From the moment at which the so-called Scientific Revolution erupted, objectivity was the main goal of all scientists. The experimental or scientific method favoured this search for objectivity, in that experiments were now to be described with sufficient precision that anyone could reproduce them and thus seek to confirm the findings. This form of making science also had an inevitable consequence on the way science was written. However, studies on discourse tend to view the second part of the eighteenth century as a period of reaction to this focus on objectivity and also as a reaction to Rationalism. It seems there is a continued shift, not only in scientificwriting but in discourse in general, that goes from this object-centred world to a reality that is more deeply related to the inner self of authors (Adamson), such a shift finally giving rise to the Romantic Movement. Also, from the middle of the century onwards, the relation between language and its users began to be taken into considera- tion by authors such as Harris (1751) and Beattie (1783). Whereas it is true that certain linguistic features and constructions were associated with science during the eighteenth century, it is worth noting that other features denoting interpersonal interaction between writer and reader can also be detected in eighteenth-century scientificwriting (Crespo; Alonso Almeida, “Sentential Evidential” and “An analysis”; Moskowich).
Different pilot studies have shown that CEPhiT, as well as other brother corpora inside the Coruña Corpus of English ScientificWriting, is a reliable tool for the study of the evolution of scientificwriting in the changing field of philosophy. The studies carried out can be grouped according to the various linguistic aspects they deal with. Since the corpus is still being finalised, not many of the research has been published but the following can be mentioned. The lexicon of science, the morphology of specialised terminology and other semantic implications have been explored from different perspectives in Camiña Riobóo (2010a and 2010b). Socio-linguistic variables included in CEPhiT have been also used for some studies such as Crespo García, (forthcoming), Moskowich (forthcoming) and Camiña Riobóo (2011). Other works such as Moskowich (2009), Monaco (2010), Lareo (forthcoming), Crespo (forthcoming) and Moskowich (forthcoming) revolve around different aspects of discourse.
Complex predicates formed by the verb make plus a noun are suitable for being studied historically with very interesting results, as it was observed in previous literature. However, our interest lies in tracing, comparing and understanding what may be the variation of these constructions in scientificwriting, and in their different chronological layers, analysing different scientific disciplines included in the Coruña Corpus of English ScientificWriting (CC hereafter). As this proves to be a long-term objective, the aim of this paper is to study the use of complex predicates in only one of these disciplines. To this end, some texts included in the 18 th century Life Sciences discipline of the CC have been analy- sed. Linguistic and extralinguistic information has been taken into account. Finally, the use of complex predicates and related verbs made by the scientists in question has been compared.
It is often claimed that the written register tends to reflect a nominal style, in which nouns, phrases and adjectives abound, whereas a verbal style, containing higher proportions of verbs, complement clauses and adverbs, among others, is typical of the oral register (Sager et al, 1980; Biber, 2008). Another feature of the written register, and particularly of scientificwriting, is that the vocabulary is in general characterised by its specificity and a tendency to have non-Germanic, classical origins (Moskowich, 2008). These two factors, the nominal style and the nature of the vocabulary, may be said to be typical of English scientificwriting. This observation is usually made of present day English. It is the aim of this study to ascertain whether written scientific texts adhered to such a pattern in the past, looking at English astronomy texts produced throughout the 18 th century and contained in CETA (Corpus of English Texts on Astronomy). My
In the first part of this study we present a brief overview of the concept of “science” (section 2), the inception of the scientific text and the development of scientific language from the Middle Ages onwards (section 3). The second part contains a comparative analysis of different passages from both essays (section 4). The earlier text is taken from Newton’s Opticks: or a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections and Colours of Light (first edition), published in 1704, while the more recent one is an article about an experiment published in Applied Optics in 1998, “Experimental study of the effects of a six-level phase mask on a digital holographic storage system”. Our aim, as mentioned above, is to analyse and compare the discourse used in both cases and propose some conclusions about how scientificwriting has evolved over the last three hundred years.
This paper explores the use of linguistic features characteristic of impersonal or personal style in scientificwriting by female authors in the eighteenth century. Variables such as discipline, subject-matter and genre are used to assess the ways in which abstract thought and argumentation are expressed by women, given that, even when these works were accepted by the scientific establishment, such modes of expression were more typical of men and men’s writing in the context of the Modern Age. Data from different genres and disciplines (History, Philosophy, Astronomy and Life Sciences) will be used in order to obtain more reliable findings.
gradual increase in studies on genre conventions and special languages, on the other. Few dispute that scientificwriting exhibits great variation and deserves study (Biber, 1988; Stubbs, 1996; Taavitsainen and Pahta, 1997a, b). As explained by Siemund and Claridge (1997: 67) when presenting their own work, our project proposes to complement other corpora pertaining to the history of what we nowadays call ESP, such as the well-known Corpus of Early English Correspondence, the Corpus of Early English Medical Writing, and the Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts.
span covered by the Coruña Corpus of English ScientificWriting (henceforth CC). All samples will be extracted from different sub-corpora of CC, namely, CETA (Corpus of English Texts on Astronomy) (Moskowich et al, 2012), CEPhiT (Corpus of English Philosophy Text, forthcoming), CELiST (Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts) and CHET (Corpus of History English Texts). Given that women writers in this period mainly devoted themselves to the creation of fictional works, the number of samples written by female authors in these corpora is not very high but it reflects eighteenth- and nineteenth-century scientific reality accurately. Since we will be working with samples from different corpora devoted each to a particular scientific discipline, we will use this as one of the variables in the analysis. Disciplinary conventions might exert an influence on how the author communicates science. The second variable will be time. To this respect we will present and compare our results per century, considering that, as could be expected, the findings will point to an evolution towards detachment, mainly in texts. Finally, the text-type or genre to which the text belongs, that is, generic conventions, could also determine the final writing.
Authorial presence in Late Modern scientificwriting can be detected, among other linguistic devices, through the use of stance adverbs. We are aware of the restrictions of the current study, in which we have not searched for all the possible types of stance adverbs but have limited ourselves to an initial list proposed by Quirk et al. (1985) and Biber (1988). Nevertheless, some preliminary conclusions can be drawn from the findings. Not all the types from this list have been traced in the corpora examined, and many more occur just once. This gives the impression of a high degree of lexical richness to express stance through this word class. Yet, the three most frequent items, indeed, generally and perhaps, all transmit a particular author position: emphasis, inclusiveness and tentativeness, respectively. These are the main traces that authors leave in their texts to render themselves visible. It is also remarkable that we have found a dissimilarity of frequencies across disciplines, with Life Sciences showing the highest rates of occurrence and History the lowest. This runs contrary to our expectations, and no coherent explanation appears feasible until we turn to the variables of sex and genre.
Scientificwriting in ME was, therefore, highly influenced by the scholastic Latin and/or French texts from which they were translated, which relied mainly on classical authors such as Galen or Hippocrates (Taavitsainen and Pahta 1998: 162). In EmodE, in turn, new ways of constructing knowledge emerged, based on observation and cognition. This methodological change had its consequences on the language by which science was transmitted as, according to Taavitsainen (2011: 123-31), genres “constitute dynamic systems that undergo change and variation over the course of time as sociocultural needs change, and genres change accordingly: old genres are adapted to new functions, new genres are created, and genres that have lost their function cease to exist (Taavitsainen 2001: 141, 2009: 38) 18 .
The aim of this work is to offer an overview of female scientificwriting in English in the nineteenth century. In particular, we want to focus on the analysis of the more or less informational style of texts written by women. Variables such as discipline or subject-matter and genre will be used to measure the way in which the informative character of scientific texts develops once Empiricism is well settled. Assuming the andro-centric nature of scientific discourse in the Modern Age, the survey of these variables will help us explore the extent to which this informational style is revealed in female scientific works. The fact that these authors are women could imply that some involvement on their part may be required. This could be caused by extra-linguistic factors such as the need to be taken more seriously not only in a field completely dominated by males but also in the social context surrounding women’s lives in general.
In the current study, we will be using the same material. However, in order to go a step further, we will explore the syntagmatic relations of these two adverbs and their accompanying modal verbs. Although it is widely assumed that scientific English has shifted from author-centered to object-centered (Atkinson 1998), the presumably objective nature of scientific discourse has in fact been questioned, with the use of hedging (Hyland 1998) and other elements expressing stance (Moskowich and Crespo 2014; Alonso Almeida and Inés 2016; Dossena 2017) cited as evidence here. In the present study, we will continue our description of late Modern English scientificwriting by assessing how the modal verbs accompanying these stance adverbs can modulate the expression of tentativeness. Perhaps and possibly both indicate an author’s desire to show tentativeness and uncertainty, as well as being devices that seek the reading public’s involvement in the presentation of content (Seoane Posse 2016). The use of stance adverbs of this kind not only shows authorial presence, but also demonstrates a covert interaction with the reader, which makes these texts more engaging for the latter.
Then it was necessary to tackle the writing as this was the weakest skill evidenced in the diagnosis phase , if we did not face this problematic the opportunities for this group of students to express in the written form would be less fruitful given the fact that they would not have the possibility to interact by means of the written language and, to express feelings, points of view, topics of personal relevance and texts related to the field of their interests as The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) expresses they will be able to do in the expected level the students should have by the end of the secondary school, also from the point of view of citizenship and globalization if the population of students do not write in EFL, it will be less probable for them to participate in a democratic way in decisions if they imply to write in English which is a nowadays need.
use. as it can be evidenced in the following excerpts: “(...) and my father whift us to the park Simon Bolivar and us buy ice cream.” (Diagnostic, writing exercise, student 1).At this point it is important to be aware that students did not know how to use adequately basic vocabulary they have learned in class such as the pronouns and the object pronouns. “Description is abouth the my best vacations: It happened in the age 2017, in the month Dicember [...]” (Diagnostic, writing exercise, Student 2). In this case, there were some other difficulties such as misspelling and in general terms vocabulary use. “The school is big has two patios a court from football has a cafe, the school is color orange [...] (Diagnostic, writing exercise, Student 3) In this case, it was possible to notice the use of Spanish, subject omission, use of wrong words, no punctuation use, so the idea was not clear. “I was homewor in the house, I play a xbox every the days, homework in the English class, I the soup of letters in the class (Diagnostic, writing exercise, Student 4). These students revealed a main problem with grammar structure and coherence in his writing, there was verb omission and misspelled words. “I am went even conser de megalan in Simon Bolivar with friend went even sang Niki Jam” (Diagnostic, writing exercise, Student 5). In this exercise, there was a lack of grammar structure and sense, the student seemed to be unclear about the coherence and correct word spelling and meaning. Finally, “The lounge it is square has desks it’s conformed teacher, they study […] This student showed a lack of grammar awareness, wrong use of punctuation, the writing had not coherence, there is addition of
147 to teach students how they should use these virtual resources as a support and help in their learning process since Internet does not have all the answers or information that they need when they are given a writing task because what they have to do is to select, summarize and adapt the information from the Internet to include relevant information in their tasks making them interesting for the readers. Besides, Internet could be a disadvantage in the development of the writing Webquest because it could work as a distractor for students where they sometimes waste the time on the Internet doing different things to the activities proposed. That is why we consider that teachers should take into account these disadvantages that could be presented in the development of the writing Webquests to not interrupt or affect the learning objectives of each task looking for a solution that solves these situations that can happen in a lesson.
ScientiÞc research demands precision. ScientiÞc writing should reßect this precision in the form of clarity. Unfortu- nately, a glance at almost any scientiÞc journal will reveal that the above-stated ideal is often not attained in the real world of scholarly publication. Indeed, many of the accusations by non-scientiÞsts of "obscurity" and "elitism" within the scientiÞc community probably originate in the sad fact that many scientists are not capable of expressing their hypotheses and conclusions clearly and simply. Fortunately, much of the confusion can be eliminated if writing is con- sidered part of the pretentiousness. In practical terms, the Þrst of those two suggestions implies that as much effort and consideration should be given to the organization of the paper as was given to the execution of the study, and the second implies that the writer should employ crisp sentences not cluttered with excess verbiage. The purpose of this handout is to help you achieve your goals.
Scientific talks, like scientific papers, are an important part of the scientific communication process. Good oral presentation skills, are vital to educational sciences, as well as to many other fields. In the engineering community, such presentations offer, a quick outline of project proposals and progress reports. In the academic community, the ability to clearly transmit scientific information, in an oral presen- tation, is critical to both teaching and research. Over the last years, it has become apparent, to many educational researchers, that represent- ing knowledge, in a visual format, allows one to better recognize and understand, incoming information. Since Novak, placed concept map- ping on the educational agenda, it has become an increasingly popular advanced teaching and learning tool. Due mainly to the innovation of visual design software like CmapTool, the production and modification of Concept Maps is straightforward. While there are no strict rules about how to give a motivating and compelling presentation, there are some guiding principles which are easy to grasp and apply. The modern scientist must be able to create well organized, well delivered scientific talks. In this context, Concept Maps harness the power of our vision to understand complex information “at-a-glance”. We propose some ideas and resources based, on the use of concept maps to make the process of preparing and organizing good talks easier. In essence, good scientific talks must satisfy the following three goals: to connect with the audience, to direct and hold attention, and to promote under- standing and memory. To accomplish these goals talk material must be elaborated carefully and logically. The plan to achieve them should have four parts: preparation, structure, design, and exposition. We fo- cus our work on the first two parts of the plan, and supply some helpful
The revolution in scientific thinking that Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileo began eventually developed into a new approach to science called the scientific method . The scientific method is a logical procedure for gathering and testing ideas. It begins with a problem or question arising from an observation. Scientists next form a hypothesis, or unproved assumption. The hypothesis is then tested in an experiment or on the basis of data. In the final step, scientists analyze and interpret their data to reach a new conclusion. That conclusion either confirms or disproves the hypothesis.
In the process of writing a thesis, participants do a variety of tasks. In this continuum, the task focus tends to vary according to the set objectives at different times. As seen in the findings, tasks do not occur in isolation; they overlap and nourish each other. Furthermore, when working on tasks, students tend to have periods of individual work as a participant reports “I have modified my introduction like five times because each time I find better ideas; I read it again and I say ‘I don’t like this too much’, so I change it; I polish it more” (P5) and others of being accompanied by a supervisor as shown in this participant’s quote: “My thesis supervisor questions me more what I write; I like that because s/he makes me reflect about what I do” (P8). When doing RWR tasks, it seems advisable to provide opportunities for both types of work, individual work and supervisor-student dialogue. The first allows opportunities for reflection and internalization of thoughts and ideas. The second seems to have a higher impact on participants’ work as they are usually questioned on what they write and how they express their ideas in their thesis as acknowledged by one of the participants “… but s/he questioned me a lot, ‘I don’t understand this, explain to me’. Then, I explained to s/he, but s/he said: ‘You don’t have that written’”(P5). As noticed, supervisor-student dialogue leads participants to a more reflective state in which they revise their texts by reformulating and transforming knowledge as a participant points out “Many of us came to reassess many things in the moment that we were questioned” (P4). This result concurs with González De la Torre et al.’s research with respect to thesis supervisors’ influence on shaping what thesis writers do during the thesis writing process.Working under questioning style of supervision engages student in reframing what they will write about. However, setting clear expectations of the task, and offering informed guidance can facilitate the process of writing, which in turn, develops the academic text. The next section discusses the implications of these findings towards the development of research literacy.
In our opinion, there is still an important gap in the field, especially from a historical perspective as the phenomenon has been mostly discussed from a synchronic perspective in Late Middle English, Chaucer’s verse in particular. The present paper then analyses the origin, development and decline of pleonastic that from a diachronic point of view in the light of The Corpus of Early English Medical Writing in the historical period 1375-1700, considering that medical writing is freer from the artificiality of verse and may offer some fresh details about the ups and downs of this pleonastic form. By the year 1475, the first phase of the vernacularization of scientific and medical writing was largely complete, to such an extent that the use of the vernacular became even more common than Latin for the rendering of scientific material (Voigts 1986: 316; 1996: 816; Pahta & Taavitsainen 2004: 12). In the absence of a national standard for these purposes, the emergence of the scientific register, shaped under the shelter of the Greco-Roman models, may shed some light on the development of these on-going changes in English. In the light of this, the present paper has been conceived with the following objectives: a) to analyse the use and distribution of pleonastic that in a corpus of early English medical writing (in the period 1375–1700); b) to classify the construction in terms of the different types of medical texts; and c) to assess the decline of the construction with the different conjunctive words.