KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics / 2018 / Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2

Informality in Applied Linguistics Research Articles: Comparing Native and Non-Native Writings

Mohammad ALIPOUR
Sayfa
349–373
Yayın Tarihi
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

Implications for EAP courses are delineated in the study as well.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:This quantitative-qualitative study aimed to fathom out whether and how informal features are exploitedin articles of applied linguistics written in English by natives and non-natives.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:To this end, a corpus of200 articles was compiled.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:Implications for EAP courses are delineated in the study as well.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Abstract

This quantitative-qualitative study aimed to fathom out whether and how informal features are exploitedin articles of applied linguistics written in English by natives and non-natives. To this end, a corpus of200 articles was compiled. We employed the classification of informal features proposed by Chang andSwales (1999) representing 10 informal features in academic writing. The AntConc software was used,along with manual search, to detect the informal features. The frequency, percentages, and the densityper 1000 words of each informal feature were calculated. The results revealed that informal features areutilized more frequently in native articles than non-native ones, with no significant differences in the twocorpora in terms of their most and least frequent informal features. Sentence initial conjunctions are themost recurrent informal features, while exclamation marks are employed the least frequently in bothnative and non-native articles. Implications for EAP courses are delineated in the study as well.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

ALIPOUR, M. (2022). Informality in Applied Linguistics Research Articles: Comparing Native and Non-Native Writings. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, Cilt: 4 - Sayı: 2, 349–373. https://ajindex.com/articles/507045

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. Adel, A. (2008). Metadiscourse across three varieties of English: American, British and advanced learner English. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (45-62). Amsterdam: Bemjamins. Adel, A., & Erman, B. (2012). Recurrent word combinations in academic writing by native and non-native speakers of English: A lexical bundles approach. English for Specific Purposes, 31, 81-92.
  2. Alipour, M. & Matouri, H. (2017). Comparative study of reflexive metadiscourse in applied linguistics research articles published in international journals and in Iranian national journals. ARTESOLESP E-Journal, 7(1), 15-28.
  3. Anthony, L. (2011). AntConc3.4.3. http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.html
  4. Atai, M. R., & Asadnia, F. (2016). The prestigious world university on its homepage: The promotional academic genre of overview. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 1-34.
  5. Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context: The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975.
  6. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Attarn, A. (2014). Study of metadiscourse in ESP articles: A comparison of English articles written by Iranian and English native speakers. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 5(1), 63-71.
  7. Aufa, F. (2014). Should native speaker norms be taken into account?: A perspective in teaching EIL. SELT, 11, 152-258.
  8. Belcher, D. (2007). Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 1–22.
  9. Bennet, K. (2009). English academic style manuals: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 43-54.
  10. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Biber, D. (1995). Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  12. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1999). Corpus linguistics. Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  13. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson. Blagojevic, S. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic prose: A contrastive study of academic articles written in English by English and Norwegian native speakers. Studies about Languages, 5, 60-67.
  14. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  15. Celik, S