1887
Volume 14, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1571-0718
  • E-ISSN: 1571-0726
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

El objetivo del presente estudio es comparar el resumen de artículos de investigación científica (AICs) de dos disciplinas (Biología e Historia) a partir de su organización retórica y de las relaciones de coherencia que lo configuran. Para describir la organización retórica, utilizamos, como taxonomía de arranque, la propuesta de Hyland (2000) , mientras que para las relaciones de coherencia, utilizamos la propuesta de Ibáñez, Moncada y Santana (2015) . El corpus de esta investigación estuvo constituido por 160 resúmenes escritos en español, pertenecientes a AICs publicados en revistas especializadas. Los resultados revelan que mientras ciertas movidas son obligatorias en los resúmenes de una disciplina, en los de la otra son opcionales. También se observa que los resúmenes de ambas disciplinas se diferencian en sus configuraciones retóricas prototípicas, al igual que en las relaciones de coherencia más frecuentes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sic.14.2.06iba
2017-10-06
2019-12-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bhatia, Vijay
    1993Analyzing genre. Language use in professional settings. Harlow: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Biber, Douglas , Ulla Connor y Thomas Upton
    (Eds.) 2007Discourse on the move. Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.28
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolívar, Adriana
    1997 La pragmática lingüística de los resúmenes de investigación para congresos. Boletín de Lingüística12–13: 153–173.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 1999a Los resúmenes para eventos científicos en lingüística aplicada en América Latina: estructura e interacción. OPCIÓN29: 61–81.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. 1999b Homogeneidad versus variedad en la estructura de los resúmenes de investigación para congresos. Akademos1–2: 121–136.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bondi, Marina y Rosa Lorés-Sanz
    2014Abstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change. Bern: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0701‑2
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0701-2 [Google Scholar]
  7. Busch-Lauer, Ines
    2014 “Abstracts: Cross-linguistic, disciplinary and intercultural perspectives.” EnAbstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change, ed. por Marina Bondi y Rosa Lorés-Sanz , 43–63. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Carlson, Linn y Daniel Marcu
    2001 Discourse tagging reference manual. ISI Technical Report ISITR-545, 54.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Coffin, Caroline
    1997 “Constructing and giving value to the past: An investigation into secondary school history”. EnGenre and institutions: Social processes in the workplace and school, ed. por Frances Christie and Jim Martin , 196–230. London: Cassell.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Cohen, Ronald , Mark Swerdlik y Douglas Smith
    1992Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurements. Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Diani, Giuliana
    2014 “Multivoiced interaction in English and Italian academic review discourse.” EnDialogicity in Written Specialised Genres, ed. por Luz Gil-Salom y Carmen Soler-Monreal , 87–112. John Benjamins, Amsterdam doi: 10.1075/ds.23.05dia
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.23.05dia [Google Scholar]
  12. Dos Santos, Mauro
    1996 “The textual organization of research paper abstracts in applied linguistics”. Text & Talk16(4): 481–499.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Farjami, Hadi
    2013 “A corpus-based study of the lexical make-up of applied linguistics article resumens”. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills5(2): 27–50.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Ge, Dongmei y Ruiying Yang
    2005 “A genre analysis of research article resumens”. Modern Foreign Languages28(2): 38–46.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gholami, Javad , Zahra Mosalli y Shiva Bidel
    2012 “Lexical complexity and discourse markers in soft and hard science articles”. World Applied Sciences Journal17(3): 368–374.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gray, Bethany
    2015Linguistic variation in research articles: When discipline tells only part of the story (Vol.71). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/scl.71
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.71 [Google Scholar]
  17. Halliday, Michael y Ruqaiya Hasan
    1976Cohesion in English. London-New York: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Harvey, Ana
    1986 A macrostructure analysis of 20 computer data-based abstracts in the field of engineering. Ponencia presentada en el Seminario Nacional de Lenguas con Fines Específicos, Santiago, Chile, Universidad Católica.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Harvey, Ana y Mercedes Horsella
    1988 “Exploring and exploiting the structure of computational abstracts. The ESPecialist9: 229–247.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Hatch, Evelyn y Anne Lazaraton
    1991The research manual: Design and statistics for applied linguistics. Massachusetts: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Hobbs, Jerry
    1985On the coherence and structure of discourse. Stanford: Centre for the Study of Language and Information.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Hovy, Eduard
    1990 Parsimonious and profligate approaches to the question of discourse structure relations. InProceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Pittsburgh, U.S.A.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyland, Ken y Polly Tsé
    2005 “Evaluative that constructions: Signaling stance in research abstracts”. Functions of Language12(1): 39–63. doi: 10.1075/fol.12.1.03hyl
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.12.1.03hyl [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyland, Ken
    2000Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ibáñez, Romualdo , Fernando Moncada y Andrea Santana
    2015 “Variación disciplinar en el discurso académico de la biología y del derecho: Un estudio a partir de las relaciones de coherencia”. Revista Onomázein2(32): 101–131. doi: 10.7764/onomazein.32.6
    https://doi.org/10.7764/onomazein.32.6 [Google Scholar]
  26. Ibáñez, Romualdo
    2010 “El texto disciplinar en la transmisión del conocimiento especializado”. Estudios Filológicos46: 59–80. doi: 10.4067/S0071‑17132010000200004
    https://doi.org/10.4067/S0071-17132010000200004 [Google Scholar]
  27. Ibáñez, Romualdo y Fernando Moncada
    2012La configuración de las relaciones causales en las introducciones del género AIC en dos áreas disciplinares. VII Encuentro Nacional de la ALED, Estudios del Discurso en Nuevos Contextos Sociales: Educación, Movilización y Redes Sociales, La Serena, Chile.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Kanoksilapatham, Budsaba
    2005 “Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles”. English for Specific Purposes24(3): 269–292. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  29. Lorés-Sanz, Rosa
    2004 “On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organization”. English for Specific Purposes23(3): 280–302. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2008 “Authorial visibility in research article and research article abstracts: The intergeneric perspective”. EnEnglish as an additional language in research publication and communication, ed. por Sally Burgess y Pedro Martín-Martín , 105–122. Berlin: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. 2014 “Lost (and gained) in translation: A contrastive (English/Spanish) analysis of rhetorical and lexicogrammatical patterns in sociology research article abstracts”. EnAbstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change, ed. por Marina Bondi y Rosa Lorés-Sanz , 85–110. Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Mann, William y Sandra Thompson
    1988 “Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization”. Text & Talk8(3): 243–281.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Martin, Jim
    1992English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.59
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  34. Martin-Martin, Pedro
    2003 “A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences”. English for Specific Purposes22(1): 25–43. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(01)00033‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00033-3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Matthiessen, Christian
    2002 “Combining clauses into clause complexes. A multi-faceted view”. EnComplex sentences in grammar and discourse: Essays in honor of Sandra A. Thompson, ed. por Joan Bybee y Michael Noonan , 235–320. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.110.13mat
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.110.13mat [Google Scholar]
  36. Melander, Bjorn , John Swales y Jim Fredrickson
    1997 “Journal abstracts from three academic fields in the United States and Sweden: National or disciplinary proclivities?”. EnIntellectual styles and cross-cultural communication, ed. por Anna Duszak , 251–271. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Moncada, Fernando y Romualdo Ibáñez
    2014Organización retórica y mecanismos de coherencia del abstract de Biología en inglés: Insumos para una propuesta basada en corpus. VIII Encuentro Nacional de Estudios del Discurso. Estudio del Discurso: Aplicaciones educativas y clínicas. Viña del Mar, Chile.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Nasser, Mohammed
    2013 “Genre-based analysis of Arabic research article abstracts across four disciplines”. Journal of Educational and Social Research3(3): 371–382.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Parodi, Giovanni
    2010 “La organización retórica del género manual a través de cuatro disciplinas: ¿cómo se comunica y difunde la ciencia en diferentes contextos universitarios?”. Boletín de LingüísticaXXII: 43–69.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Pezzini, Ornella
    2003 “Genre analysis and translation. An investigation of abstracts of research articles in two languages”. Capa2(12): 75–108.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Pho, Phuong
    2008 “Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: A study of linguistic realizations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance”. Discourse Studies10(2): 231–250. doi: 10.1177/1461445607087010
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607087010 [Google Scholar]
  42. Redeker, Gisela
    2000 “Coherence and structure in text and discourse”. InAbduction, belief and context in dialogue. Studies in computational pragmatics, ed. por William Black y Harry Bunt , 233–263. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/nlp.1.06red
    https://doi.org/10.1075/nlp.1.06red [Google Scholar]
  43. Renkema, Jan
    2009The texture of discourse. Amsterdam. John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.151
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.151 [Google Scholar]
  44. Saeeaw, Supachai and Supong Tangkiengsirisin
    2014 “Rhetorical variation across research article abstracts in environmental science and applied linguistics”. English Language Teaching7(8): 81–93. doi: 10.5539/elt.v7n8p81
    https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n8p81 [Google Scholar]
  45. Salager-Meyer, Françoise
    1992 “A text-type and move analysis study of verb tense and modality distribution in medical English abstracts”. English for Specific Purposes11(2): 93–113. doi: 10.1016/S0889‑4906(05)80002‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(05)80002-X [Google Scholar]
  46. 1990 “Discoursal flaws in medical English abstracts: A genre analysis per research and text type”. Text & Talk10(4): 365–384.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Samraj, Betty
    2002 “Disciplinary variation in abstracts: The case of wildlife behavior and conservation biology”. EnAcademic discourse, ed. por John Flowerdew , 40–56. London: Pearson.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. 2005 “An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines”. English for Specific Purposes24(2): 141–156. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  49. Sanders, Ted and Henk Pander Maat
    2006 “Cohesion and coherence: Linguistic approaches.” EnEncyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. por Keith Brown , 591–595. Amsterdam: Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/00497‑1
    https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/00497-1 [Google Scholar]
  50. Sanders, Ted , Wilbert Spooren y Leo Noordman
    1992 “Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations”. Discourse Processes15(1): 1–35. doi: 10.1080/01638539209544800
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539209544800 [Google Scholar]
  51. 1993 “Coherence relations in a cognitive theory of discourse representation”. Cognitive Linguistics4(2): 93–133. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1993.4.2.93
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.1993.4.2.93 [Google Scholar]
  52. Scholman, Merel , Jacqueline Evers-Vermeul y Ted Sanders
    2016 “Categories of coherence relations in discourse annotation: Towards a reliable categorization of coherence relations.” Dialogue & Discourse7(2): 1–28.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Spooren, Wilbert and Liesbeth Degand
    2010 “Coding coherence relations: Reliability and validity”. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6(2): 241–266. doi: 10.1515/cllt.2010.009
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt.2010.009 [Google Scholar]
  54. Spooren, Wilbert y Ted Sanders
    2008 “The acquisition of coherence relations: On cognitive complexity in discourse”. Journal of Pragmatics40(12): 2003–2026. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.021
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.021 [Google Scholar]
  55. Suntara, Watinee y Siriluck Usaha
    2013 “Research article abstracts in two related disciplines: Rhetorical variation between linguistics and applied linguistics”. English Language Teaching6(2): 84–99. doi: 10.5539/elt.v6n2p84
    https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v6n2p84 [Google Scholar]
  56. Swales, John
    1990Genre analysis. English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Taboada, Maite y William Mann
    2006 “Rhetorical structure theory: Looking back and moving ahead”. Discourse Studies8(3): 423–459. doi: 10.1177/1461445606061881
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061881 [Google Scholar]
  58. Taboada, Maite
    2009 “Implicit and explicit coherence relations”. EnDiscourse, of course, ed. por Jan Renkema , 127–140. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/z.148.13tab
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.148.13tab [Google Scholar]
  59. Tseng, Fan-ping
    2011 “Analysis of move structure and verb tense of research article abstracts in applied linguistics journals”. International Journal of English Linguistics1(2): 27–39. doi: 10.5539/ijel.v1n2p27
    https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v1n2p27 [Google Scholar]
  60. Van Dijk, Teun
    1977Text and context. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Ventola, Eija
    1994 “Abstracts as an object of linguistic study”. EnWriting vs. speaking: Language, text, discourse, communication, ed. por Světla Čmejrková , František Daneš and Eva Havlová , 333–352.Tübingen: Gunter Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sic.14.2.06iba
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sic.14.2.06iba
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): discurso académico , organización retórica , relaciones de coherencia and Resumen
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