ON THE IMPERSONAL STANCE IN SCIENTIFIC WRITING: A CROSS-DISCIPLINARY AND CROSS-CULTURAL STUDY

Milica Rodić

DOI Number
https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME250125053R
First page
805
Last page
820

Abstract


Аuthorial absence – marked through passive voice and impersonal constructions – is one of the most salient characteristics of scientific writing, contributing to objective writing and implicit expression of authorial stance. This study investigates the quantitative and qualitative uses of impersonal stance markers across three academic and three linguistic communities, based on a corpus of 124 research articles, written by native speakers in the English, Serbian, and German languages, within the scope of articles in linguistics, economics, and technology. Quantitative results reveal remarkable differences in the cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary use of these markers, as they are used most frequently by authors writing in German, and least in English. In addition, their highest overall number is identified in technology articles. These differences are elaborated in a qualitative analysis, highlighting cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary similarities and differences in functional and formal categories of impersonal stance markers.


Keywords

impersonal authorial stance, linguistic markers, scientific writing, authorial absence, impersonal and passive constructions.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Baratta, A. M. (2009). Revealing stance through passive voice. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1406–1421. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.010

Blagojević, S. (2007). Autorovo ograđivanje kao retorička strategija u akademskom diskursu: kontrastivna analiza [Hedging as a rhetoric strategy in academic discourse – a contrastive analysis]. Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta, 37, 125–133.

Blagojević, S. (2008). Metadiskurs u akademskom diskursu [Metadiscourse in scientific discourse]. Niš: Filozofski fakultet.

Charles, M. (2003). ‘This mystery...’: a corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 313–326. doi:10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00048-1

Charles, M. (2006). The Construction of Stance in Reporting Clauses: A Cross-disciplinary Study of Theses. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 492–518. doi:10.1093/applin/aml021

Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts. English and German. Journal of Pragmatics, 11, 211–247.

Đorđević, R. (2007). Gramatika engleskog jezika (Četvrto izdanje) [Grammar of the English language (4th ed.)]. Beograd: Čigoja štampa.

Duden – die Grammatik (10. Auflage) [Duden Grammar (10th ed.)]. (2022). Berlin: Dudenverlag.

Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207–226.

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.

Lachowicz, D. (1981). On the use of passive voice for objectivity, author responsibility and hedging in EST. Science of Science, 2(6), 105–115.

Luukka, M.-R., & Markkanen, R. (1997). Impersonalization as a Form of Hedging. In: R. Markkanen & H. Schröder (Eds.), Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts (pp. 168–187). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.

Malchukov, A., & Ogawa, A. (2011). Towards a typology of impersonal constructions: a semantic map approach. In: A. L. Malchukov & A. Siewierska (Eds.), Impersonal Constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective (pp. 17–54). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Meyer, P. G., Frühwirth, A., Haupt, B., Kohn, A., Marsden, P., & Oelkers, T. (2002). Synchronic English Linguistics: An Introduction. Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language (17th impression). London and New York: Longman.

Reilly, J., Zamora, A., & McGivern, R. (2005). Acquiring perspective in English: the development of stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(2), 185–208. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2004.08.010

Rodić, M. (2024). Authorial stance in scientific writing: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study of markers of authorial stance-taking in linguistics, economics, and technology research articles written in English, Serbian, and German. Doctoral Dissertation. Heidelberg University. doi: 10.11588/heidok.00035895

Stanojčić, Ž., & Popović, Lj. (2004). Gramatika srpskoga jezika (Deveto izdanje) [Grammar of Serbian language (9th ed.)]. Beograd: Zavod za udžbenike i nastavna sredstva.

Tanasić, S. (2014). Sintaksa pasiva u savremenom srpskom jeziku [The syntax of the passive in the modern Serbian language]. Beograd: Beogradska knjiga.

Tarone, E., Dwyer, S., Gillette, S., & Icke, V. (1981). On the use of passive in two astrophysics journal papers. The ESP Journal, 1, 123–140.

Tepavčević, M. (2015). Academic Discourse: A Semantic and Syntactic Analysis. In I. Lakić, B. Živković, & M. Vuković (Eds.), Academic Discourse across Cultures (pp. 180–196). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Weinrich, H. (2005). Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache (Dritte revidierte Auflage) [Text grammar of the German language (3rd revised ed.)]. Hildesheim/Zürich/New York: Georg Olms Verlag.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.22190/TEME250125053R

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


© University of Niš, Serbia
Creative Commons licence CC BY-NC-ND
Print ISSN: 0353-7919
Online ISSN: 1820-7804