File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles

TitleWriting without conviction? Hedging in science research articles
Authors
Issue Date1996
PublisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/
Citation
Applied Linguistics, 1996, v. 17 n. 4, p. 433-454 How to Cite?
AbstractHedging is a well-documented feature of spoken discourse as a result of its role in qualifying categorical commitment and facilitating discussion. Its use in academic writing has received less attention, however, and we know little about the functions it serves in different research fields and particular genres. Hedging is a significant communicative resource for academics since it both confirms the individual's professional persona and represents a critical element in the rhetorical means of gaining acceptance of claims. Hedges allow writers to anticipate possible opposition to claims by expressing statements with precision, caution, and diplomatic deference to the views of colleagues. Based on a contextual analysis of 26 articles in molecular biology, this paper argues that hedging in scientific research writing cannot be fully understood in isolation from social and institutional contexts and suggests a pragmatic framework which reflects this interpretive environment.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/130177
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 3.25
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.749
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorHyland, Ken_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-12-23T08:47:36Z-
dc.date.available2010-12-23T08:47:36Z-
dc.date.issued1996en_HK
dc.identifier.citationApplied Linguistics, 1996, v. 17 n. 4, p. 433-454en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0142-6001en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/130177-
dc.description.abstractHedging is a well-documented feature of spoken discourse as a result of its role in qualifying categorical commitment and facilitating discussion. Its use in academic writing has received less attention, however, and we know little about the functions it serves in different research fields and particular genres. Hedging is a significant communicative resource for academics since it both confirms the individual's professional persona and represents a critical element in the rhetorical means of gaining acceptance of claims. Hedges allow writers to anticipate possible opposition to claims by expressing statements with precision, caution, and diplomatic deference to the views of colleagues. Based on a contextual analysis of 26 articles in molecular biology, this paper argues that hedging in scientific research writing cannot be fully understood in isolation from social and institutional contexts and suggests a pragmatic framework which reflects this interpretive environment.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherOxford University Press. The Journal's web site is located at http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/en_HK
dc.relation.ispartofApplied Linguisticsen_HK
dc.titleWriting without conviction? Hedging in science research articlesen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailHyland, K:khyland@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityHyland, K=rp01133en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-0040304512en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-0040304512&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume17en_HK
dc.identifier.issue4en_HK
dc.identifier.spage433en_HK
dc.identifier.epage454en_HK
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats