1887
Volume 31, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

The present article is a corpus-based contrastive study on mitigation of criticism in linguistic book reviews in English and in Chinese. It is based on the face theory of Brown and Levinson (1987) and follows the framework of Johnson and Roen (1992) . The present article shows the following results: (1) at the local level, there are thirteen mitigation devices in the corpus, of which only six have been introduced by previous studies; devices of ‘generalization’ and ‘metaphorical statement’ are specific to the English sub-corpus, whereas ‘omission’ is only found in Chinese; (2) at the global level, English writers maintain an overall supportive tone with praise largely distributed in both openings and closings, whereas their Chinese counterparts sound much impartial. Differences in findings are then explained from perspectives of cultural values and functions of book reviews.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15027.qia
2018-08-27
2019-12-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Brown, P., & Levinson, S.
    (1987) Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511813085
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511813085 [Google Scholar]
  2. Cheng, C.
    (2014) A contrastive study of English and Chinese book reviews on linguistics: Perspective of attitudinal meanings. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 4(5), 1009–1016.10.4304/tpls.4.5.1009‑1016
    https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.4.5.1009-1016 [Google Scholar]
  3. Cherry, R. D.
    (1988) Politeness in written persuasion. Journal of Pragmatics, 12(1), 63–81.10.1016/0378‑2166(88)90020‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(88)90020-3 [Google Scholar]
  4. Confucius
    Confucius (2006) Confucian analects (J. Legge, Trans.). Whitefish: Kessinger Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Diani, G.
    (2015) Politeness. InK. Aijmer & C. Rühlemann (Eds.), Corpus pragmatics: A handbook (pp.169–191). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139057493.009
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139057493.009 [Google Scholar]
  6. Ge, K.
    (1988) 怎样写书评 [How to write book reviews]. Shanghai: Tongji University Press.
  7. Gu, Y.
    (1990) Politeness phenomena in modern Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics, 14(2), 237–257.10.1016/0378‑2166(90)90082‑O
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(90)90082-O [Google Scholar]
  8. Harris, R. J., Friel, B. M., & Mickelson, N. R.
    (2006) Attribution of discourse goals for using concrete- and abstract-tenor metaphors and similes with or without discourse context. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(6), 863–879.10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.010
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.06.010 [Google Scholar]
  9. Hyland, K.
    (2000) Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Itakura, H., & Tsui, A.
    (2011) Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1366–1379.10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023 [Google Scholar]
  11. Johnson, D. M.
    (1992) Compliments and politeness in peer-review texts. Applied Linguistics, 13(1), 51–71.10.1093/applin/13.1.51
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/13.1.51 [Google Scholar]
  12. Johnson, D. M., & Roen, D. H.
    (1992) Complimenting and involvement in peer reviews: Gender variation. Language in Society, 21(01), 27–57.10.1017/S0047404500015025
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404500015025 [Google Scholar]
  13. Kurzon, D.
    (2001) The politeness of judges: American and English judicial behaviour. Journal of Pragmatics, 33(1), 61–85.10.1016/S0378‑2166(99)00123‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00123-X [Google Scholar]
  14. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.
    (1998) Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities: The flow of ideas within and among disciplines. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Lu, L.
    (2003) 汉语辞海 [A comprehensive dictionary of Chinese]. Beijing: Beijing Education Publishing House.
  16. Mackiewicz, J.
    (2007) Compliments and criticisms in book reviews about business communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 21(2), 188–215.10.1177/1050651906297168
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1050651906297168 [Google Scholar]
  17. Mao, L. M. R.
    (1994) Beyond politeness theory: ‘Face’ revisited and renewed. Journal of Pragmatics, 21(5), 451–486.10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90025‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90025-6 [Google Scholar]
  18. Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S.
    (1991) Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98(2), 224–253.10.1037/0033‑295X.98.2.224
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224 [Google Scholar]
  19. Moreno, A. I., & Suarez, L.
    (2008) A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 15–26.10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.009 [Google Scholar]
  20. Motta-Roth, D.
    (1998) Discourse analysis and academic BRs: A study of text and disciplinary cultures. InI. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer & J. F. Coll (Eds.), Genre studies in English for academic purposes/ Estudios de género en Inglés para propositos academicos (pp.29–58). Castelló: Universitat Jaume I.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Myers, G.
    (1989) The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1–35.10.1093/applin/10.1.1
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.1 [Google Scholar]
  22. Nicolaisen, J.
    (2002) The scholarliness of published peer reviews: A bibliometric study of book reviews in selected social science fields. Research Evaluation, 11(3), 129–140.10.3152/147154402781776808
    https://doi.org/10.3152/147154402781776808 [Google Scholar]
  23. Orteza y Miranda, E.
    (1996) On book reviewing. The Journal of Educational Thought (JET)/ Revue de la Pensée Educative, 191–202.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Oyserman, D., Coon, H. M., & Kemmelmeier, M.
    (2002) Rethinking individualism and collectivism: Evaluation of theoretical assumptions and meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 128(1), 3–72.10.1037/0033‑2909.128.1.3
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.128.1.3 [Google Scholar]
  25. Richards, I.
    (1937) The philosophy of rhetoric. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Römer, U.
    (2005) “This seems somewhat counterintuitive, though”: Negative evaluation in linguistic book reviews by male and female authors. InE. Tognini-Bonelli & G. d. L. Camiciotti (Eds.), Strategies in academic discourse (pp.97–115). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.19.08rom
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.19.08rom [Google Scholar]
  27. Salager-Meyer, F., & Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á.
    (2004) Negative appraisals in academic book reviews: A cross-linguistic approach. InG. M. Candlin C (Ed.), Intercultural aspects of specialized communication (pp.149–172). Bern: Peter Lang Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Semino, E., Heywood, J., & Short, M.
    (2004) Methodological problems in the analysis of metaphors in a corpus of conversations about cancer. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(7), 1271–1294.10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2003.10.013 [Google Scholar]
  29. Valor, M. L. G.
    (2000) A pragmatic approach to politeness and modality in the book review articles. Valencia: Universitat de València.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang, Y., & Nelson, M. E.
    (2012) Discursive construction of authorial voice in English book reviews: A contrastive analysis. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 1–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Xu, Z.
    (1994) 书评学概论 [Book reviews study]. Wuhan: Wuhan University Press.
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15027.qia
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/resla.15027.qia
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