Heteroglossic (dis)engagement and the construal of the ideal readership Dialogic spaces in academic texts

Studies in Corpus Linguistics

Volumn 47, Issue , 2011, Pages 25-45

  Auría, Carmen Pérez Llantada ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Academic writing; Contrastive rhetoric; Dialogism; Heteroglossia; Stance

Indexed keywords

EID: 85105746351     PISSN: 13880373     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/scl.47.05aur     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Askehave, I. & Swales, J. 2001. Genre identification and communicative purpose: A problem and a possible solution. Applied Linguistics 22(2): 195-212.
2. Bazerman, C. 1990. Discourse analysis and social construction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 11: 77-83.
3. Bennett, K. 2007. Epistemicide! The tale of a predatory discourse. The Translator 13(2): 151-169.
4. Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T.N. 1995. Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communities: Cognition, Culture, Power. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5. Biber, D., Connor, U. & Upton, T.A. (eds). 2007. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
6. Breivega, K.R., Dahl, T. & Fløttum, K. 2002. Traces of self and others in research articles: a comparative pilot study of English, French and Norwegian research articles in medicine, economics and linguistics. Applied Linguistics 12(2): 218-239.
7. Carciu, O.M. 2009. An intercultural study of first-person plural references in biomedical writing. Ibérica 18: 71-92.
8. Clyne, M. 1996. Inter-cultural Communication at Work: Cultural Values in Discourse. Cambridge: CUP.
9. Connor, U. 2004. Intercultural rhetoric research: Beyond texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 291-304.
10. Connor, U., Nagelhout, E. & Rozycki, W.V. 2008. Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 169]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
11. Dahl, T. 2004. Textual metadiscourse in research articles: A marker of national culture or of academic discipline? Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1807-1825.
12. Duszak, A. 2005. Between styles and values: An academic community in transition. In Identity, Community, Discourse: English in Intercultural Settings, G. Cortese & A. Duszak (eds), 69-94. Bern: Peter Lang.
13. Ferguson, G. 2007. The global spread of English, scientific communication and ESP: Questions of equity, access and domain loss. Ibérica 13: 7-38.
14. Fløttum, K. 2005. The self and the others: Polyphonic visibility in research articles. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 15(1): 29-44.
15. Gianonni, D. 2008. Medical writing at the periphery: The case of Italian journal editorials. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7(2): 97-107.
16. Hyland, K. 2001. Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic writing. Written Communication 18(4): 549-74.
17. Kerans, M.E. 2002. Close to home: Notes on the post-publication withdrawal of a Spanish research paper. Ibérica 4: 39-54.
18. Mauranen, A. 1993. Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric: A Text-linguistic Study. Bern: Peter Lang.
19. Mauranen, A., Swales, J.M. & Pérez-Llantada, C. 2010. Academic Englishes: A standardised knowledge? In The Routledge Handbook of World Englishes, A. Kirkpatrick (ed.), 634-654. London: Routledge.
20. Pérez-Llantada, C. 2008. Humans vs. machines? A multi-perspective model for ESP discourse analysis in intercultural rhetoric research. ESP Across Cultures 5: 91-104.
21. Pérez-Llantada, C. 2010a. The 'dialectics of change' as a facet of globalisation: Epistemic modality in academic writing. In English for Professional and Academic Purposes, M. Ruiz, J.C. Palmer & I. Fortanet, 25-42. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
22. Pérez-Llantada, C. 2010b. The discourse functions of metadiscourse in published writing: Issues of culture and language. Nordic Journal of English Studies 9(2): 41-68).
23. Rayson, P. & Garside, R. 2000. Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparing Corpora, Held in Conjunction with the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2000). 1-8 October 2000, Hong Kong, 1-6.
24. Sarup, M. 1993. An Introductory Guide to Post-Structuralism and Postmodernism. New York NY: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
25. Scott, M. 1999. Wordsmith Tools. Oxford: OUP.
26. Swales, J.M. 2004. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: CUP.
27. Vázquez Orta, I. & Giner, D. 2008. Beyond mood and modality: Epistemic modality markers as hedges in research articles. A cross-disciplinary study. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 21: 171-190.
28. Vázquez Orta, I. & Giner, D. 2009. Writing with conviction: The use of boosters in modelling persuasion in academic discourses. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 22: 219-237.
29. Vold, E.T. 2006. Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 16(1): 61-87.
30. White, P.R.R. 2003. Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23(2): 259-284.
31. Wilkinson, A. 1991. The Scientist's Handbook for Writing Papers and Dissertations. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice Hall.