【作者】 李鑫；

【导师】 王松；

【作者基本信息】 哈尔滨工业大学 ， 外国语言学及应用语言学， 2024， 硕士

【副题名】以生命科学领域为例

【摘要】 在全球化不断深入的背景下,越来越多的中国学者开始重视国际传播能力的研究,并希望将其科研成果以学术论文的形式传播到国际,而学术论文的讨论部分在这一过程中发挥着重要作用。学术论文中的讨论部分涉及作者的内部声音及其与学术同行的外部声音的表达,在具体语步中运用合理的话语方式,能够增进学者对彼此科研成果的了解,促进学者之间的交流。基于Martin&White(2005)评价理论和Kanoksilapatham(2004)语步模型,本研究选取了2019-2023年中文母语学者和英文本族语学者发表在生命科学领域国际知名期刊上的英语学术论文各100篇,通过对比研究英文本族语者的学术论文,探讨了中国学者学术论文讨论部分整合结果语步的评价性词块使用特征。本研究主要回答以下三个问题:(1)与英语本族语学者相比,中国学者学术论文讨论部分整合结果语步中评价性词块在总体数量、长度以及分布上有哪些特征?(2)与英语本族语学者相比,中国学者学术论文讨论部分整合结果语步中评价性词块在“态度”“介入”及“级差”三个子系统之下有哪些特征?(3)中英学者学术论文讨论部分整合结果语步中评价性词块使用相同及差异的原因是什么?研究发现,首先,与英语本族语学者相比,中国学者整体存在评价性词块使用不足的倾向;在长度上,中国学者更倾向于使用较小、较短评价性词块;在结构上,英语本族语学者较多使用名词词块和介词词块,而中国学者倾向于使用动词词块和从句词块,中国学者和英语本族语学者对动词词块和名词词块使用比例均最高;在评价性词块分布上,总分布特征显示介入词块占主导,级差词块和态度词块次之。其次,在两个语料库中,评价性词块在三个子系统下分别呈现出相同点和不同点。在态度系统下,两组学者在语阶1,语阶2,语阶3和语阶5倾向使用鉴赏词块,在语阶6倾向使用判断词块;英语本族语学者倾向于在语阶3、语阶5和语阶6使用情感词块,在语阶4使用较多判断词块,而中国学者不使用情感词块。在介入系统下,两组学者在语阶2和语阶4优先考虑收缩词块,在语阶3和语阶5倾向收缩词块和拓展词块的平衡分布;在语阶1和语阶6,英语本族语学者倾向使用收缩词块,而中国学者倾向使用拓展词块。在级差系统下,两组学者都倾向于在每个语阶使用语势词块,但在语阶2和语阶5表现出对量化词块的偏好。在语阶1,与中国学者不同,英语本族语学者倾向于使用量化词块;在语阶3,语阶4和语阶6,英语本族语学者大量使用量化词块,而中国学者倾向于量化词块和强化词块的平衡分布。最后,该研究发现上述相似可以归因于以下三点:(1)语阶功能,(2)中国的英语教育环境,(3)学科特点;而上述差异可以归因于以下三点:(1)中英表达差异,(2)中英文词汇和句法差异,(3)观点表达个体差异。本研究具有一定的理论和现实意义。在理论方面,本研究从词块与语步结合的角度切入,依据相关研究构建评价性词块的分析框架。因此,本研究不仅探讨了中国学者与英语本族语学者的学术论文讨论部分整合结果语步的评价性词块分布情况和使用特征,而且分析了其相同点和不同点及产生的原因,深化了评价理论与词块结合的可能,进而充实了评价理论的理论研究。另一方面,本研究帮助中国学者认识到评价性词块的重要性,为中国学者英语学术论文讨论部分提供一些有用的高频评价性词块。本研究发现对中国高校英文学术论文写作教学也具有一定启示。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the context of globalization,an increasing number of Chinese scholars attach importance to international communication and hope to disseminate their academic ideas and research findings to the world.The discussion section of a research article plays an important role in expressing and sharing their ideas.The discussion section of a research article involves the authorial voice and the external voices of academic peers,and the use of reasonable discourse in specific Steps is helpful for scholars to communicate scientific research findings and disseminate scientific knowledge.On basis of Appraisal Theory of Martin & White(2005)and Move Model of Kanoksilapatham(2004),this study selects 100 English discussion sections of the research articles(the RADs)published in internationally well-known journals in the field of life sciences from 2019 to 2023 by Chinese scholars and native English scholars respectively.The two small corpora are named Chinese Scholar Academic English Corpus(CSAEC)and Native Scholar Academic English Corpus(NSAEC).This study mainly answers the following three questions:(1)Compared with native English scholars,what are the features of the overall number,length and distribution of evaluative lexical bundles used in Consolidating Results Move in the RADs by Chinese scholars?(2)Compared with native English scholars,what are the features of evaluative lexical bundles used in Consolidating Results Move in the RADs by Chinese scholars under the three subsystems of "attitude","engagement" and "graduation" ?(3)What are the reasons for the similarities and differences in the use of evaluative lexical bundles in Consolidating Results Move in the RADs by Chinese scholars and native English scholars ?The results show that: firstly,compared with native English scholars,evaluative lexical bundles used by Chinese scholars is significantly fewer in both total types and frequency.In terms of length,Chinese scholars tend to use smaller and shorter evaluative lexical bundles.In terms of structure,native English scholars use NP-based lexical bundles and PP-based lexical bundles,while Chinese scholars use NP-based lexical bundles and PP-based lexical bundles.Both Chinese and native English scholars use the highest proportion of VP-based lexical bundles and NP-based lexical bundles.The total distribution features of evaluative lexical bundles in the discussion section show that engagement lexical bundles dominate,followed by graduation lexical bundles and attitude lexical bundles.Under attitude system,Step 1,Step 2,Step 3 and Step 5 have a higher proportion of appreciative lexical bundles while Step 6 shows a higher proportion on using judgmental lexical bundles in both the corpora;a number of affect lexical bundles appear in Step 3,Step 5 and Step 6 in NSAEC while no ones in CSAEC;Step 4 in NSAEC shows a higher proportion of judgemental lexical bundles than that in CSAEC.Under engagement system,Step 2 and Step 4 give preference to contractive lexical bundles and both contractive and expansive lexical bundles are more balanced in Step 3 and Step 5 in the two corpora;native English scholars use more contractive lexical bundles while Chinese scholars use more expansive lexical bundles in Step 1 and Step 6.Under graduation system,force lexical bundles occupy the major part in all six Steps in the both corpora and Step 2 and Step 5 show preference to quantification lexical bundles;native English scholars show preference to quantification lexical bundles while Chinese scholars are different in Step 1;quantification lexical bundles are employed greatly in NSAEC while a balanced distribution between quantification and intensification lexical bundles in CSAEC in Step 3,Step 4 and Step 6.Finally,these similarities mentioned above can be attributed to three reasons,mainly the function of the specific Step,characteristics of academic discipline and English education environment in China.And reasons for differences may be related to differences in Chinese and English expressions,differences in vocabulary and syntax,and differences in the expressions of personal opinions.This study have some theoretical and practical implications.As for theoretical significance,from the perspective of the combination of lexical bundles and Move Modal,this study tries to establish an analytical framework of evaluative lexical bundles according to the previous related research,further enriching theoretical studies on the Appraisal Theory.Therefore,this study not only explores the structural and distributive features of evaluative lexical bundles in the Consolidating Results Move in the RADs by Chinese and native English scholars,but more importantly,analyzes the similarities and differences of these features and the reasons behind them.This deepens the possibility of combining Appraisal Theory with lexical bundles,thus fulfilling the theoretical research of Appraisal Theory.As for practical significance,this study helps Chinese scholars attach importance evaluative lexical bundles,and provides some useful high-frequency evaluative lexical bundles for Chinese scholars to achieve the purpose of writing in the RADs.The findings of this study also have implications for English teachers to teach Chinese students academic English writing on tertiary level in China.更多还原