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 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).

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.

scholarly journals Lexical Bundles Ending in that in Academic Writing by Czech Learners and Native Speakers of English

2021 ◽  
pp. 33-69
Author(s):  
Gabriela Brůhová ◽  
Kateřina Vašků
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
Native Speakers ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Native Speakers Of English ◽  
Novice Writers ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Professional Writers ◽  
Shell Nouns

The aim of this paper is to explore how Czech learners of English use lexical bundles ending in that in their academic texts in comparison with novice and professional L1 authors. The analysis is based on three corpora (VESPA-CZ, BAWE and our own cor- pus of papers published in academic journals). The results suggest that Czech learners of English do not use a more limited repertoire of lexical bundles ending in that than pro- fessional writers. However, there are differences between the groups studied, especially in the range of various shell nouns used in nominal bundles. Novice writers, both L1 and L2, use bundles ending in that to express stance more frequently than professional writers.

scholarly journals Paradigmatic influences on lexical bundles in research articles in the discipline of education

Corpora ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-263
Author(s):  
Duygu Candarli ◽  
Steven Jones
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Structural Characteristics ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
Novice Writers ◽  
English Academic Writing

Lexical bundles are pervasive in English academic writing; however, little scholarly attention has been paid to how quantitative and qualitative research paradigms influence the use of lexical bundles in research articles. In order to investigate this, we created two equal-size corpora of research articles in the discipline of education. We examined four-word lexical bundles in terms of their structural characteristics and discourse functions in the quantitative and qualitative research articles published in international English-medium journals. We attribute intra-disciplinary variations in the use of lexical bundles to the knowledge-making practices that are specific to quantitative and qualitative research articles. This paper provides further evidence that the research article is not a unitary construct. The results have implications for academic writing, and corpus building and design in academic discourse. One of the key implications of this study is that L2 novice writers need to take into account the influences of research paradigms on the use of lexical bundles when writing research articles for English-medium journals in the discipline of education.

scholarly journals A Comparative Study of Saudi and International Journals of Applied Linguistics: The Move–Bundle Connection Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-30
Author(s):  
Basim Alamri
Keyword(s):  
Academic Writing ◽  
English Language ◽  
Applied Linguistics ◽  
English For Academic Purposes ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Writing For Publication ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Raising Awareness ◽  
Novice Writers ◽  
Rhetorical Structures

The present study implemented a genre-based approach to analyze the rhetorical structure of English language research articles (RAs): specifically, the Introduction-Methods-Results-Discussion-Conclusion (I-M-R-D-C) sections. Next, lexical bundles (LBs) associated with patterns of moves were identified by applying a corpus-driven approach. The study analyzed two corpora of 30 RAs purposely selected from 16 peer-reviewed journals of applied linguistics published in Saudi Arabia and internationally during the years of 2011-2016. First, a genre-based approach was used to identify the move structures of RAs through analyzing different RA sections by different models. Next, lexical bundles associated with each identified move in each IMRDC section were analyzed using a corpus-driven approach, based on structural and functional taxonomies. The study findings showed that both corpora share similarities and differences related to rhetorical structures and lexical bundles. These findings have pedagogical implications for novice writers, graduate students, and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) instruction, including raising awareness of rhetorical structures and LBs in academic writing for publication, which could help produce more successful publishable research articles.

Translating authorial presence

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 104-128
Author(s):  
Galina Shleykina ◽  
Frances Junnier
Keyword(s):  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
First Person ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Lingua Franca ◽  
Grammatical Form ◽  
Research Article ◽  
Linguistic Code ◽  
Pragmatic Equivalence

Abstract Of increasing interest in cross-linguistic variation in academic discourse is the way in which writers use first-person pronouns (FPPs) to promote their agency. While research has shown that language specific socio-cultural, rhetorical and lexico-grammatical factors impact levels of self-concealment vs. self-promotion, less attention has been paid to the ways in which translated texts are sensitive to these discoursal traditions. We address this gap by analyzing frequency, rhetorical use, and grammatical form of FPPs in a corpus of research article (RA) abstracts in biology written by Russian and international researchers in two peer-reviewed bilingual journals. Three subcorpora were analyzed: (i) L1 Russian abstracts; (ii) the same abstracts translated into English; (iii) abstracts by international biologists in English from the same journals. The FPP tokens were identified and their frequency, rhetorical use, and forms were compared. The results show significant differences between the corpora which supports previous findings on cross-cultural variation in authorial presence in research genres. The results also suggest that the translation not only transfers L1 linguistic code but also adds a stronger emphasis on author agency. Implications for translating RAs into English as an exercise in linguistic, cognitive, and pragmatic equivalence as well as for accommodating discourse conventions of English as a lingua franca of science are explored.

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.

Logical markers in L1 (Spanish and English) and L2 (English) Business research articles

2009 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pilar Mur Dueñas
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Business Research ◽  
Intercultural Studies ◽  
Academic Texts ◽  
Specific Discipline ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Academic Genres ◽  
L1 English

A great number of cross-cultural analyses of academic written genres have shown that there are cultural differences in the use of certain rhetorical and metadiscoursal features in texts produced in English and other languages. Intercultural studies of L2 (English) academic texts are more scarce. They tend to point out that these texts occupy a mid-position between those produced in the two L1s. The present research analyses logical markers in L1 research articles (RAs) in Spanish and English and L2 RAs in English in a specific discipline to try to unveil whether the use made of these metadiscoursal features by Spanish scholars in their English RAs resembles that in L1 English or Spanish texts. The use of additive, contrastive and consecutive logical markers is found to be rather different in the English and Spanish RAs and, in turn, their use in the English RAs written by Spanish scholars resembles that in RAs written by Anglo-American peers. Thus, no transfer process seems to occur from L1 (Spanish) RAs into L2 (English) texts. It is hypothesized that some rhetorical and metadiscoursal features may be more likely than others to undergo this transfer in academic genres, a hypothesis which shall be confirmed by future research. The possible reasons for these results are also discussed as well as their pedagogical implications.

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 CROSS-CULTURAL VARIATION IN THE EXPRESSION OF PERSUASIVE POWER IN THE GENRE OF TECHNICAL MANUALS: THE CASE OF DIRECTIVES

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Renata Povolná
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Analysis ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Corpus Analysis ◽  
Cultural Variation ◽  
Technical Device ◽  
Persuasive Strategies ◽  
Technical Writers ◽  
Persuasive Power ◽  
Technical Communicators ◽  
Rhetorical Questions

The paper provides a cross-cultural analysis of selected linguistic realizations of persuasion in technical manuals as typical representatives of technical discourse. It aims to identify differences and similarities between the ways persuasive power is expressed in this type of specialized discourse in English and Czech L1 texts. The data comprises manuals to various technical devices and amounts to slightly more than 200,000 words. This specialized corpus (15 manuals in English and 15 in Czech) is assumed to enable the comparison of the ways in which technical communicators express persuasion. The investigation, which is conducted from the perspectives of corpus analysis and discourse analysis, focuses on the ways in which the interactive and dynamic process of persuasion is explicitly manifested: 1. directly (i.e. using directives expressed by imperatives of full verbs, modals of obligation, necessity, prohibition, and predicative adjectives expressing the writer’s judgement of the necessity to perform an action) and 2. indirectly (i.e. using other language means than directives, such as other modals than those related to obligation, necessity or prohibition, conditional clauses, rhetorical questions). The findings are expected to be relevant and applicable in the education domain to raise technical writers’ awareness of directives as useful persuasive strategies suitable for the production of effective well-written technical manuals since their quality including the appropriate degree of persuasiveness can influence prospective consumers to make a purchase of a particular technical device.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document