Exploring Language of Psychology in Journal Articles and Popularized Online Texts: Does Audience Make a Difference?
محورهای موضوعی : نشریه تخصصی زبان، فرهنگ، و ترجمه (دوفصلنامه)
محمودرضا عطایی
1
(دانشیار گروه انگلیسی، دانشگاه خوارزمی)
پروین مشتاقی
2
(کارشناس ارشد، دانشگاه خوارزمی)
کلید واژه: Research Articles, Popularized articles, Lexicogrammatical features, Communicative purpose,
چکیده مقاله :
Scholars have investigated how authors structure their messages according to their communicative purposes and their intended audience. This article examines whether English research articles (RAs) and popularized texts (PTs) as representations of two different communication purposes and target audiences utilize distinct lexicogrammatical features. The corpus comprised English research articles and science popularized texts in psychology. We examined the distribution of lexicogrammatical features indicating interpersonal and social relationships. The findings indicate that the distribution of linguistic features is different across these two genres. The findings promise implications for writers of online psychology texts and call for further research on psychology texts.
پژوهشگران چگونگی ساختار پیامها بر اساس هدف ارتباط و مخاطب مورد نظر را بررسی نموده اند. این مقاله بر آنست تا نشان دهد آیا مقالات پژوهشی به زبان انگلیسی شد ه ی متون عمومی به عنوان نمایندگان دو نوع متفاوت از هدف ارتباطی و دو نوع مخاطب از ویژگ ی های واژگانی - دستوری متفاوتی بهره م ی گیرند یا خیر. متون بررسی شده شا مل مقالات پژوهشی و متون عمومی در زمینه روانشناسی بوده است. با محاسبه توزیع ویژگیهای واژگانی - دستوری نمایشگر روابط اجتماعی و شخصی در این دو نوع متن تفاوت آنها بررسی شد. نتایج حاصل می تواند مورد توجه نویسندگان و پژوهشگران متون روانشناسی قرار گیرد و زمینه ها ی پژوهش بیشتر را فراهم سازد.
Badger, R. (2003). Legal and general: toward a genre analysis of newspaper law reports. English for Specific Purposes, 22(3), pp.249-263.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G. , Conard, S. , Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Calsamiglia, H., & Ferrero, C. L. (2003). Role and Position of Scientific Voices: Reported Speech in the Media. Discourse Studies, 5(2), pp. 147-173.
Chafe, W., & Danielewicz, J. (1987). Properties of spoken and written language. In R. Horowitz, and S. J. Samules (Eds.), Comprehending oral and written language, (pp. 83-113). San Diego,CA: Academic Press.
Christie, F., & Martin, J. R. (Eds.) (1997). Genre and institutions: social processes in the workplace and school. London: Pinter.
Coffin, C. (2001). 'Theoretical approaches to written language - A TESOL perspective'. In Burns, A and C. Coffin (Eds.) Analysing English in a Global Context. London: Routledge
Dunwoody, S. (1982). A question of accuracy. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, PC-25, pp. 196-199.
Fahnestock, J. (1986). Accommodating science: The rhetorical life of scientific facts. Written Communication, 3(3), pp. 275–296.
Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and Power. London: Longman.
Fowler, R. & Kress, G. (1979). Critical Linguistics, In R. Fowler, R. Hodge, G. Kress, and T. Trew (Eds.), Language and Control, (pp.85- 213). London: Routledge.
Garces-Conejos, P., & Sanchez-Macarro, A. (1998). Scientific discourse as interaction: Scientific articles vs. popularizations. In A. S_anchez-Macarro, and R. Carter (Eds.), Linguistic choice across genres, (pp. 173–190). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Gregory, J., and Miller, S. (1998). Science in public: Communication, culture and Credibility. New York: Plenum
Halliday, M. A. K. (1988). On the language of physical science. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features , pp. 162–178. London and New York: Pinter Publishers.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar(Second Edition). London: Arnold.
Halliday, M., A. K., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: Falmer.
Halliday, M. A. K., and Matthiessen, C. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar (Third edition). London: Arnold.
Hilgartner, S. (1990). The Dominant View of Popularization: Conceptual Problems Political Uses, Social Studies of Science, 20 (3), pp. 519–39.
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20 (3), pp. 207–226.
Hyland, k. (2003). Graduates gratitude: the generic structure of dissertation acknowledgements. English for Specific Purposes, 22(3), pp. 303-324.
Hyland, K. (2004). Graduates’ gratitude: the generic structure of dissertation acknowledgements. English for Specific Purposes, 23 (3), pp. 303–324.
Martin, J. R. (1992). English Text: System and structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins
Myers, G. (2003). Discourse Studies of Scientific Popularization: Questioning the Boundaries. Discourse Studies, 5(2), pp. 265–279.
Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. London: University of Wisconsin Press.
Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), pp. 110–135.
O'Donnell, M. (2008). The UAM CorpusTool: Software for corpus annotation and exploration. Proceedings of the XXVI Congreso de AESLA, Almeria, Spain, 3-5 April 2008.
Oliveira, J. M. D., & Pagano, A. S. (2006).The research article and the science popularization article: a probabilistic functional grammar perspective on direct discourse representation. Discourse Studies, 8(5), pp. 627–646.
Parkinson, J. (2002). Popular and academic genres of science: A comparison, with suggestions for pedagogical applications. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Natal, Durban.
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English Language. London: Longman
Rowan, K. E. (1989). Moving beyond the what to the why: Differences in professional and popular science writing. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication, 19, pp.161- 179
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21 (1), pp. 1–17.
Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24 (2), pp. 141–156.
Simpson, R. C., & Swales, J. M. (2001). Corpus linguistics in North America. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Soler, V. (2007). Writing titles in science: An exploratory study. English for Specific Purposes, 26 (1), pp.90–102.
Simpson, P. (1 990). Modality in literary-critical discourse. In W. Nash (Ed.), The writing scholars: Studies in academic discourse, pp. 63-94. Newbury Park: Sage Publication.
Swales, J. M. (1985). Episodes in ESP: A source and reference book on the development of English for science and technology. Oxford: Pergamon.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ure, J. (1971). Lexical density and register differentiation. In G. E. Perren, and J. L. M. Trim (Eds.) Applications of linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
