Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge

Text

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 349-382

  Hyland, Ken ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

Academic writing; Discourse analysis; Hedges and boosters; Social construction.

Indexed keywords

EID: 1542490942     PISSN: 01654888     EISSN: 18607349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping Written Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press
2. Becher, T. (1989). Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Inquiry and the Cultures of Disciplines. Milton Keynes, SRHE/Open University Press
3. Biglan, A. (1973). The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology 57 (3): 204-213
4. Bizzell, P. (1992). Academic Discourse and Critical Consciousness. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
5. Bloor, T. (1996). Three hypothetical strategies in philosophical writing. In Academic Writing: Intercultural and Textual Issues, E. Ventola and A. Mauranen (eds.), 19-13. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
6. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
7. Bruffee, K. (1986). Social construction: Language and the authority of knowledge. A bibliographical essay. College English 48: 773-779
8. Channell, J. (1990). Precise and vague quantities on writing in economics. In The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse, W. Nash (ed.), 95-117. Newbury Park, CA.: Sage
9. Cohen, M. and Manion, L. (1985). Research Methods in Education. London: Croomhelm
10. Dubois, B. L. (1987). 'Something in the order of around forty to forty four': Imprecise numerical expressions in biomedical slide talks. Language and Society 16: 527-541
11. Gilbert, G. and Mulkay, M. (1984). Opening Pandora's Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientific Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
12. Gosden, H. (1993). Discourse functions of subject in scientific research articles. Applied Linguistics, 14 (1): 56-75
13. Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a Social Semiotic: The Sociological Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold
14. Halliday, M. (1988). On the language of physical science. In Registers of Written English, M. Ghadessey (ed.), 162-178. London: Pinter
15. He, A. (1993). Exploring modality in institutional interactions: Cases from academic counselling encounters. Text 13 (2): 503-528
16. Holmes, J. (1983). Speaking English with the appropriate degree of conviction. In Learning and teaching languages for communication: Applied linguistics perspectives, C. Brumfit (ed.), London: British Association of Applied Linguistics
17. - (1984). Modifying illocutionary force. Journal of Pragmatics 8: 345-365
18. - (1988). Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks. Applied Linguistics 9: 20-44
19. - (1990). Hedges and boosters in women's and men's speech. Language and communication 10 (3): 185-205
20. Hyland, K. (1996a). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics 17 (4): 433-454
21. - (1996b). Talking to the academy: Forms of hedging in science research articles. Written Communication 13 (2): 251-281
22. - (1997). Scientific claims and community values: Articulating an academic culture. Language and Communication 16(1): 19-32
23. - (1998a). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
24. - (1998b). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 437-455
25. - (1999). Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In Writing: Texts. Processes and Practices. C. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds.), 99-121. London: Longman
26. Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997). Hedging in L1 and L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6 (2): 183-206
27. Kolb, D. A. (1981). Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In The Modern American College, A. Chickering (ed.), 232-255. San Francisco: Jossey Bass
28. Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
29. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979). Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills: Sage
30. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics. Vols I and 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
31. MacDonald, S. (1994). Professional Academic Writing in the Humanities and Social Sciences. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press
32. Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10: 1-35
33. Nash, W. (1990). Introduction: The stuff these people write. In The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse, W. Nash (ed.), 8-30. Newbury Park, CA.: Sage
34. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G. and Svarlvik, J. (1972). A Grammar of Contemporary English. Harlow, Essex: Longman
35. Rorty, R. (1979). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press
36. Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes 13 (2): 149-170
37. Skelton, J. (1988). Comments in academic articles. In Applied Linguistics in Society, P. Grunwell (ed.). London: C1LT/BAAL
38. Skelton, J. (1997). The representation of truth in academic medical writing. Applied Linguistics 18 (2): 121-140
39. Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press