Abstract
This article explores the role of doubt and certainty in published research articles from eight academic disciplines. Drawing on a computer corpus of 56 research papers and interviews with expert informants, I identify the principal means by which academics modify their statements and the functions such modifications perform in negotiating knowledge claims in a range of areas of intellectual inquiry. The quantitative results reveal the importance of hedges and boosters in academic writing and their wide disciplinary variability. The analysis shows that these devices are responsive to the understandings of social communities, and that their use is one of the systematic means by which academics collaborate to both socially create knowledge and construct their disciplinary worlds. The paper therefore suggests that these differences in rhetorical practices are related to the fact that academics construct knowledge as members of particular disciplinary communities and that their discoursal decisions are influenced by, and embedded in, the epistemological and interactional conventions of their disciplines
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callMore From: Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse
Disclaimer: 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.
