Abstract
In this paper a cross-disciplinary study of the use of epistemic markers as hedging rhetorical strategies in research articles in English is carried out. Based on computer readable data, and combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the article argues that the use of modal expressions can be better explained as reflecting the strategies of hedging used by writers for dealing with the social conditions involved in the event of publishing an article, which is addressed to different discourse communities. Three different disciplines (Marketing, Biology and Mechanical Engineering) belonging to the soft knowledge vs. hard knowledge discipline continuum are investigated here. Our analysis of hedging in these three different disciplines has revealed, not only that there are differences in the occurrence of hedges in the RAs selected, but also that these differences depend on the nature of the data used for the research in each discipline. Each discipline tries to fulfil social needs in different areas. The sociological features of each discipline may be shaping the discourse in their RAs differently. This is reflected in the varied presence of hedging devices in Marketing, Biology and Mechanical Engineering research articles.
Highlights
This article explores the role of epistemic modality markers in research articles taken from three different disciplines: Marketing, Biology and Mechanical Engineering
Based on computer readable data, and combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the article argues that the use of modal expressions can be better explained as reflecting the strategies of hedging used by writers for dealing with the social conditions involved in the event of publishing an article, which is addressed to different discourse communities
Three different disciplines belonging to the soft knowledge vs. hard knowledge disciplines continuum will be investigated here
Summary
This article explores the role of epistemic modality markers in research articles taken from three different disciplines: Marketing, Biology and Mechanical Engineering. These can be studied as the most common realizations of two rhetorical strategies, whose dominant function is the qualification of the writer’s commitment (boosters) or lack of commitment to the truth of a proposition (hedges). Based on computer readable data, and combining quantitative and qualitative methods, the article argues that the use of modal expressions can be better explained as reflecting the strategies of hedging used by writers for dealing with the social conditions involved in the event of publishing an article, which is addressed to different discourse communities. The use of hedging techniques in research articles has normally been investigated by looking at grammatical and lexical units, such as modal auxiliaries, epistemic verbs and adjectives, epistemic nouns or adverbial expressions of probability, possibility and necessity, which together are often referred to as modal meanings, or more modality
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
