【作者】 孙源；

【导师】 付慧敏；

【作者基本信息】 吉林大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2025， 硕士

【摘要】 外壳名词是一种开放式的、由功能定义的抽象名词,在学术写作中广泛存在。摘要是对学术研究的简洁概述,语义传递是否高效直接影响摘要撰写是否成功。外壳名词在英语摘要中被广泛使用,其语义功能具有很大的研究价值。同时,外壳名词作为复杂信息的“概念容器”,在学术语篇中起到浓缩观点、增强连贯性的关键作用。研究新手和专家在摘要中的外壳名词的使用差异,可以准确揭示研究的关键信息和概念,提高摘要的准确性和清晰度,增强学术写作的逻辑性和连贯性。尽管已有研究关注外壳名词在不同语域中的使用,也有学者针对学术论文中的外壳名词进行了分析,但针对摘要这一高度凝练的体裁,特别是新手与专家外壳名词的使用差异的系统性分析仍显不足。本研究结合语步分析,对比新手与专家英语学术论文写作摘要中的外壳名词,旨在分析以下三个研究问题:(1)新手和专家的英语学术论文摘要中,外壳名词频率及分布特征如何?(2)新手和专家的英文学术论文摘要中,外壳名词的词汇语法结构有何异同?(3)新手和专家的英文学术论文摘要中,外壳名词的语义功能存在哪些差异?本研究自建了专家学术摘要语料库(EAAC)与新手学术摘要语料库(NAAC),其中,EAAC语料选自60篇SSCI期刊应用语言学领域学术论文摘要,NAAC语料来源于60篇中国“双一流”院校外国语言学及应用语言学专业硕士论文摘要。本研究采用定量和定性研究方法,整合语料库语言学、语步分析与统计检验,通过词性标注识别外壳名词,并对其频率、词汇语法模式及语义功能进行分析。本研究采用定量分析和定性分析相结合的方法。在定量分析方面,本研究使用软件Tree Tagger对语料库进行标注,然后在Ant Conc3.5.9中输入外壳名词的词汇语法结构,提取出索引行并识别外壳名词;借助MAXQDA软件,依据Santo的五语步结构人工标注语步;随后使用SPSS26.0和对数似然比计算器进行数据统计与分析。在定性分析方面,本研究根据外壳名词语义分类,对两个语料库中外壳名词的数据结果进行分析和讨论。研究发现,新手和专家学术论文摘要中的外壳名词存在显著使用差异,专家在摘要的研究目的和研究方法语步中高频使用外壳名词,而新手在结果和讨论两个语步中较为高频使用外壳名词。在语法层面,专家善用th-N和SN-be/V-cl的词汇语法结构实现名词化,而新手多依赖N-cl结构,体现句法复杂度的差距。在外壳名词实现的语义功能方面,专家与新手在使用事实类、语言类及环境类外壳名词上存在显著差异,专家更频繁地使用事实类名词来突出实证严谨性,语言类名词则帮助他们参与学科对话,环境类名词有助于将研究发现置于方法论框架中。相比之下,新手对这些名词的使用较少,且常用模糊词汇替代。本研究表明,专家在构建学科论证方面展现出显著优势,能够通过策略性运用名词化手段,将实证证据系统整合为概念框架并融入学术对话。其词汇选择体现出对学科认知规范的内化掌控,实现了理论语境化与证据严谨性的有机统一。相比之下,新手在学科规范操作化层面存在显著差距,主要表现为过度依赖语言简化策略和表层信息转述,其论证模式偏重信息传递而弱化批判性分析,未来的研究可进一步扩大语料库的范围,并采用更多样客观的标注方法以探索学术写作中外壳名词的使用情况。更多还原

【Abstract】 Shell nouns serve as conceptual containers for complex information.They are pivotal in condensing ideas and enhancing coherence in academic discourse.Previous research highlights the growing focus on shell nouns in various registers,especially academic writing.Abstracts,which provide a concise summary of research,are a key area where shell nouns play an important role.However,a comprehensive analysis of shell nouns in abstracts,particularly a comparative study between novices and experts,is still insufficient.This study combines move analysis to compare the use of shell nouns in abstracts written by novices and experts,focusing on their frequency and distribution,grammatical patterns and functions.The study compiles the Expert Academic Abstract Corpus(EAAC)from 60 SSCI journal abstracts in applied linguistics(2020-2024)and the Novice Academic Abstract Corpus(NAAC)from 60 master’s theses in foreign linguistics and applied linguistics from Double First-Class universities(2020-2024).It addresses the following research questions:(1)What are the frequency and distribution of shell nouns in English abstracts written by novices and experts?(2)What are the similarities and differences in the lexico-grammatical features of shell nouns in English abstracts written by novices and experts?(3)How do shell nouns function differently in the abstract of novices and experts?This study adopts a mixed-method approach combining quantitative and qualitative methodologies.Tree Tagger 3.0 is used for part-of-speech tagging,and Ant Conc3.5.9 is employed to analyze shell noun distribution.The moves were annotated manually in MAXQDA based on the move framework proposed by Santo.Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS26.0 and Log-likelihood tests to examine potential correlations and significant differences between the two corpora.This study aims to explore the use of shell nouns in academic abstracts by comparing their deployment between novice and expert writers in linguistics,systematically analyzing corpus data from master’s theses and international journal articles to uncover differences in frequency,lexico-grammatical patterns,and functional roles,thereby enhancing understanding of academic writing proficiency and providing insights for improving novice writers’skills in employing shell nouns effectively.Key findings reveal distinct divergences in shell noun between experts and novices in academic abstracts.Experts employ shell nouns with higher frequency in the moves of presenting the research and describing the methodology,utilizing th-N patterns and SN-be/V-cl structures to achieve nominal density and cohesion.Novices,conversely,overuse shell nouns in the moves of summarizing the results and discussing the research,relying heavily on N-cl patterns to explicate propositions verbosely,reflecting a difference in syntactic complexity.In terms of the semantic functions of shell nouns,experts predominantly use factual and circumstantial nouns to emphasize empirical rigor and situate findings within methodological frameworks.Meanwhile,novices underutilize linguistic nouns to engage in disciplinary dialogues,often substituting them with vague terms or omitting contextual explanations altogether.The study reveals that experts are more skilled at constructing disciplinary arguments through strategic use of field-specific nominalizations,effectively synthesizing empirical evidence into conceptual frameworks while engaging scholarly dialogues.Their lexical precision demonstrates internalized mastery of epistemic conventions that integrate theoretical contextualization with evidentiary rigor.Novices exhibit marked gaps in operationalizing disciplinary norms,predominantly relying on linguistic simplification and surface-level reporting that prioritize information transmission over critical analysis.This divergence highlights a fundamental developmental challenge in academic enculturation:transitioning from fragmented knowledge reproduction to contextually-grounded disciplinary cognition.Future research could expand the scope of the corpus,adopt more objective annotation methods,and explore the pragmatic and developmental aspects of shell noun usage in academic writing.更多还原