Implicaciones sociales y ambientales de la expansión piñera

take); progression (including performing); habits

(used to, used for); duration (is/are +gerund); Completion (end of + infinitive)

Move 13: Listing definitions

Person

Prevails first person of plural in the sequence of procedures. In section ‘roles an responsibilities’ third person of singular is used. Low usage of

pronouns has been detected.

Consequently, we present in Table 5.3 some functional and lexical features related to the syntactic ones, with the description of each feature identified.

Table 5.3 Proposal of Functional and Lexical Features

Feature Name Feature Description

Language Function It is informative or referential focused on the message, external reality, or referent.. The writer makes no judgments about the information or processes.

Descriptive sequence Clear language, accurate, and direct. In most of cases clarity in the exposition of ideas can be detected. Descriptive style and usage of names, locations, and qualifying objects, people, or processes. Also, it may have actions in a temporal order looking for a specific purpose. Terminology Contains a large number of terms belonging to the body of knowledge

and a lot of information shared between producer and reader. Such information is produced by individuals who possess specific knowledge of a subject.

vii. Identification of occurrence frequencies for relevant features.

By using computational tools supporting the corpus-linguistic method we try to analyze relevant features and to identify their occurrence frequencies. Thus, we have not relied on our intuition on the analysis or made-up examples. Once texts are tagged and analyzed, other programs are used for calculating the rate of occurrence of linguistics features in each text (e.g. number of verbs per a unit of words). We present sample of occurrence frequencies for some collocations, summing 68 total number of collocate types and 765 collocated tokens in Figure. 5.4. In Figure 5.5 we present the abstract noun ‘management’ as a feature considered relevant for the analysis, with its occurrence frequency and collocations in context.

Figure 5.4 Sample of collocations frequency

Evaluation of structural and functional pattern

For a specific technical document we carry out the evaluation of structural and functional patterns from ROM. We choose a SOP for such evaluation. This activity is oriented to determine what rhetorical moves are nuclear or core moves for writing this type of technical document (SOP), as part of the methodology based on corpus linguistics. After applying the rhetorical analysis method, we follow the evaluation activities as we describe below:

Figure 5.5 Analysis of co-occurrences for the relevant feature ‘management’

i. Selecting the experts for the evaluation of the reference model. The following criteria were considered for such selection:

a. Relevance to the area

b. Knowledge about discourse analysis

c. Comprehension of the context of technical documents d. Availability for applying the evaluation process

In this way, we select four experts, as follows:

a) Jorge Gana Leay, Head of the M.Sc. program in Processing and Information Management. Computational Sciences Department, Engineering School, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile

b) René Venegas Velásquez, Professor of Philosofy and Education Faculty, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Valparaíso

c) Juan David Martínez, Coordinator of the PhD in Linguistics, Communication Faculty, Universidad de Antioquia

d) Carlos Mario Zapata Jaramillo, Professor of the Computating and Decisions Sciences Department, Faculty of Mines, Universidad Nacional de Colombia –Medellín.

ii. Designing a template for the evaluation (Appendix 5.3), based on the reference model, and considering the following components:

a. Rhetorical Unit of reference, including code, type of rhetorical move (move or macro- move), name of rhetorical unit, and purpose.

b. Example extracted from a SOP

c. Evaluation including a column for each element of rhetorical move to be evaluated: name and purpose or rhetorical move. Also, a column for specify the obligatory/mandatory character of the move.

d. Finally, a space for adding comments whenever necessary.

iii. Designing a instructions guide for filling in the evaluation template (Appendix 5.4), including:

a. Description of the model

b. Evaluation of the following parameters: Agree / Satisfy (Valuation 1) and Valuation Parameter (Valuation 2)

iv. Sending the request for information to the experts for evaluation purposes. We sent the requests via email, including a letter with the instructions for evaluating and filling in the form, with the evaluation template as attachment.

v. Analyzing and filtering the forms filled in.

We received the evaluation template filled by the four experts, as we present in the Appendix 5.5 and we developed an analysis inter rater reliability, according to the comments, evaluated parameters, and valuation of each parameter. Such analysis generates a new version of the model for the subsequent analysis, comprising only the moves considered mandatory by the experts. For this analysis, we consider as inclusion criteria only the moves which were evaluated with 3 or 4 positive responses (answer: YES). Additionally, we carried out the adjustments and changes by move in the cases where the responses disagreed or were unsatisfied (answer: 2) In Table 5.4 we show the compilation of results and the average of responses by the experts.

Table 5.4 Results and actions on the reference model

Rhetorical Unit of reference Evaluation

Action

Code Unit Name Name Purpose Obligatoriness

1 Macromove Preamble / Overview

1.1 Move Identifying SOP 1 - YES

Include move

1 1 YES

1 2 YES

1 1 YES

1.2 Move Organizing SOP 1 - YES

Include move

1 1 YES

1 2 YES

1 1 YES

1.3 Move Introduction 2 - YES

Include move, correct or improve writing 1 1 YES 2 2 YES 1 1 YES

1.4 Move Presenting Foreword 2 - NO

Do not Include move

2 2 NO

2 2 YES

1 1 YES

1.5 Move Documenting Conventions 2 - YES

Include move, correct or improve writing 1 1 YES 1 2 YES 1 1 YES

1.6 Move Appointing regulations or

regulatory requirements 1 - NO Include move, correct or improve writing 1 1 YES 2 2 YES 1 1 YES

1.7 Move Giving acknowledgements 2 - NO

Do not Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 NO

1 1 YES

1.8 Move Defining Intended Audience and

Reading Suggestions 1 - YES Include move 1 1 YES 1 1 NO 1 1 YES

1.9 Move Establishing Purpose 2 - NO

Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

2 Macromove Development

2.1 Move Defining procedure purpose 1 - YES

Include move

1 1 YES

1 2 YES

1 1 YES

2.2 Move Defining roles and responsibilities 1 - YES

Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

Rhetorical Unit of reference Evaluation

Action

Code Unit Name Name Purpose Obligatoriness

1 1 YES

1 2 YES

1 1 YES

2.4 Move Listing definitions 2 - YES

Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

2.5 Move Listing resources 1 - YES Include move,

improve writing

1 1 YES

1 2 YES

1 1 YES

2.6 Move Establishing methods 1 - YES Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

2.7 _Move Specifying procedure 1 - YES Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

2.8 Move Representing procedure 2 - NO Do not Include

move

1 1 YES

1 1 NO

1 1 YES

3. Macromove Closure / Ending 3.1 Move Adding Supplementary

information 2 _{1 1} - NO _YES Do not Include _move

1 1 NO

1 1 YES

3.2 Move Including references 1 - YES Include move

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

1 1 YES

Based on the previous results and their analysis, we generate a new proposal of the rhetorical organization model for the SOP document, as we present in the Table 5.5. In the model we exclude the moves not mandatory, selected the appropriate nomination and a description closer to the context and intention of the SOP author according to the analysis inter rater reliability.

Table 5.5 Proposal of Rhetorical Organization Model (ROM)

Code

Rhetorical