Cross-cultural differences in the use of rhetorical strategies in academic texts. An English and Czech contrastive study.

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F60076658%3A12210%2F20%3A43901913" target="_blank" >RIV/60076658:12210/20:43901913 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://journals.pan.pl/dlibra/publication/133271/edition/116432/content" target="_blank" >https://journals.pan.pl/dlibra/publication/133271/edition/116432/content</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.24425/linsi.2020.133271" target="_blank" >10.24425/linsi.2020.133271</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Cross-cultural differences in the use of rhetorical strategies in academic texts. An English and Czech contrastive study.

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Academic authors employ various language means in order to construct and disseminate knowledge, to sound persuasive, to undergird their arguments, but also to seek agreement within the academic community. The aim of this paper is to analyse a selected group of rhetorical strategies used by Anglophone and Czech authors of Linguistics research articles (RAs) and research theses (RTs). These strategies are assumed to vary in both academic genres since the position of their writers within the academic community differs. Even though authors of RAs have to meet reviewers’ requirements in order for their article to be published, so their relative position may be lower than that of the reviewers’, authors of RAs may have the same “absolute status” as the reviewers may be just as expert in that particular field. By contrast, the status of research students is lower than that of their evaluators both in relative and absolute terms. Even though students may gain some learned authority in presenting an original contribution, their assessors command both learned and institutional authority, hence are endowed with a higher status. Apart from comparing rhetorical strategies used in RAs and RTs, the paper focuses on cross-cultural differences between Anglophone and Czech academic writing traditions.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Cross-cultural differences in the use of rhetorical strategies in academic texts. An English and Czech contrastive study.

Popis výsledku anglicky

Academic authors employ various language means in order to construct and disseminate knowledge, to sound persuasive, to undergird their arguments, but also to seek agreement within the academic community. The aim of this paper is to analyse a selected group of rhetorical strategies used by Anglophone and Czech authors of Linguistics research articles (RAs) and research theses (RTs). These strategies are assumed to vary in both academic genres since the position of their writers within the academic community differs. Even though authors of RAs have to meet reviewers’ requirements in order for their article to be published, so their relative position may be lower than that of the reviewers’, authors of RAs may have the same “absolute status” as the reviewers may be just as expert in that particular field. By contrast, the status of research students is lower than that of their evaluators both in relative and absolute terms. Even though students may gain some learned authority in presenting an original contribution, their assessors command both learned and institutional authority, hence are endowed with a higher status. Apart from comparing rhetorical strategies used in RAs and RTs, the paper focuses on cross-cultural differences between Anglophone and Czech academic writing traditions.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60203 - Linguistics

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Linguistica Silesiana

ISSN

0208-4228

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

41

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

41

Stát vydavatele periodika

PL - Polská republika

Počet stran výsledku

18

Strana od-do

177-195

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85090223627