Author:
Sinkuniene Jolanta,Melinskas Augustinas
Abstract
This paper aims to investigate frequency and distribution patterns of stance and engagement markers across different science fields in European Research Council funded project proposal abstracts. Three science fields analysed using corpus-based quantitative and qualitative methodology are life sciences, physical sciences and engineering, and social sciences and humanities. A corpus consisting of 90 project proposal abstracts was compiled and each text was examined for stance and engagement markers following Hyland’s (2005b) framework of stance and engagement. The results show that stance markers were used much more frequently than engagement markers in all science fields analysed. However, it was found that compared to writers in social sciences and humanities, authors of life sciences and physical sciences and engineering abstracts tended to use more stance markers which may suggest a greater importance placed on creating a stronger authorial persona. In social sciences and humanities abstracts, on the other hand, engagement markers were more frequent than in the other two fields, which may imply that their texts are slightly more reader focused. The results of the study shed light on competitive funding discourse which is still scarcely researched, as well as reveal strategies and techniques used to create effective scientific discourse.
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference37 articles.
1. Ädel, A. (2006) Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
2. Alghazo, S., Al-Salem, M. N. and Alrashdan, I. (2021) 'Stance and engagement in English and Arabic research article abstracts.' System 103, 102681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102681
3. Becher, T. (1994) 'The significance of disciplinary differences.' Studies in Higher Education 19(2), 151-161. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079412331382007
4. Bordet, G. (2014) 'Influence of collocational variations on making the PhD abstract an effective "would-be insider" self-promotional tool.' In: Bondi, M. and Lorés Sanz, R. (eds) Abstracts in Academic Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang. 131-160.
5. Coates, J. (1983) The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. London and Canberra: Croom Helm. Connor, Connor, U. (2000) 'Variation in rhetorical moves in grant proposals of US humanists and scientists.' Text & Talk 20(1), 1-28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/text.1.2000.20.1.1