Procrustes' recipe: Hedging and positivism

English for Specific Purposes

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2000, Pages 175-187

  Salager Meyer, Françoise ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347563484     PISSN: 08894906     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00022-8     Document Type: Note

References (57)

1. Banks, D. (1998). Book review. ESP France Newsletter, 13(4), 3.
2. Beaufrère-Bertheux, C. (1997). L'anglais de la recherche médicale: une grande diversité. ASp, 15/18, 223-238.
3. Borges, J. L. (1974). Obras completas. Buenos Aires: Emecé Editores.
4. Brown, J. D. (1988). Understanding research in second language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
5. Clemen, G. (1997). The concept of hedging: origins, approaches, definitions. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 235-249). Berlin: de Gruyter.
6. Collins, H. (1985). Changing order: replication and induction in scientific practice. California: Beverly Hills.
7. Comte, A. (1830-42). Cours de philosophie positive. Paris, 6 volumes.
8. Crismore, A., & Vande, Kopple W. J. (1997). The effects of hedges and gender on the attitudes of readers in the United States toward material in a science textbook. In A. Duszak, Culture and style in academic discourse (pp. 223-253). Mouton de Gruyter.
9. Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical aspects. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 271-289.
10. Crompton, P. (1998). Identifying hedges: definitions or divination. English for Specific Purposes, 17(3), 303-313.
11. Crosnier, E. (1997). Français vs. anglais: histoire d'une rencontre avec penalty. . . et sans retour. ASp, 15/18, 55-74.
12. Dilthey, W. (1959). In Gesammette Schriften (pp. 83-86). Stuttgart Gottingen. Bd. I.
13. Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, M. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multidisciplinary approach. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
14. Feyerabend, P. K. (1970). Against method. Outline of an anarchist theory of knowledge. In M. Radner, & S. Winokur, Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science, vol. vol. IV (pp. 17-130). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
15. Freud S. (1917). General introduction to psycho-analysis. In Principles of psychology. (First published in 1890). In The great ideas. Encyclopaedia Britanica, William Benton. 19th printing 1.971. Volume 54.
16. Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. Cambridge: CUP.
17. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1997). On the writing of science and the science of writing: hedges in science texts and elsewhere. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 151-168). Berlin: de Gruyter.
18. Hanson, N. R. (1958). Patterns of discovery. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19. Horkheimer, M. (1974). Théorie traditionnelle et théorie critique. Paris: Gallimard.
20. Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
21. James W. (1890). Principles of psychology. (First published in 1890). In The Great Ideas. Encyclopaedia Britanica, William Benton. 19th printing 1.971. Volume 53.
22. Kaplan, R., & Grabe, W. (1991). The fiction in science writing. In H. Shcröder, Subject-oriented texts: languages for specific purposes and text theory (pp. 199-218). Berlin: de Gruyter.
23. Kant, I. (1781). The critique of pure reason. London: MacMillan (1st edition 1781. Translated by Kemp Smith).
24. Kreutz, H. (1997). Some observations on hedging phenomena and hedging devices as regional markers in the speech of young East Germans. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 208-234). Berlin: de Gruyter.
25. Kreutz, H., & Harres, A. (1997). Some observations on the distribution and function of hedgings in German and English academic writing. In A. Duszak, Culture and style in academic discourse (pp. 181-203). Mouton de Gruyter.
26. Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
27. Lakatos, Y. (1971). History of science and its rational reconstructions. In R. C. Buck, & R. S. Cohen, Boston studies in the philosophy of science, vol. vol. VIII (pp. 91-136). Dordrecht, Holland: Reidel.
28. Lewin, B. (1998). Hedging: form and function in scientific research texts. In I. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, & J. F. Coll, Genre studies in English for academic purposes, vol. 9 (pp. 89-108). Filología: Universitat Jaume I. Col.lecció Summa.
29. Luuka, M. R., & Markkanen, R. (1997). Impersonalization as a form of hedging. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 170-187). Berlin: de Gruyter.
30. Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (1997). Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts. Berlin: de Gruyter.
31. Martin, J. (1997). Du bon usage des corpus dans la recherche sur le discours spécifique. ASp, 15/18, 75-85.
32. Mathis, G. (1997). Stylistique et discours scientifique. ASp, 15/18, 157-185.
33. Mauranen, A. (1997). Hedging in language revisers' hands. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 115-134). Berlin: de Gruyter.
34. Meyer, P. G. (1997). Hedging strategies in written academic discourse: strenghtening the argument by weakening the claim. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 21-42). Berlin: de Gruyter.
35. Motta-Roth, D. (1998). Discourse analysis and academic book reviews: a study of text and discipline cultures. In I. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, & J. F. Coll, Genre studies in English for academic purposes, vol. 9 (pp. 29-59). Filología, Spain: Universitat Jaume I. Col.lecció Summa.
36. Mulkay, M. (1979). Science and the sociology of knowledge. London: Unwin & Allen.
37. Namsaraev, V. (1997). Hedging in Russian academic writing in sociological texts. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 64-82). Berlin: de Gruyter.
38. Nikula, S. (1997). Interlanguage view on hedging. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 188-208). Berlin: de Gruyter.
39. Percebois, J. (1996). Anglais de spécialité en ŕconomie de l'énergie: analyse du discours et pédagogie générique. ASp, 11(14), 103-121.
40. Perrin, M. (1995). Les langues de spécialité, facteur de progrès pédagogique. In G. Budin, Multilingualism in specialist communication (pp. 47-85). Vienna: Termnet.
41. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
42. Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 149-170.
43. Salager-Meyer, F. (1998a). Language is not a physical object. English for Specific Purposes, 17(3), 295-303.
44. Salager-Meyer, F. (1998b). From the gentleman's courtesy to the scientist's caution: a diachronic study of hedges in academic writing (1810-1995). In I. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, & J. F. Coll, Genre studies in English for academic purposes, vol. 9 (pp. 133-173). Filología: Universitat Jaume I. Col.lecció Summa.
45. Salager-Meyer F. (1998c). Professional conflict in French and English medical discourse (1810-1995). Paper presented at the 6th International Pragmatic Conference. Reims. August.
46. Salager-Meyer F. (1999). Le discours aigre-doux de la querelle scientifique: ŕtude de l'évolution des confrontations académiques. ASp (in press).
47. Scholes, R. J. (1998). The case against phonemic awareness. Journal of Research in Reading, 27(3), 177-188.
48. Skelton, J. (1997). How to tell the truth in 'The British Medical Journal': patterns of judgments in the 19th and 20th centuries. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 42-63). Berlin: de Gruyter.
49. St. Augustine, (published in 1952) The confessions. Chicago.
50. Stanovich, K. E. (1995). How research might inform the debate about early reading acquisition. Journal of Research in Reading, 18(2), 87-105.
51. Toulmin, S. (1961). Foresight and understanding. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
52. Varttala, T. (1999). Remarks on the communicative functions of hedgings in popular scientific and specialist research articles on medicine. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 177-200.
53. Vassileva, I. (1997). Hedging in English and Bulgarian academic writing. In A. Duszak, Culture and style in academic discourse (pp. 203-223). Mouton de Gruyter.
54. Ventola, E. (1997). Modalization: probability -an exploration into its role in academic writing. In A. Duszak, Culture and style in academic discourse (pp. 157-181). Mouton de Gruyter.
55. Widdowson, H. (1998). Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly, 52(4), 705-716.
56. Wills, W. (1997). Hedging in expert language reviews. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and discourse. Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 134-150). Berlin: de Gruyter.
57. Zambrano N. (1999). Confrontaciones académicas en el discurso científico escrito en inglés y en frances: un estudio diacrónico (1810-1995). MA Thesis. Universidad de Los Andes. Mérida. Venezuela.