analyzed. It is possible to extend the type of syntactic complexity found in academic texts. In the end, those extensions should be characterized the English language used by Indonesian learners. The data is gained through downloading the abstracts of the undergraduate thesis in the academic year of 2015-2016 from the UBM English Department alumni database. The data regarding the abstracts written down by the native speakers is downloaded from the reputable universities in The United States of America. After that, the data is analyzed by making used of the syntactic analyzer by Lu &amp; Ai (2015). The results shows that the Indonesian learners tend to write more complex sentences and use subordination in the abstracts. The native speakers, on the other hands, tend to write longer sentences with longer T-Unit and clauses. They also tend to write complex nominal in the abstracts. The number of coordination used is similar between the ones written down by Indonesian learners and native speakers of English. <strong></strong></p><strong>Keywords:</strong> syntactic complexity, syntactic structures, undergraduate thesis, Indonesian learners

Context-dependency and impoliteness in intercultural communication

2017 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Istvan Kecskes
Keyword(s):  
Intercultural Communication ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Context Dependency ◽  
Shared Knowledge ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Actual Meaning ◽  
Interpretation Process

AbstractThere has been a great deal of research on impoliteness focusing on one particular language or cross-cultural differences between languages (e.g. Bousfield 2008; Bousfield and Locher 2008; Culpeper 2005, 2009; Haugh 2007, 2011; Kienpointner 1997). However, much less attention has been paid to impoliteness in intercultural communication in which all or some speakers communicate in a language other than their native tongue.On the basis of research on L1s and cross-cultural analysis of impoliteness, most of the researchers (e.g. Culpeper 2005, 2009, Haugh 2011; Watts 2003) in the field seem to agree that no act is inherently impolite, and that such an interpretation depends on the context or speech situation that affects interpretation (see Culpeper 2009). The paper will examine this context-dependency in intercultural communication where interlocutors cannot always rely on much existing common ground, shared knowledge and conventionalized context but need to co-construct most of those in the communicative process. It will be argued that limited shared knowledge and common ground may restrict the interpretation process to the propositional content of utterances, which may result in an increase in the actual situational context-creating power of utterances. Recent research (e.g. Abel 2003; Bortfeld 2002, 2003; Cieślicka 2004, 2006; House 2002, 2003; Kecskes 2007) demonstrated that in intercultural communication the most salient interpretation for non-native speakers is usually the propositional meaning of an utterance. So interpretation generally depends on what the utterance says rather than on what it actually communicates. As a consequence of their taking propositional meaning for the actual meaning of an utterance, interlocutors are sometimes unaware of impoliteness conveyed implicitly or through paralinguistic means.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document