Scientific discourse and contrastive rhetoric: The Creating a Research Space (CARS) model

European Science Editing

Volumn 36, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 66-69

  Salager Meyer, Françoise ^a  

^a UNIVERSIDAD DE LOS ANDES   (Venezuela)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959806819     PISSN: 02583127     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Grabe W, Kaplan RB. Theory and practice of writing. London: Longman, 1996.
2. Connor U. Contrastive rhetoric. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
3. Connor U. New directions in contrastive rhetoric. TESOL Quarterly 2002;36(4):493-510.
4. Sa'adeddin MA. Text development and Arabic-English negative interference. Applied Linguistics 1989;10(1):36-51.
5. Evangelisti A, ed. Academic discourse in Europe. Rome: Bulzoni, 1989.
6. Hinds J. Reader vs. writer responsibility: a new typology. In: Connor U, Kaplan RB, eds. Writing across languages: analysis of L2 texts. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987.
7. Hinds J. Inductive, deductive, quasi inductive: expository writing in Japanese, Korean, Chinese and Thai. In: Connor U, Johns AM, eds. Coherence in writing: research and pedagogical perspectives. Alexandria, VA: TESOL, 1990: 87-110.
8. Hyland K. Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 1998.
9. Hyland K. Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 1998;18(3):349-382.
10. Salager-Meyer F. Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes 1994;13:149-170.
11. Salager-Meyer F. Language is not a physical object. English for Specific Purposes 1998;17(3):295-303.
12. Salager-Meyer F. Procrustes' recipes: hedging and positivism. English for Specific Purposes 2000;19(2):175-189.
13. Thompson G, Ye Y. Evaluation of the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics 1991;12:365-382.
14. Ventola E, Mauranen A. Non-native writing and native revisiting of scientific articles. In: Ventola E, ed. Functional and systemic linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 1991:457-492.
15. Mauranen A. Cultural differences in academic rhetoric. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1993.
16. Mauranen A. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: metatext in Finnish-English economic texts. English for Specific Purposes 1993;12:3-22.
17. Salager-Meyer F, Alcaraz Ariza MA, Zambrano N. The scimitar, the dagger and the glove: intercultural differences in the rhetoric of criticism in Spanish, French and English medical discourse (1930-1995). English for Specific Purposes 2003;22:223-247.
18. Swales J. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
19. Swales J. Research genres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004:141.
20. Ford A, Talley NJ, Spiegel MR, Foxx-Orenstein AE, Schiller L, Quigley EMM, Moayyedi P. Effect of fibre, antispasmodics, and peppermint oil in the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2008;337:1388-1391.
21. Driver JA, Djoussé L, Logroscino G, Gaziano JM, Kurth T. Incidence of cardiovascular disease and cancer in advanced age: prospective cohort study. BMJ 2008;337:1400-1403.
22. Fredrickson KM, Swales J. Competition and discourse community: introductions from Nysvenka Studier. In: Gunnarsson BL, Linell P, Nordberg B, eds. Text and talk in professional contexts. Uppsala: ASLA, 1994:9-22.
23. Lindeberg AC. Promotional rhetorical steps and linguistic signalling in research articles in three disciplines. In: Lundqvist L, Pitch H, Qvistgaard J, eds. LSP: identity and interface research. Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School, 1998:689-698.
24. Hyland K. Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness 2000;9:4.
25. Latour B, Woolgar S. Laboratory life. The social contruction of scientific facts. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1979.
26. Knorr-Cetina K. The manufacture of knowledge. Oxford: Pergamon, 1981.
27. Duszak A. Academic discourse and intellectual styles. Journal of Pragmatics 1994;21:291-313.
28. Golebiowski Z. Rhetorical approaches to scientific writing. An English-Polish contrastive study. Text 1998;18:67-102.
29. Golebiowski Z. Application of Swales' model in the analysis of research papers by Polish authors. International Review of Applied Linguistics 1999;37:231-247.
30. Yakhontova T. 'Selling' or 'telling'? The issue of cultural variation in research genres. In: Flowerdew J, ed. Academic discourse. Harlow: Pearson Education, 2002: 216-232.
31. Yahontova T. Titles of conference presentations abstracts: a cross cultural perspective. In: Ventola E, Shalom C, Thompson S, eds. The language of conferencing. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 2002:277-300.
32. López GS. Article introductions in Spanish. A study in comparative rhetoric [MSc dissertation]. Birmingham: University of Aston, 1982.
33. Najjar H. Arabic as a research language: the case of the agricultural sciences [PhD dissertation]. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 1992.
34. Ahmad UK. Research article introductions in Malay: rhetoric in an emerging research community. In: Duszak A, ed. Culture and styles in academic discourse. Berlin: Moutin de Gruyter, 1997:273-303.
35. Harwood N, Hadley G. Demystifying institutional practices: critical pragmatism and the teaching of academic writing. English for Specific Purposes 2004; 23(4):355-377.
36. Moreno AI. Researching into English for research publication purposes from an applied intercultural perspective. In: Ruiz-Garrido MF, Palmer-Silveira JC, Fortanet-Gómez I, eds. English for professional and academic purposes. Amsterdam: Rodopi (in press)
37. Burgess S, Fumero Pérez MC, Díaz Galán A. Mismatches and missed opportunities? A case study of a non-English speaking background research writer. In: Carretero M, Hidalgo Downing L, Lavid J, et al, eds. A pleasure of life in words: a Festschrift for Angela Downing. Madrid: Universidad Complutense de Madrid, 2005:283-304.
38. Mur Dueñas P. A contribution to the intercultural analysis of metadiscourse in business management research articles in English and in Spanish: a corpus-driven approach [doctoral dissertation]. Zaragoza: Universidad de Zaragoza, 2007.
39. Martín-Martín P. A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes 2003;22:25-43.
40. Taylor G, Chen T. Linguistic, cultural and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics 1991;12:319-336.
41. Scollon R. Contrastive rhetoric, contrastive poetics or perhaps something else? TESOL Quarterly 1997;31:352-358.
42. Harrison B. Japanese research papers: the advisability of translators performing a proactive editing role. European Science Editing 2002;104-107.