東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

Hedging and boosting in English and ...

Sanjaya, I Nyoman Suka.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles.

紀錄類型:	書目-語言資料,印刷品 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles./
作者:	Sanjaya, I Nyoman Suka.
面頁冊數:	319 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-03(E), Section: A.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International75-03A(E).
標題:	Language, Linguistics. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3576495
ISBN:	9781303565397

Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles.
Sanjaya, I Nyoman Suka.

Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles. - 319 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-03(E), Section: A.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2013.

The present cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary study was aimed at exploring the similarities and differences between English and Indonesian research articles from the disciplines of applied linguistics and chemistry in terms of frequency of usage of hedges (e.g. perhaps, may) and boosters (e.g. clearly, very). Theoretically, the study was designed to examine whether sociocultural context in which the articles were produced and discipline solely affect the rate of use of hedges and boosters in research articles. To this end, a corpus of 104 research articles (i.e. articles reporting on empirical research) from the two languages and disciplines were analyzed quantitatively with the help of corpus linguistic method. The findings of the study revealed that overall English research articles were more tentative than Indonesian articles, indicated by the more frequent use of hedges found in the former set of articles and the more frequent use of boosters found in the latter set of articles. The within-language comparison conducted showed that scholars from the two disciplines did not use hedges and boosters at comparable rates. This suggested that sociocultural context in which the research articles were produced did not largely influence the frequency of use of hedges and boosters. Likewise, the within-discipline comparison also showed that scholars writing in the two languages did not use hedges and boosters comparably frequently, which suggested that discipline also did not largely affect the frequency of use of the two rhetorical features. It is proposed that frequency of use of hedges and boosters in research articles might be influenced by the cultural models adopted by the individual scholars, and that hedges and boosters had differing situated meanings for different groups of scholars, and that the two rhetorical features were used by the scholars to construct a particular identity.

ISBN: 9781303565397Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018079
Language, Linguistics.

Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles.
LDR:02797nam a2200277 4500 001 1963145
005 20140923134346.5
008 150210s2013 ||||||||||||||||| ||eng d
020 $a 9781303565397
035 $a (MiAaPQ)AAI3576495
035 $a AAI3576495
040 $a MiAaPQ $c MiAaPQ
100 1 $a Sanjaya, I Nyoman Suka. $3 2099324
245 1 0 $a Hedging and boosting in English and Indonesian research articles.
300 $a 319 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 75-03(E), Section: A.
500 $a Adviser: A. Suresh Canagarajah.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Pennsylvania State University, 2013.
520 $a The present cross-cultural and cross-disciplinary study was aimed at exploring the similarities and differences between English and Indonesian research articles from the disciplines of applied linguistics and chemistry in terms of frequency of usage of hedges (e.g. perhaps, may) and boosters (e.g. clearly, very). Theoretically, the study was designed to examine whether sociocultural context in which the articles were produced and discipline solely affect the rate of use of hedges and boosters in research articles. To this end, a corpus of 104 research articles (i.e. articles reporting on empirical research) from the two languages and disciplines were analyzed quantitatively with the help of corpus linguistic method. The findings of the study revealed that overall English research articles were more tentative than Indonesian articles, indicated by the more frequent use of hedges found in the former set of articles and the more frequent use of boosters found in the latter set of articles. The within-language comparison conducted showed that scholars from the two disciplines did not use hedges and boosters at comparable rates. This suggested that sociocultural context in which the research articles were produced did not largely influence the frequency of use of hedges and boosters. Likewise, the within-discipline comparison also showed that scholars writing in the two languages did not use hedges and boosters comparably frequently, which suggested that discipline also did not largely affect the frequency of use of the two rhetorical features. It is proposed that frequency of use of hedges and boosters in research articles might be influenced by the cultural models adopted by the individual scholars, and that hedges and boosters had differing situated meanings for different groups of scholars, and that the two rhetorical features were used by the scholars to construct a particular identity.
590 $a School code: 0176.
650 4 $a Language, Linguistics. $3 1018079
650 4 $a Sociology, Sociolinguistics. $3 1669082
690 $a 0290
690 $a 0636
710 2 $a The Pennsylvania State University. $b Applied Linguistics. $3 2099325
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 75-03A(E).
790 $a 0176
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2013
793 $a English
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3576495