1887
image of Shell nouns as register-specific discourse devices
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This article provides a corpus-based investigation into shell nouns. Shell nouns perform a variety of referential functions and express speaker stance. The investigation was motivated by the fact that past research in this area has been primarily based on written texts. Very little is known about the use of shell nouns in speech. The study used the ICE-GB corpus of contemporary British English and investigated cataphoric shell nouns complemented by appositive -clauses across fine-grained spoken and written registers. It has revealed that the deployment of shell nouns is governed by the principle of register formality definable in terms of contextual configurations of the Field-Tenor-Mode complex rather than the mode of production. Additionally, the study has uncovered the frequent use of a small core set of shell nouns common across speech and writing. Hence it argues that shell nouns are part and parcel of spoken and written discourse and that they pertain more to grammar than to lexis.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19059.fan
2021-04-09
2021-05-10
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Benítez-Castro, M.-Á.
    (2014) Formal, syntactic, semantic and textual features of English shell nouns: A manual corpus-driven approach. InA. A. Sintes & S. V. Hernández (Eds.), Diachrony and Synchrony in English Corpus Linguistics (pp.171–203). Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Benítez-Castro, M.-Á., & Thompson, P.
    (2015) Shell-nounhood in academic discourse: A critical state-of-the-art review. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(3), 378–404. 10.1075/ijcl.20.3.05ben
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.20.3.05ben [Google Scholar]
  3. Charles, M.
    (2007) Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the Noun that pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 203–218. 10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  4. Dong, M., & Fang, A. C.
    (2019) Shell nouns as grammatical metaphor revealing disparate construals: Investigating the differences between British English and China English based on a comparable corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. doi:  10.1515/cllt‑2018‑0047
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2018-0047 [Google Scholar]
  5. Dong, M., Fang, A. C., & Qiu, X.
    (2020) Shell nouns as grammatical metaphor in knowledge construal: Variation across science and engineering discourse. Lingua. doi:  10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102946
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102946 [Google Scholar]
  6. Flowerdew, J., & Forest, R. W.
    (2015) Signalling Nouns in English: A Corpus-based Discourse Approach. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139135405
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139135405 [Google Scholar]
  7. Francis, G.
    (1986) Anaphoric Nouns. English Language Research, University of Birmingham.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (1994) Labelling discourse: An aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion. InM. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in Written Text Analysis (pp.83–101). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Francis, G., Hunston, S., & Manning, E.
    (1998) Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns 2: Nouns and Adjectives. HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Greenbaum, S.
    (1996) Comparing English Worldwide: The International Corpus of English. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Halliday, M. A. K.
    (1993) Quantitative studies and probabilities in grammar. InM. Hoey (Ed.), Data, Description, Discourse: Papers on the English Language in Honour of John McH. Sinclair on his Sixtieth Birthday (pp.1–25). HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R.
    (1976) Cohesion in English. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. (1985) Language, Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Deakin University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J.
    (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. Falmer Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Hinkel, E.
    (2004) Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Hunston, S., & Francis, G.
    (2000) Pattern Grammar: A Corpus-driven Approach to the Lexical Grammar of English. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.4 [Google Scholar]
  17. Jiang, F., & Hyland, K.
    (2016) Nouns and academic interactions: A neglected feature of metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 1–25. 10.1093/applin/ams019
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams019 [Google Scholar]
  18. (2017) Metadiscursive nouns: Interaction and cohesion in abstract moves. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 1–14. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  19. Levandowsky, W.
    (1971) Distance between sets. Nature, 234(5), 34–35. 10.1038/234034a0
    https://doi.org/10.1038/234034a0 [Google Scholar]
  20. Mahlberg, M.
    (2003) The text linguistic dimension of corpus linguistics: The support function of English general nouns and its theoretical implications. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 8(1), 97–108. 10.1075/ijcl.8.1.05mah
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.8.1.05mah [Google Scholar]
  21. (2005) English General Nouns: A Corpus Theoretical Approach. John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.20
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.20 [Google Scholar]
  22. Ochs, E., & Schieffelin, B.
    (1983) Acquisition of Conversational Competence. Routledge and Kegan Paul.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
    (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Rapp, B., Fischer-Baum, S., & Miozzo, M.
    (2015) Modality and morphology: What we write may not be what we say. Psychological Science, 26(6), 892–902. 10.1177/0956797615573520
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797615573520 [Google Scholar]
  25. Redeker, G.
    (1984) On differences between spoken and written language. Discourse Processes, 7(1), 43–55. 10.1080/01638538409544580
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638538409544580 [Google Scholar]
  26. Schmid, H.-J.
    (2000) English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110808704
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110808704 [Google Scholar]
  27. (2018) Shell nouns in English – a personal roundup. Caplletra, 64, 109–128. 10.7203/caplletra.64.11368
    https://doi.org/10.7203/caplletra.64.11368 [Google Scholar]
  28. Van Dijk, T. A.
    (1988) News as Discourse. Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Yamasaki, N.
    (2008) Collocations and colligations associated with discourse functions of unspecific anaphoric nouns. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(1), 75–98. 10.1075/ijcl.13.1.05yam
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.13.1.05yam [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19059.fan
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ijcl.19059.fan
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error