Expressing cause and effect in hard and soft scientific discourse: A corpus-based analysis

• Pérez-Guerra, Javier ^[1] ; Smirnova, Elizaveta ^[2] ; Kostareva , Elena ^[2]
  1. [1] Universidade de Vigo

     Universidade de Vigo

     Vigo, España

     
  2. [2] HSE University
• Localización: Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos ( AELFE ), ISSN-e 2340-2784, ISSN 1139-7241, Nº. 47, 2024, págs. 121-148
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.17398/2340-2784.47.121
• Enlaces
  • Texto completo (pdf)
• Resumen

  • This study is a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the use of cause and effect expressions in two corpora that comprise research articles in four hard and four soft disciplines, selected to represent a broad cross-section of academic discourse. Linguistic expressions of cause/effect are hypothesised to deviate in hard and soft sciences, and the differences pertain not only to key lexical categories but also to syntactic patterns. With the ultimate goal of facilitating practitioners of ESP (English for Specific Purposes) and EAP (English for Academic Purposes) to produce discipline-specific materials, which can effectively address the needs of learners of different sciences, this study investigates the productivity of lexical units, representative of cause/effect expressions in hard and soft scientific disciplines, as identified in the Louvain EAP Dictionary, as well as the main grammatical patterns where the former are attested. This paper shows that cause expressions are more common in soft sciences, while the expressions of effect are used in similar proportion in the two categories. As for lexical strategies, soft sciences tend to use more nouns to express cause/effect, while hard sciences rely on prepositions and conjunctions to a larger extent.

• Referencias bibliográficas
  • Abraham, E. (1991). Why ‘because’? The management of given/new information as a constraint on the selection of causal alternatives. Text Interdisciplinary...
  • Altenberg, B. (1984). Causal linking in spoken and written English. Studia Linguistica, 38(1), 20-69.
  • Anthony, L. (2014). AntConc (Version 3.4.4) [Computer Software]. Waseda University. https:// www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/
  • Becher, T. (1989). Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual enquiry and culture of the disciplines. The Society for Research into Higher...
  • Bennett, G. R. (2010). Using corpora in the language learning classroom: Corpus linguistics for teachers (Vol. 10). University of Michigan...
  • Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press.
  • Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2016). Grammatical complexity in academic English: Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge University Press.
  • Boulton, A. (2012). Corpus consultation for ESP: A review of empirical research. In A. Boulton, S. Carter-Thomas & E. Rowley-Jolivet (Eds.),...
  • Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistics: A practical guide. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316410899
  • Burton, M., & Morgan, C. (2000). Mathematicians writing. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 31(4), 429-453. https://doi.org/...
  • Cao, M., Sun, X., & Zhuge, H. (2018). The contribution of cause-effect link to representing the core of scientific paper – The role of...
  • Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., & Saricaoglu, A. (2016). Causal discourse analyzer: Improving automated feedback on academic ESL writing. Computer...
  • Davis, P. J., & Hersh, R. (1981). The mathematical experience. Birkhauser.
  • Degand, L. (2000). Causal connectives or causal prepositions? Discursive constraints. Journal of Pragmatics, 32(6), 687-707. https://doi.org/10....
  • Flowerdew, L. (1998). Integrating expert and interlanguage computer corpora findings on causality: Discoveries for teachers and students....
  • Gilquin, G., & Paquot, M. (2007). Spoken features in learner academic writing: Identification, explanation and solution. In M. Davies,...
  • Gopalan, S., & Devi, S. L. (2017). Cause and effect extraction from biomedical corpus. Computación y Sistemas, 21(4), 749-757. https://doi.org/10.13053/cys-21-4-2854
  • Granger, S., & Paquot, M. (2010). Customising a general EAP dictionary to meet learner needs. In S. Granger & M. Paquot (Eds.), Lexicography...
  • Granger, S., & Paquot, M. (2015). Electronic lexicography goes local: Design and structures of a needs-driven online academic writing...
  • Groom, N. (2005). Pattern and meaning across genres and disciplines: An exploratory study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3),...
  • Gruiţă, M. (1983). On causal connectives in English and Romanian. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique, 28(1), 53-62.
  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman.
  • Hardy, J. A., & Römer, U. (2013). Revealing disciplinary variation in student writing: A multidimensional analysis of the Michigan Corpus...
  • Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three...
  • Hunston, S., & Francis, G. (2000). Pattern Grammar: A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.4
  • Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: writer stance in research articles. In C. N. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: texts, processes...
  • Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00012-0
  • Hyland, K. (2002). Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 215-239. https://doi.org/10. 1093/applin/23.2.215
  • Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplines and discourses: Social interaction in the construction of knowledge. In A. Arbor (Ed.), Disciplinary discourses:...
  • Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173-192. https://doi.org/...
  • Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 4-21. https://doi.org/...
  • Hyland, K., & Jiang, J. J. (2018). ‘In this paper we suggest’: Changing patterns of disciplinary metadiscourse. English for Specific Purposes,...
  • Johns, T. F. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two samples of data-driven learning materials. English Language Research Journal, 4, 1-16.
  • Johns, T. F. (1997). Contexts: The background, development and trialling of a concordance-based CALL program. In A. Wichmann, S. Fligelstone,...
  • Jordan, R. R. (1999). Academic writing course: Study skills in English. Pearson Education.
  • Kac, M. B. (1972). Clauses of saying and the interpretation of because. Language, 48, 626-632.
  • Krogsrud, B. (1980). Factors motivating the position of finite adverbial clauses introduced by as, because, since. MA thesis, Oslo University.
  • Li, F. (2014). Subjectivity in Mandarin Chinese: the meaning and use of causal connectives in written discourse. PhD dissertation. Utrecht...
  • Li, F., Evers-Vermeul, J., & Sanders, T. J. M. (2013). Subjectivity and result marking in Mandarin. Chinese Language and Discourse, 4(1),...
  • Linderholm, T., Everson, M. G., Van Den Broek, P., Mischinski, M., Crittenden, A., & Samuels, J. (2000). Effects of causal text revisions...
  • Louvain EAP Dictionary (LEAD). https://leaddico. uclouvain.be/
  • Ma, H., & Qian, M. (2020). The creation and evaluation of a grammar pattern list for the most frequent academic verbs. English for Specific...
  • Marshman, E. (2004). The cause-effect relation in a French-language biopharmaceuticals corpus: Some lexical knowledge patterns. The Computational...
  • Marshman E., & L’Homme M. C. (2006). Disambiguating lexical markers of cause and effect using actantial structures and actant classes....
  • McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (2001). Corpus linguistics (2nd ed.). Edinburgh University Press.
  • Mel’ču, I., Clas, A., & Polguère, A. (1995). Introduction à la lexicologie explicative et combinatoire. AUPELF-UREf & Éditions Duculot....
  • Palmer, F. R. (2001). Mood and modality (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10. 1017/CBO9781139167178
  • Pander Maat, H., & Sanders, T. (2001). Subjectivity in causal connectives: An empirical study of language in use. Cognitive Linguistics,...
  • Paquot, M. (2010). Academic vocabulary in learner writing. Continuum.
  • Paquot, M. (2012). The LEAD dictionary-cumwriting aid: An integrated dictionary and corpus tool. In S. Granger, & M. Paquot (Eds.), Electronic...
  • Rutherford, E. (1970). Some observations concerning subordinate clauses in English. Language, 46, 97-115.
  • Sager, J. C., Dungworth, D., & MacDonald, P. F. (1980). English special languages: Principles and practice in science and technology....
  • Sanders, T. J., & Spooren, W. P. (2015). Causality and subjectivity in discourse: The meaning and use of causal connectives in spontaneous...
  • Storer, N. W. (1967). The hard sciences and the soft: Some sociological observations. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 55(1),...
  • Sweetser, E. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structure. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620904
  • van Dijk, T. A. (1977). Text and context. Longman.
  • Winkworth, T., Tredgold, T., & Glynn, J. (1858). The Journal of the Society of Arts, 6(310), 697- 706.
  • Winter, E. (1977). A clause-related approach to English texts. Instructional Science, 6, 1-92.
  • Winter, E. (1982). Towards a contextual grammar of English. George Allen & Unwin.
  • Whalley, P. (1981). A partial index of text complexity involving the lexical analysis of rhetorical connectives. ALLC Journal, 2, 55-60.