Cyfroteka.pl

klikaj i czytaj online

Cyfro
Czytomierz
00549 010948 7499532 na godz. na dobę w sumie
Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles - ebook/pdf
Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles - ebook/pdf
Autor: Liczba stron: 312
Wydawca: Uniwersytet Śląski Język publikacji: polski
ISBN: 978-8-3801-2456-1 Data wydania:
Lektor:
Kategoria: ebooki >> nauka języków obcych >> polski
Porównaj ceny (książka, ebook, audiobook).

Przedmiotem pracy są językowe wykładniki stopnia pewności sądów w artykułach naukowych z dziedziny językoznawstwa w języku angielskim i polskim. Punktem wyjścia podjętych badań jest przekonanie, że różne tradycje intelektualne, w jakich kształtowała się polska i angielska komunikacja akademicka — tradycje odmiennie postrzegające status wiedzy naukowej i proces jej tworzenia, relację między autorem i czytelnikiem, czy wreszcie sam akt pisania i stopień dialogowości tekstu naukowego — mogą znajdować odzwierciedlenie w różnych przeświadczeniach dotyczących tego, czym jest fakt naukowy, a co pozostaje w sferze hipotez, założeń i propozycji oczekujących na potwierdzenie i akceptację środowiska akademickiego. Różnice te z kolei sugerowałyby, iż autorzy wywodzący się z tych dwóch kręgów kulturowych mogą przywiązywać różną wagę do wyraźnego oznaczania treści hipotetycznych oraz sądów, którym towarzyszy wysoki stopień pewności, oznaczać je w różny sposób, z różną częstotliwością i w różnych miejscach wywodu. Niniejsza praca podejmuje próbę ustalenia, czy różnice takie istnieją i, jeśli tak, których wykładników modalności epistemicznej dotyczą i jak przebiegają.

Praca może stanowić głos w dyskusji nad różnicami w stylach argumentacji akademickiej charakterystycznych dla poszczególnych kultur i dyscyplin, wnieść dane do badań porównawczych nad znaczeniami epistemicznymi i ich funkcją w różnych typach dyskursu oraz być punktem odniesienia dla dalszych analiz uwzględniających inne języki, gatunki i dyscypliny.

Znajdź podobne książki

Darmowy fragment publikacji:

i C e r t a n t y a n d D o u b t i n A c a d e m c D s c o u r s e i i : Certainty and Doubt in Academic Discourse: Epistemic Modality Markers in English and Polish Linguistics Articles Krystyna Warchał i E p s t e m c M o d a i l i t y M a r k e r s i n E n g l i s h a n d P o l i l i i s h L n g u s t i c s A r t i c e s K r y s t y n a W a r c h a ł QR CODE Wygenerowano na www.qr-online.pl Więcej o książce CENA 40 ZŁ (+ VAT) ISSN 0208-6336 ISBN 978-83-8012-456-1 KATOWICE 2015 Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles For Hania and Jasio NR 3375 Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles Krystyna Warchał Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego • Katowice 2015 Editor of the series: Językoznawstwo Neofilologiczne Maria Wysocka Referee Piotr Mamet Contents Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. Academic discourse and its rhetoric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Academic discourse community: its genres and values . . . . . . 1.2 The cultural factor in academic communication . . . . . . . . . 1.3 English academic discourse: Previous studies . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.1 Academic register(s) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.2 Academic genres . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.3 Principal themes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3.4 English as an academic lingua franca . . . . . . . . . . . 1.4 Polish academic discourse: Previous studies . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Linguistic modality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 Approaches and concepts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.1 Sentential, sub-sentential and discourse modality . . . . . . 2.1.2 Modality and mood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.3 Modality and the propositional content . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.4 Modality and subjectivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1.5 Modality and the realis/irrealis distinction . . . . . . . . . 2.1.6 Modality and relevance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Modal meanings and values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.1 The epistemic/deontic distinction and related modal subdomains . 2.2.2 The root/epistemic distinction . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.3 Epistemicity, speaker-orientedness, and agent-orientedness . . . 2.2.4 Epistemicity and evidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.5 Modal scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Epistemic modality markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3.1 Epistemic markers in English . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11 15 18 22 22 26 32 41 44 50 53 53 54 55 57 59 63 67 71 71 74 79 83 88 92 92 6 Contents 2.3.2 Epistemic markers in Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99 2.4 Modality in academic discourse: Previous studies . . . . . . . . 111 2.5 Concluding remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120 3. The project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 3.1 Aims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 3.2 Corpus description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 3.3 The analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127 4. Markers of (un)certainty in English and Polish linguistics articles . . . 133 4.1 High-value markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 4.1.1 English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133 4.1.2 Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 4.1.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 4.2 Middle-value markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 4.2.1 English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 4.2.2 Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 4.2.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 4.3 Low-value markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 4.3.1 English . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213 4.3.2 Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 4.3.3 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 5. Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265 Index of names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291 Index of modality markers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297 Streszczenie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301 Zusammenfassung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 303 List of tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 List of figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 309 Introduction When people say that they know something, they have their reasons to feel certain that something is the case. Scientific knowledge requires that these rea- sons be of a specific kind, that they be backed by data collected in the course of observation and systematic experimentation. Moreover, as the develop- ments brought by social constructionism have shown, the status of these data as the empirical basis of knowledge is sanctioned by the particular social con- text where knowledge is generated, as is the value of observation and experi- ment as legitimate scientific procedures (Berger and Luckmann, 1967). In this perspective, knowledge is relative to the communities which produce it and emerges in a complex process of negotiating a shared vision of the world and a shared understanding of what constitutes an appropriate object of scientific inquiry, a valid scientific method, and a meaningful academic contribution. Thus, rather than a faithful representation of an objectively given reality, sci- entific knowledge can be viewed as a product of society, created according to the principles a particular community judges appropriate and aiming to ex- plain this reality which is available to and agreed upon by this particular group. It is then to a large extent a matter of social consensus. The consensual nature of scientific knowledge and the fact that it is gener- ated in interaction between community members implies that signals of epis- temic stance in academic discourse will reflect not only the degree of the au- thor’s personal commitment to the truth of a proposition, but also the author’s awareness of other members of the discourse community, of the state of the art in the discipline, and of the established patterns of interaction with oth- ers. For example, an expression of certainty may convey information about the author’s commitment deriving from the amount, distribution, and consisten- cy of the data gathered, thus being a direct claim to expertise; it may indicate that the information presented has already been accepted by the discourse 8 Introduction community as a fact and granted the status of knowledge; or it may emphasise the rigour and cogency of argumentation by showing that the author (with the readers) has reached an undeniable conclusion which deserves promotion to the status of fact. And conversely, an expression which limits or qualifies the author’s commitment to the proposition may reflect the author’s lack of cer- tainty, possibly related to the type of evidence insufficient to sustain the claim; it may signal that the proposition is a new claim offered for evaluation by the discourse community and awaiting the community’s approval rather than part of the already established consensus over what is known; or it may con- vey the author’s awareness of the norms and values professed by the commu- nity, such as accepted ways of showing respect for and disagreeing with other authors and the preferable degree of autonomy left to the readers. In this per- spective, a study of epistemic markers in academic texts originating in a par- ticular community may provide some insight into its academic practices: the specific mechanisms of knowledge generation and sharing which function within this community. Possible differences in academic practices may be related to various com- munity-defining elements, of which language is perhaps the most salient. Languages have developed their own rhetorical patterns, which reflect their internal organisation, the responsibilities of and the preferred degree of soli- darity between interactants, and the intellectual tradition in which they grow and to which they contribute (Kaplan, 1987; Connor and Kaplan, 1987; Con- nor, 1996). These culture-specific features will contribute to the ways in which members of communities talk about, generate and disseminate knowledge. Another important element which defines a particular scientific community is the discipline. Disciplines have given rise to text types and evolved stylis- tic features which best correspond to their specific needs, including recognis- able argumentation patterns and expected degree of interpersonal involve- ment (Melander et al., 1997; Hyland, 1999a, 2000, 2008a; Dahl, 2004; Hyland and Bondi, 2006; Fløttum et al., 2006a; Vold, 2006a; Yakhontova, 2006). These discipline-related characteristics will be responsible for much of the variation observed in the area of academic communication. As powerful factors influ- encing communication patterns on various levels — from the choice of genre, through the degree of dialogicality, to phraseological decisions — both cultural and disciplinary background may also influence the ways in which signals of epistemic evaluation are used in the text: their frequency, the degrees of com- mitment which tend to be marked more often than others, and the part of text in which they tend to appear. This book is concerned with potential differenc- es related to the first of these two factors. — Are high, middle and low degrees of confidence marked with a similar fre- — What categories of markers prevail as exponents of particular modal val- Polish linguistics articles? quency? ue in the two sets of texts? Introduction 9 This book examines the use of epistemic modality markers in two sets of peer-reviewed journal articles in the field of linguistics published in the years 2001-2006. The first set comprises two hundred articles written in English and drawn from five international linguistics journals: Journal of Pragmatics, Lan- guage and Communication, Language Sciences, Lingua, and Linguistics and Phi- losophy. The second set consists of two hundred articles written in Polish and published in eight Polish journals, all of which were included in the 2003 list of recognised scientific journals released by the Polish Committee for Scien- tific Research. The analysis seeks answers to the following questions: — Is the epistemic evaluation marked with the same frequency in English and — Do epistemic markers tend to cluster in particular article sections? Are there any differences in their distribution that might be related to the value of the marker? — Is there any indication of potential differences in what tends to be epistem- ically qualified in these two sets of texts? I hope that the data presented here may be of interest to scholars who study culture-based and discipline-based argumentation patterns in academic dis- course, including those concerned with the use of English as an Addition- al Language and English as a Lingua Franca, and to researchers who investi- gate epistemic modality and evidentiality in cross-linguistic and cross-cultural perspective. They might also be of some value to scholars who are concerned with how language reflects the community-based mechanisms of knowledge generation and sharing. Chapter 1 discusses the internal variation of academic discourse resulting from disciplinary divisions, the complex system of genres, multiple audiences, and cultural diversity, provides a short overview of the main lines of research that have been undertaken into academic communication, and reports on the existing research into Polish academic discourse. Chapter 2 is devoted to lin- guistic modality and outlines the main approaches to the concept, discusses modality types and values, and focuses of epistemicity to present its markers in English and in Polish. The chapter closes with an overview of previous re- search into modality in academic discourse. Chapter 3 describes in more de- tail the aims of the present study, introduces the corpus which is the source of data, and explains the procedures applied in the analysis. Chapter 4 presents 10 Introduction and discusses the collected data in three main sections, each of which is de- voted to one modal value — high, middle and low — and its representation in the English and Polish part of the corpus and closes with a discussion sum- marizing the information for both languages. Chapter 5 offers some conclud- ing remarks. Index of names Abbamonte, Lucia 32, 265 Ädel, Annelie 35–36, 51, 265 Adnan, Zifirdaus 18, 265 Ahmad, Ummul K. 285 Aijmer, Karin 34, 51, 265 Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 86–87, 265 Allison, Desmond 289 Ammon, Ulrich 41, 265 Ananiadou, Sophia 286 Ángeles Alcaraz Ariza, María 283 Arabski, Janusz 25, 265, 273, 278, 287 Arnaudet, Martin L. 23, 28, 265 Artiga León, María Rosario 114, 265 Asher, R. E. 273 Auwera, Johan van der 56, 67, 70, 80– 82, 84, 87, 90, 265, 270, 280–281, 283, 307 Avram, Larisa 67, 289 Bachtin, Michaił 266 Bailey, Stephen 23, 266 Bakhtin, Mikhail 13, 26, 266 Bamford, Julia 32, 34, 266 Barbieri, Federica 23, 25, 267 Barbiers, Sjef 57, 70, 266 Barrett, Mary E. 23, 28, 265 Bartholomae, David 11, 266 Bazerman, Charles 27–28, 266 Beck, Silvia C. 279 Bell, Roger T. 27, 266 Belotti, Ulisse 14, 29, 266 Benson, James D. 277–278 Berbeira Gardón, José L. 67, 69, 266, 303 Berger, Peter L. 7, 266 Bergs, Alexander 57, 266 Beukema, Frits 266 Bhatia, Vijay K. 27, 266 Biber, Douglas 22–25, 32, 34, 39–40, 46, 59, 111–114, 127, 134, 266–267, 269, 276 Bielska, Joanna 30, 267 Bielski, Marek 30, 267 Bloor, Thomas 29, 267 Bondi, Marina 8, 14, 25, 30, 34, 267, 271, 275, 279, 284, 286–287 Borchert, Donald M. 271 Boye, Kasper 76, 267 Bralczyk, Jerzy 108–109, 127, 267 Brantjes, Jenneke 67, 267 Brown, E. K. 273 Bruce, Ian 28, 267 Brutt-Griffler, Janina 41, 267 Bunton, David 31, 35–36, 267 Burgess, Sally 17, 30, 265, 267, 272, 276–280, 287 Burrough-Boenisch, Joy 33, 267 Busuttil, Pierre 283 292 Index of names Butler, Jonny 64, 267 Bybee, Joan 56, 58, 70, 75, 79–82, 268, 273, 278, 280, 283, 307 Canagarajah, Suresh 16, 268 Canale, Michael 27, 268 Candlin, Cristopher N. 275 Cargill, Margaret 28, 268 Carter-Thomas, Shirley 14, 33, 268 Cava, Amelia M. 30, 34, 268 Chafe, Wallace 63, 85, 268 Chang, Yu-Ying 285 Chavez, Daniel 285 Chen, Qi 25, 268 Chomsky, Noam 38 Chung, Sandra 56–57, 268 Clyne, Michael 17–20, 37, 46, 268 Čmejrková, Světla 18, 20–21, 46, 51, 268–269 Coates, Jennifer 60–61, 63, 68, 72, 74, 78, 90–97, 127, 134–135, 166–167, 213–214, 217, 269 Collins, Peter 92–97, 134, 167, 269 Connor, Ulla 8, 18, 27, 32, 269, 274, 276 269 Dedaić, Mirjana N. 59, 270 Del Lungo Camiciotti, Gabriella 265– 266, 272, 274, 281, 283–284, 286 DeLancey, Scott 86, 270 Dendale, Patrick 83, 270, 280–281 Dervin, Fred 270, 273, 276, 280 Dewey, Martin 41, 270 Diani, Giuliana 31, 34, 270, 280 Diewald, Gabriele 67, 87, 270 Divasson, Lourdes 34, 277 Dobrzyńska, Teresa 281 Dossena, Marina 59, 273 Dressen, Dacia F. 285 Dudley-Evans, Tony 274 Duszak, Anna 12–14, 18, 20, 26, 28, 37, 46–51, 269–271, 277, 279, 286– 287 Dwyer, Sharon 285 Eikmeyer, Hans-Jurgen 277 ElMalik, Abdullahi T. 14, 271 Espinoza, Ana María 33, 271 Evans, Virginia 28, 271 Facchinetti, Roberta 213, 269–271, Fant, Lars 54, 271 Feak, Christine B. 23, 28, 285 Ferguson, Gibson R. 265, 282 Fernández Polo, Francisco Javier 31, 271 Fillmore, Charles J. 57, 271 Finegan, Edward 34, 111, 127, 267 Fintel, Kai von 70, 73, 98, 271 Fitneva, Stanka A. 86, 271 Fleischman, Suzanne 58, 268, 273, 278, 280, 283 Fløttum, Kjersti 8, 14, 23–24, 29, 35– 36, 38, 51, 271, 275, 279 Conrad, Susan 22, 34, 39, 112, 267, 276–278, 280–282 Cortes, Viviana 14, 269 Cotterill, Janet 288 Coulthard, Malcolm 274, 288 Coupland, Nikolas 265 Coxhead, Averil 25, 269 Crawford Camiciottoli, Belinda 32, 40, 115, 269 Crismore, Avon 35, 38, 269 Crompton, Peter 37, 111, 269 Crystal, David 41–42, 269 Czaplejewicz, Eugeniusz 266 D’Angelo, Larissa 31, 270 Dahl, Trine 8, 14, 29–30, 35, 51, 269– Flower, Linda. 21, 272 Flowerdew, John 11, 13, 33, 42, 269, 271 Daneš, František 18, 20, 46, 269 272, 282, 289 Fok, Angela C.Y.Y. 284 Index of names 293 Forey, Gail 31, 274 Fortanet Gómez, Inmaculada 32, 34, 38, 272, 282 Frawley, William 273, 281, 286 Freddi, Maria 14, 32, 34, 272 Fredrickson, Kirstin M. 279 Freedman, Aviva 282 Gabrielatos, Costas 287 Gabryś-Barker, Danuta 287 Gajda, Stanisław 44, 47, 272, 289 Galtung, Johan 45, 272 Gavins, Joanna 97–98, 127, 272 Ge, Guang-chun 25, 268 Gillaerts, Paul 37, 272 Gillette, Susan 285 Giner, Diana 118, 287 Gledhill, Chris 14, 272 Goffman, Erving 263, 272 Golebiowski, Zofia 33, 48–49, 51, 272–273 Gotti, Maurizio 59, 273 Graff Fara, Delia 282 Grajewski, Wincenty 266 Gravett, Sarah 11, 273 Gray, Bethany 46, 267 Greaves, William S. 277–278 Green, M.S. 58, 273 Greenbaum, Sidney 282 Groefsema, Marjolein 67–69, 95, 273, 303 Groom, Nicholas 23–24, 273 Grunwell, Pamela 284 Grzegorczykowa, Renata 99–100, 107, 127, 273 Gumul, Ewa 265 Günthner, Susanne 26, 273 Haan, Ferdinand de 74, 55, 65, 74, 273 Halliday, Michael A.K. 22, 26, 60, 82– 83, 88–91, 273, 307 Hamp-Lyons, Liz 11, 14, 275 Hansen, Björn 67, 273 Harres, Annette 37, 277 Hassan, Ruqaiya 22, 273 Heine, Bernd 67, 273 Heine, Lena 57, 266 Heltoft, Lars 55, 273 Hentschel, Gerd 288 Herslund, Michael 62, 273 Hewings, Ann 29, 34, 273–274 Hewings, Martin 34, 273–274 Hidalgo Downing, Laura 278 Hinds, John 17, 19, 21, 45–46, 274 Hinkel, Eli 115–116, 274 Hoey, Michael 38, 274 Hollett, Vicki 28, 274 Holmes, Richard 28, 274 Hood, Susan 31, 274 Hoye, Leo 38, 57, 61, 63, 93, 98–99, 127, 140, 143, 217, 274 Huckin, Thomas 30, 274 Huddleston, Rodney D. 92–93, 274 Hunston, Susan 17–18, 34, 51, 263, 269, 274, 278, 285 Hyland, Ken 8, 11–14, 17–18, 22–25, 27, 29–39, 51, 98, 114–118, 127, 263, 267, 270–271, 274–275, 280, 284, 286–287 Icke, Vincent 285 Ineichen, Gustav 288 Janik, Christina 40, 119, 276 Jędrzejko, Ewa 101, 276 Jenkins, Jennifer 41, 270 John, Suganthi 38, 285 Johns, Ann M. 15–16, 27, 31, 276 Jordan, R.R. 23, 28, 276 Kachru, Braj 41, 276 Kachru, Yamuna 46, 276 Kakietek, Piotr 100, 276 Kaplan, Robert B. 8, 18, 269, 274, 276 Kasperski, Edward 266 294 Index of names Keck, Casey M 40, 59, 113–114, 134, Kerz, Elma 33, 276 Kettemann, Bernhard 286 Kiefer, Ferenc 63, 70, 75, 77–78, 276, 276 307 277 Kinn, Torodd 271 Klinge, Alex 67–68, 76, 271, 273, 276, 280–281 Knoblauch, Hubert 26, 273 Koutsantoni, Dimitra 38, 276 Kowalski, Grzegorz 50, 276 Kratzer, Angelika 63–69, 73–74, 89, 276–277 Kreutz, Heinz 37, 277 Krug, Manfred 271, 277, 280–281 Krzyżyk, Danuta 108–110, 127, 277 Kuo, Chih-Hua 38, 277 Kuteeva, Maria 288 Kuźniak, Marek 288 Lafuente Millán, Enrique 29, 40, 118, Larreya, Paul 66, 277 Lazard, Gilbert 86, 277 Leckie-Tarry, Helen 22, 277 Lee, Y. P. 284 Leech, Geoffrey 282 Lemke, Jay L. 22, 277 León. Isabel K. 34, 277 Lewin, Beverly A. 37, 277 Lewkowicz, Jo 14, 271 Ligara, Bronisława 67, 99–109, 127, 150, 277 Lillis, Theresa 274 Lord, Robert 284 Lorés Sanz, Rosa 23–24, 30, 267, 277 Low, Graham 284 Luckmann, Thomas 7, 266 Lunn, Patricia V. 66, 278 Luukka, Minna-Riitta 37, 278 Łyda, Andrzej 18, 33, 40, 50, 114, 265, 271, 276, 278, 280, 287–288 Lyons, John 11, 59–62, 65, 70–74, 99, 278, 307 Marín-Arrese, Juana I. 59, 278 Markkanen, Raija 37, 269, 278, 281 Marko, Georg 286 Martin, J.R. 26–27, 34, 263, 278–279 Martínez, Iliana A. 25, 279 Martín-Martín, Pedro 17, 30, 265, 267, 272, 276–280, 287 Martins, Helder F. 288 Mason, Ian 22, 273 Matthews, Richard 54, 67, 279 Mauranen, Anna 19–21, 32–36, 43– 44, 51, 267–269, 279, 285 Maynard, Senko K. 54, 279 McCarthy, Michael 25, 279 McEnery, Tony 125, 279 McNaught, John 286 Medway, Peter 282 Melander, Björn 8, 14, 30, 279 Merlini Barbaresi, Lavinia 38, 279 Miko, František 45 Mikołajczak, Stanisław 47, 279 Miller, Carolyn R. 26, 279 Milton, John 98, 115–116, 127, 275 Mitchell, Keith 61, 280 Mithun, Marianne 63, 65, 280 Molina Plaza, Silvia 278 Molino, Alessandra 38, 51, 280 Montemagni, Simonetta 286 Moore, Sarah 28, 280 Morell, Teresa 31, 280 Moreno, Ana I. 34, 36, 280 Morton, Janne 32, 280 Motapanyane, Virginia 67, 280 Müller, Henrik H. 67, 271, 273, 280– Mur Dueñas, Pilar 14, 29, 38, 51, 280 Murray, Rowena 28, 280 Myers, Greg 14, 17–18, 28, 37, 111, 280–281 281 Index of names 295 Namsaraev, Vasili 14, 37, 281 Narrog, Heiko 56–58, 63, 66–67, 70, 74, 281 Nation, Paul 25, 269 Nesi, Hilary 14, 271 Nichols, Johanna 268 Nuyts, Jan 53, 61–62, 74, 77–78, 82, 86, 91, 281 O’Connor, Patrick 28, 268 O’Dell, Felicity 25, 279 Oakey, David 14, 281 Okamura, Akiko 14, 281 Oliveira, Fátima 67, 281 Omoniyi, Tope 270 Ostaszewska, Danuta 48, 281 Pagliuca, William 268 Palmer, Frank R. 56–59, 63–74, 83– 84, 89–97, 127, 269, 270–271, 282, 307 Palmer-Silveira, Juan C. 282 Paltridge, Brian 11, 27–28, 282 Panza, Carolina B. 279 Papafragou, Anna 58–62, 66–70, 76– 78, 93, 282, 303, 307 Paré, Anthony 26, 282 Peacock, Matthew 11, 42, 269, 272, 282, 289 Pérez-Llantada, Carmen 36, 38, 99, 119, 127, 265, 282 Perkins, Revere 268 Petersen, Eva B. 12, 17, 282 Petersen, Nadine 11, 273 Pho, Phuong Dzung 30, 282 Plungian, Vladimir A. 56, 70–71, 80– 87, 90, 265, 282, 307 Pohl, Alek 288 Polański, Kazimierz 55, 282 Portner, Paul 54–55, 59, 98, 282 Prior, Paul 266 Pullum, Geoffrey K. 93, 274 Quirk, Randolph 96–98, 127, 282 Ransom, Evelyn N. 57, 282 Recanati, François 67, 282 Rezzano, Norma S. 40, 112–113, 282– 283 Rieser, Hannes 277 Rock, Frances 288 Römer, Ute 31, 34, 38, 283 Rothstein, Björn 266, 285 Rowley-Jolivet, Elizabeth 14, 31, 33, 268, 283 Rozwadowska, Bożena 288 Ruiz-Garrido, Miguel F. 282 Rundblad, Gabriella 14, 33, 283 Russell, Gillian 282 Rytel, Danuta 99–102, 108–109, 127, 283 283 Saeed, John I. 59, 283 Sala, Michele 14, 283 Salager-Meyer, Françoise 18, 37, 51, 116–117, 283 Salkie, Raphael 70–71, 91–92, 120, Saloni, Zygmunt 104, 106, 283 Samraj, B. 14, 18, 28, 283 Saxena, Mukul 270 Schröder, Hartmut 37, 278, 281 Scott, Michael 127, 283 Seymour, Ruth 285 Sharifian, Farzad 41, 283 Shaw, Philip 18, 51, 283 Shopen, Timothy 268 Siepmann, Dirk 46, 283 Silva-Corvalán, Carmen 67, 283 Silver, Marc 34, 39, 284 Simpson, J. M. Y. 273 Simpson, Paul 59, 74, 97–98, 127, 284 Simpson-Vlach, Rita C. 23, 284 Skelton, John 37, 116, 284 Sławkowa, Ewa 48, 281 Slessor, Richard 287 296 Index of names Smart, Graham 26, 282 Smirnova, Elena 87, 270 Smith, Larry E. 18, 41, 268, 276, 284 Soler, Viviana 38, 284 Sperber, Dan 67, 69, 284 Steffensen, Margaret S. 269 Stotesbury, Hilkka 30, 34, 284 Strevens, Peter 19, 41, 284 Suárez-Tejerina, Lorena 30, 34, 280, Suomela-Salmi, Eija 270, 273, 276, 284 280 Svartvik, Jan 282 Swain, Merrill 27, 268, 284 Swales, John M. 11–18, 23, 27–33, 42– 43, 49, 111, 264, 276, 279, 285–286 Sweetser, Eve E. 68, 70, 74–78, 93, 285 Talmy, Leonard 75–76, 285 Tang, Ramona 38, 285 Tarone, Elaine 33, 285 Tasmowski, Liliane 83, 270 Taylor, Charles 12, 285 Tessuto, Girolamo 14, 29, 285 Thieroff, Rolf 55, 266, 285 Thompson, Geoff 34, 51, 263, 269, 274, 278, 285 112, 286 Thompson, Paul 23, 31–32, 40, 111– Thompson, Susan E. 36, 286 Timberlake, Alan 56–57, 268 Tognini-Bonelli, Elena 265–266, 272, 274, 281, 283–284, 286 Traugott, Elizabeth C. 70, 75, 286 Tse, Polly 25, 31, 275, 286 Tutak, Kinga 108–109, 127, 286 Ulicka, Danuta 266 Unger, J.W. 287 Uysal, Hacer Hande 22, 286 Van Bonn, Sarah 30, 286 287 Van de Velde, Freek 37, 272 Vande Kopple, William J. 35, 38, 286 Vassileva, Irena 37–39, 51, 286 Vázquez Orta, Ignacio 39, 51, 118– 119, 287 Ventola, Eija 40, 267–268, 285, 287 Venturi, Giulia 286 Venuti, Marco 30, 34, 268 Verstraete, Jean-Christophe 61, 63, Vladimirou, Dimitra 39, 274, 287 Vold, Eva T. 8, 14, 23–24, 37, 40, 51, 117–118, 121, 130, 287 Walton, Douglas 12, 19, 287 Warchał, Krystyna 16, 18, 27, 33, 38, 40, 50, 113–114, 119, 126, 263, 265, 271, 276, 278, 280, 287–288 Wärnsby, Anna 67, 288 Weiss, Daniel 100, 105, 288 Westney, Paul 62, 66, 94, 97, 127, 288 White, Peter R.R. 13, 34, 39, 124, 279, 288–289 Wiemer, Björn 100, 108–110, 131, 289 Willett, Thomas 84–86, 289 Williams, Ian A. 14, 289 Williams, Joseph M. 23, 35, 289 Wilson, Andrew 125, 279 Wilson, Deirdre 67, 69, 284 Wojtak, Maria 37, 47, 289 Wojtaszek, Adam 278 Wood, Alistair 13, 289 Wurff, Wim van der 266 Yakhontova, Tatyana 8, 14, 289 Yang, Ruiying 14, 28, 289 Yiyun, Ye 34, 285 Zambrano, Nahirana 283 Żabowska, Magdalena 107, 127, 289 Żydek-Bednarczuk, Urszula 47, 289 Index of modality markers English alleged 73 allegedly 97, 128, 131, 220–224 apparent 131 apparently 98, 115, 131 appear 99, 115–118, 130–131, 177, 179, 183–186, 208–211, 215–217, 251 arguably 128, 171–175 assume 25, 99, 117–118, 130, 179– be able to 91, 168, 216 be bound to 93, 96–97, 127, 134–139 be going to 62, 93, 97, 127, 134, 136, 186, 211 139 166–170 be supposed to 62, 85, 88, 93, 97, 128, believe 99, 117, 130, 179–186 by no means 128, 140–144 can 68–70, 73–76, 80–81, 91, 112– 115, 119, 141–143, 147, 173–174, 180–183, 221–224, 230–231 can’t 59, 92–93, 96, 98, 127, 134, 136– 138, 163, 173 certain 88–89, 98, 129, 146–148 certainly 38, 85, 89, 97–99, 128, 140– 144, 163, 170,183, 185, 215–218 conceivable 129, 225–229 conceivably 97, 128, 215–217, 220– 224, 228 conclude 99 convinced 98, 129, 146–148 could 25, 79, 90–93, 112–114, 117– 118, 128, 141–142, 165, 168, 172– 174, 180–183, 213–224 couldn’t 127, 134–136, 139–140, 165 definitely 97, 128, 140–141, 144 doubt 129–130, 225–232 doubtful 98, 129, 225–227, 229 doubtless 128, 140–144 evidently 97 expect 130, 179, 181, 184, 186 feeling 129, 176–178 for certain 128, 140 for sure 128, 142–144 guess 114, 130, 228–232 had better 61, 65 have (got) to 75, 81, 93, 96–97, 114, 127, 134–139, 173–174, 180, 182, 216 imagine 89, 130, 179, 181, 184–186 imply 99, 117, 217 impossible 129, 176–178, 217 impression 129, 176–178, 217 in all likelihood 98, 128, 171–175 in fact 131 inconceivable 129 298 Index of modality markers incontestably 128, 140 incontrovertibly 128, 142, 144 indeed 98, 131, 215–216 indisputably 128, 140 indubitably 128, 142, 144 infer 99, 131 likelihood 129, 176–178 likely 60, 65, 89, 98, 117, 128–129, 168, 171–178 little doubt 98, 129, 147–148 may 25, 54, 56, 58, 64–65, 68–93, 99, 112–119, 128, 141–144, 173, 180– 183, 213–224, 230–231, 249–251 maybe 54, 88, 97, 128, 219–224 might 61, 90–93, 112, 114, 118, 128, 141, 180–184, 211–224, 230–232, 249–252 must 40, 59–61, 64, 68–75, 79–84, 87– 97, 112–114, 127, 134–143, 172– 175, 180, 221, 227–228 need 75, 92–93, 96–97, 127, 134, 137, 139 139, 216 need to 79, 93, 96–97, 127, 134, 137, no doubt 98, 128–129, 140–148 not likely 129, 225–229 not possible 129 obviously 38, 97–98, 131 of course 38, 97–98, 131, 137, 165, on no account 128, 140 ought to 62, 75, 90–97, 128, 141, 166– 215–216 170 perhaps 54, 97–98, 115, 118, 128, 137, 215–216, 219–224, 249–250 plausible 129, 176–178, 180, 211 possibility 65, 93, 129, 224–229 possible 54–55, 88–91, 115, 117, 129, 141, 168, 216, 224–229, 252 possibly 89, 97–99, 128, 136, 139–140, presumably 128, 165, 168, 171–175, 215–224, 251 211 221 presume 130, 179–181, 185–186 probable 61, 129, 176–178 probably 60, 85, 89, 97, 117, 128, 168– 175, 180, 211 purportedly 128, 220–224 reportedly 131 seem 25, 85, 114, 117–118, 130–131, 146–148, 169, 177–186, 208–209, 215–218, 227, 251–252 should 40, 60, 62, 65–70, 79–80, 90– 97, 112–114, 117, 128, 141–143, 166–175, 181–183, 211, 221 speculate 130, 228–232 suppose 85, 117, 130, 179–183, 186, supposedly 128, 171–175 sure 89, 98, 129, 146–148 surely 128, 137–144, 147, 164 suspect 117, 130, 228–232, 252 think 60, 85, 89–91, 99, 114, 130, 179, 182–186, 208–211 unarguably 128, 140 uncertain 98, 129 undeniable 129, 146–148 undeniably 97, 128, 142–144 undoubtedly 128, 140–144 unlikely 88, 129, 225–229 unquestionably 128, 140–144 will 62, 69, 73, 84, 89–98, 106–107, 112–119, 127, 131, 134–144, 149, 160, 163, 165, 172–174, 209, 221– 222 without doubt 98, 142–144 would 90–95, 112–117, 128, 141–144, 166–174, 181–183, 209–211, 221– 222, 230–231 Polish bez wątpliwości ‘without doubt’ 128 bez wątpienia ‘without doubt’ 107– 108, 128, 154–158, 164 Index of modality markers 299 być może ‘perhaps’ 108, 128, 189, niewykluczone ‘not impossible’ 109, możliwe ‘possible’ 109, 129, 209, 241– prawdopodobieństwo ‘probability’ możliwość ‘possibility’ 109, 129, 242– prawdopodobne ‘likely’ 109, 129, 187, 243 243, 252 246 238–240, 245 chyba ‘probably’ 107–108, 128, 152, 192–197, 208–211 domniemywać ‘speculate’ 130, 243– domyślać się ‘guess’ 110, 130, 243–246 future tense 106–107, 151–154, 163 jakoby ‘purportedly’ 100, 108, 128, 131, 188–190, 237–240 mało prawdopodobne ‘unlikely’ 129, 241–244 mieć ‘is to’ ‘purportedly’ 105, 128, 189–191, 105, 191 mniemać ‘guess’ 130, 243–246 może ‘perhaps’ 100, 107–108, 128, 236–240, 250, 252 móc ‘may’ 100–102, 107, 128, 131, 156, 194, 201, 203, 209–211, 233– 236, 242, 245, 250–252, 305, 309 musieć ‘must’ 100–103, 107, 127, 131, 150–156, 194–195 myśleć ‘think’ 110, 130, 199–204 na pewno ‘for sure’ 100, 104, 108, 128, 155–158 192–197 najpewniej ‘in all likelihood’ 128, najprawdopodobniej ‘in all probabili- ty’ 108, 128, 154, 192–194, 197 najwidoczniej ‘apparently’ 131 naturalnie ‘naturally’ 131 nie (jest) możliwe ‘not possible’ 129, 209 nie do pomyślenia ‘inconceivable’ 129 nie móc ‘can’t’ 163, 127, 150–154 niechybnie ‘undoubtedly’ 108, 128 niemożliwe ‘impossible’ 129 niewątpliwie ‘undoubtedly’ 100, 107– 108, 128, 154–158, 164 129, 241–243 niezawodnie ‘undoubtedly’ 108, 128 oczywiście ‘obviously’ 100, 107, 131 pewne ‘certain’ 109, 129, 158–159 pewnie ‘in all likelihood’ 100, 105, 108, 128, 192, 194, 197 pewno ‘in all likelihood’ 108, 128 pewność ‘certainty’ 109–110, 129 pewny ‘sure’ 129 podejrzenia ‘doubts’ 129, 242–243 podejrzewać ‘suspect’ 130, 243–246 podobno ‘reportedly’ 100, 108, 131 ponad wszelką wątpliwość ‘without do- ubt’ 108, 128 powinien ‘should’ 100, 110, 103–104, 107, 128, 131, 187–191, 194 109–110, 128–129, 192–199 197–199, 211 128, 192–197 prawdopodobnie‘probably’ 100, 108, przeczucie ‘feeling’ 109–110, 129 przekonanie ‘conviction’ 108, 129, 191 przekonany ‘convinced’ 109, 129, przeświadczenie ‘conviction’ 129 przeświadczony ‘certain’ 109, 129 przypuszczać ‘suppose’ 108, 110, 130, przypuszczalnie ‘probably’ 107–108, 128, 192, 195–197 rzeczywiście ‘indeed’ 100 rzekomo ‘allegedly’ 100, 108–109, 128, sądzić ‘think’ 110, 130, 199–205, 208– spodziewać się ‘expect’ 110, 130, 199– 158–159 199–205 237–240 211 204 tak naprawdę ‘in fact’ 131 uważać ‘believe’ 110, 130, 199–204 300 Index of modality markers w żadnym razie ‘on no account’ 128, w żadnym wypadku ‘on no account’ wątpić ‘doubt’ 110, 130, 243–246 wątpliwe ‘doubtful’ 129, 242–243 wątpliwie ‘doubtfully’ 108, 128 wątpliwość ‘doubt’ 109, 129, 158–159, 165, 234, 241–243 wydaje się ‘it seems’ 109–110, 130– 131, 197–204, 208–209, 234–235, 242 wykluczone ‘inconceivable’ 129 z dużym prawdopodobieństwem ‘with a great deal of probability’ 128, 192–197 z pewnością ‘with certainty’ 100, 107– 108, 128, 154–158, 163 155–158 128 131 197–199 widocznie ‘apparently’ 100, 108–109, zapewne ‘presumably’ 100, 108, 128, wrażenie ‘impression’ 109–110, 129, zdaje się ‘it seems’ 109–110, 130–131, 189–197, 211 199–204 Krystyna Warchał Pewność i wątpliwość w dyskursie akademickim: Wykładniki modalności epistemicznej w angielsko- i polskojęzycznych artykułach naukowych z dziedziny językoznawstwa S t r e s z c z e n i e Przedmiotem pracy są językowe wykładniki stopnia pewności sądów w artyku- łach naukowych z dziedziny językoznawstwa w języku angielskim i polskim. Punk- tem wyjścia podjętych badań jest przekonanie, że różne tradycje intelektualne, w ja- kich kształtowała się polska i angielska komunikacja akademicka – tradycje odmiennie postrzegające status wiedzy naukowej i proces jej tworzenia, relację między autorem i czytelnikiem, czy wreszcie sam akt pisania i stopień dialogowości tekstu naukowe- go – mogą znajdować odzwierciedlenie w różnych przeświadczeniach dotyczących te- go, czym jest fakt naukowy, a co pozostaje w sferze hipotez, założeń i propozycji ocze- kujących na potwierdzenie i akceptację środowiska akademickiego. Różnice te z kolei sugerowałyby, iż autorzy wywodzący się z tych dwóch kręgów kulturowych mogą przywiązywać różną wagę do wyraźnego oznaczania treści hipotetycznych oraz są- dów, którym towarzyszy wysoki stopień pewności, oznaczać je w różny sposób, z róż- ną częstotliwością i w różnych miejscach wywodu. Niniejsza praca podejmuje próbę ustalenia, czy różnice takie istnieją i, jeśli tak, których wykładników modalności epi- stemicznej dotyczą i jak przebiegają. Praca zbudowana jest z czterech rozdziałów, z których pierwszy dotyczy badań nad dyskursem akademickim i jego retoryką, drugi poświęcony jest modalności języko- wej, trzeci opisuje cel pracy, materiał badawczy oraz sposób jego analizowania, czwar- ty zaś przedstawia i omawia wyniki badania dla trzech wartości modalnych w obu ję- zykach. Pracę zamyka zwięzłe podsumowanie. Angielskojęzyczną część materiału badawczego stanowi 200 artykułów opubliko- wanych w latach 2001–2006 w naukowych czasopismach językoznawczych o zasię- gu międzynarodowym: Journal of Pragmatics, Language and Communication, Langu- age Sciences, Lingua i Linguistics and Philosophy. Polskojęzyczną część analizy oparto na danych zaczerpniętych z 200 artykułów opublikowanych w tym samym przedzia- le czasowym w polskich czasopismach językoznawczych, których tytuły znalazły się na liście czasopism punktowanych, opublikowanej w roku 2003 przez Komitet Badań Naukowych: Acta Baltico-Slavica, Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Językoznawczego, Etnolingwistyka, Język a Kultura, Onomastica, Poradnik Językowy, Slavia Meridionalis oraz Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej. Obie części składają się na korpus o wiel- kości ok. trzech milionów słów. Analizę przeprowadzono na materiale zdygitalizo- wanym i oznaczonym (otagowanym) pod względem segmentów tekstu przy pomo- cy programu Oxford WordSmith Tools 5 jako narzędzia wspomagającego. W badaniu 302 Streszczenie wzięto pod uwagę następujące kategorie wykładników: epistemiczne użycia czasow- ników modalnych (wraz z epistemicznymi użyciami czasu przyszłego w języku pol- skim), przysłówki epistemiczne, przymiotniki i rzeczowniki, które niosą znaczenia epi- stemiczne i wprowadzają zdania podrzędne, oraz epistemiczne czasowniki leksykalne. Najistotniejsze wyniki badania można streścić w następujących punktach: — Artykuły anglojęzyczne zawierają prawie dwukrotnie więcej wykładników mo- dalności epistemicznej niż artykuły polskojęzyczne; w tekstach angielskich ponad dwukrotnie częściej spotyka się orientację subiektywną niż obiektywną, w tekstach polskich zaś przeważa orientacja obiektywna. — W tekstach anglojęzycznych najczęściej spotyka się niskie wartości modalne, dru- gą pod względem częstości występowania grupę stanowią wartości wysokie, war- tości średnie występują zaś najrzadziej. W tekstach polskich autorów najczęściej wyrażane są średnie wartości modalne, najrzadziej natomiast spotyka się warto- ści wysokie. — Pod względem kategorii wykładników modalności epistemicznej, w anglojęzycz- nej części korpusu przeważają czasowniki modalne, w polskiej zaś przysłówki epistemiczne. — W obu grupach tekstów wykładniki sądów epistemicznych występują częściej w zakończeniu niż w innych segmentach; obserwacja ta dotyczy wszystkich war- tości modalnych w języku angielskim oraz niskich i średnich wartości modalnych w języku polskim; wysoki stopień pewności odnotowywany jest w języku polskim z równą (niską) częstotliwością we wstępie i w zakończeniu. Praca może stanowić głos w dyskusji nad różnicami w stylach argumentacji aka- demickiej charakterystycznych dla poszczególnych kultur i dyscyplin, wnieść dane do badań porównawczych nad znaczeniami epistemicznymi i ich funkcją w różnych ty- pach dyskursu oraz być punktem odniesienia dla dalszych analiz uwzględniających inne języki, gatunki i dyscypliny. Krystyna Warchał Gewissheit und Zweifel im akademischen Diskurs. Anzeichen epistemischer Modalität in englisch- u. polnischsprachigen Zeitungsartikeln auf dem Gebiet der Sprachwissenschaft Z u s a m m e n f a s s u n g Zum Gegenstand der Abhandlung werden Anzeichen der Gewissheit in den wis- senschaftlichen Artikeln auf dem Gebiet der Sprachwissenschaft im Englischen und Polnischen. Der Ausgangspunkt für vorliegende Studie ist die Überzeugung davon, dass unterschiedliche intellektuelle Traditionen, in denen sich polnische und englische akademische Kommunikation bildeten – Traditionen, die den Status des Wissens und dessen Bildung, die Relation zwischen dem Verfasser und dem Leser und schließlich den Schreibeakt selbst und den Dialogcharakter des wissenschaftlichen Textes ganz anders betrachten — können ihre Widerspiegelung finden in unterschiedlicher Beur- teilung dessen, was in der Wissenschaft ein Fakt und was lediglich eine Hypothese ist, die von akademischen Kreisen noch bestätigt und akzeptiert werden muss. Diese Un- terschiede ließen vermuten, dass die von zwei Kulturkreisen abstammenden Verfasser werden eine andere Meinung davon haben, auf welche Weise, wie oft und an welchen Stellen der Argumentation ganz hypothetische Inhalte und Behauptungen mit hohem Sicherheitsgrad hervorgehoben werden sollten. In vorliegender Abhandlung hat man sich Mühe gegeben, nachzuweisen, ob es diese Unterschiede gibt und wenn ja – wel- che Anzeichen der epistemischen Modalität sie betreffen und worauf sie beruhen. Die Arbeit besteht aus vier Kapiteln; das erste von ihnen betrifft die Forschungen über den akademischen Diskurs und dessen Rhetorik, das zweite ist der Sprachmo- dalität gewidmet, das dritte erläutert das Ziel der Abhandlung, das Forschungsmate- rial und dessen Beurteilung und das vierte Kapitel präsentiert und analysiert die For- schungsergebnisse für drei Modalwerten in beiden Sprachen. Am Ende der Arbeit befindet sich ein knappes Resümee. Den englischsprachigen Teil des Forschungsmaterials bilden 200 Artikel, die in den Jahren 2001–2006 in sprachwissenschaftlichen Zeitschriften von weltweiter Be- deutung: Journal of Pragmatics, Language and Communication, Language Sciences, Lingua und Linguistic and Philosophy veröffentlicht wurden. Polnischsprachiger Teil der Analyse basierte auf den in demselben Zeitraum veröffentlichten 200 polnischen sprachwissenschaftlichen Artikeln, deren Titel auf die im Jahre 2003 von dem Komitee für Wissenschaftliche Forschungen veröffentlichten Liste der anerkannten Zeitschrif- ten kamen: Acta Baltico-Slavica, Poradnik Językowy, Slavia Meridionalis und Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej. Beide Teile bilden das Korpus von ca. drei Millio- nen Wörtern. Analysiert wurden Texte, die digitalisiert und mit Tags hinsichtlich der Textsegmente mittels des Programms Oxford WordSmith Tools 5 ausgezeichnet wur- 304 Zusammenfassung den. In der Forschung berücksichtigte man folgende Kategorien der Anzeichen: den epistemischen Gebrauch von Modalverben (samt epistemischem Gebrauch des Fu- turs im Polnischen), epistemische Adverbien, die die Nebensätze einleitenden Adjek- tive und Substantive mit epistemischer Bedeutung und epistemische lexikale Verben. Die wichtigsten Forschungsergebnisse lassen sich in folgenden Punkten zusam- menfassen: — Englischsprachige Artikel beinhalten fast doppelt so viel Anzeichen der epistemi- schen Modalität als polnische Artikel; in englischen Texten ist die subjektive Ori- entierung fast doppelt so häufig als die objektive, in polnischen Texten dagegen überwiegt die objektive Orientierung — In englischen Texten treten am häufigsten niedrige Modalwerte auf, zweithäufigs- te Gruppe bilden hohe Werte und Mittelwerte kommen am seltensten vor — Hinsichtlich der Kategorie der epistemischen Modalität überwiegen im englischen Teil des Korpus Modalverben und im polnischen dagegen epistemische Adverbien — In beiden Textgruppen kommen die Anzeichen der epistemischen Urteile häu- figer im Schlussteil als in anderen Segmenten vor. Diese Bemerkung betrifft alle Modalwerte im Englischen und niedrige und mittlere Modalwerte im Polnischen; ein hoher Sicherheitsgrad wird im Polnischen genauso selten in der Einleitung und im Abschluss festgestellt. Die Arbeit kann zur Diskussion über unterschiedliche Stile der für die einzelnen Kulturen und Disziplinen charakteristischen akademischen Argumentation beitra- gen und zum Bezugspunkt für weitere Analysen in Bezug auf andere Sprachen, Gat- tungen und Disziplinen werden. List of tables Table 2.1 Semantics of selected modal verbs according to Groefsema (1995: 62) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.2 Semantics of selected modal verbs according to Berbeira Gardón (1998: 15–16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Table 2.3 Semantics of selected modal verbs according to Papafragou (1998: 14) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Table 3.1 Epistemic markers used as search words . . . . . . . . . . 127 Table 4.1 High-value epistemic markers in ELA: An overview of categories . 134 Table 4.2 High-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal and quasi-modal 68 69 verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 Table 4.3 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Mo- dal and quasi-modal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Table 4.4 High-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal modifiers . . . . . 141 Table 4.5 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Mo- dal modifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144 Table 4.6 High-value epistemic markers in ELA: Adjectives and nouns . . . 147 Table 4.7 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Ad- jectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 Table 4.8 High-value epistemic markers in PLA: An overview of categories . 150 Table 4.9 High-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal verbs and forms of the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Table 4.10 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Mo- dal verbs and forms of the future . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 Table 4.11 High-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal modifiers . . . . 156 Table 4.12 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Mo- dal modifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Table 4.13 High-value epistemic markers in PLA: Adjectives and nouns . . . 158 Table 4.14 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Ad- jectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159 306 List of tables Table 4.15 Distribution of high-value epistemic modality markers by categories in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Table 4.16 Distribution of negative certainty in ELA and PLA . . . . . . 164 Table 4.17 Middle-value epistemic markers in ELA: An overview of catego- ries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166 Table 4.18 Middle-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal and quasi-modal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 Table 4.19 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Modal and quasi-modal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 Table 4.20 Middle-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal modifiers . . . 173 Table 4.21 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Modal modifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 Table 4.22 Middle-value epistemic markers in ELA: Adjectives and nouns . . 177 Table 4.23 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Adjectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178 Table 4.24 Middle-value epistemic markers in ELA: Lexical verbs . . . . . 180 Table 4.25 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Lexical verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Table 4.26 Middle-value epistemic markers in PLA: An overview of catego- ries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187 Table 4.27 Middle-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal verbs . . . . . 189 Table 4.28 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Modal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191 Table 4.29 Middle-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal modifiers . . . 194 Table 4.30 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Modal modifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 Table 4.31 Middle-value epistemic markers in PLA: Adjectives and nouns . . 198 Table 4.32 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Adjectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199 Table 4.33 Middle-value epistemic markers in PLA: Lexical verbs . . . . . 200 Table 4.34 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Lexical verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204 Table 4.35 Distribution of middle-value epistemic modality markers by catego- ries in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209 Table 4.36 Distribution of negative probability in ELA and PLA . . . . . 210 Table 4.37 Low-value epistemic markers in ELA: An overview of categories . 213 Table 4.38 Low-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal verbs . . . . . . 215 Table 4.39 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Mo- dal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219 Table 4.40 Low-value epistemic markers in ELA: Modal modifiers . . . . 221 Table 4.41 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Mo- dal modifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224 List of tables 307 Table 4.42 Low-value epistemic markers in ELA: Adjectives and nouns . . . 227 Table 4.43 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Ad- jectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229 Table 4.44 Low-value epistemic markers in ELA: Lexical verbs . . . . . . 230 Table 4.45 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in ELA: Le- xical verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 Table 4.46 Low-value epistemic markers in PLA: An overview of categories . 233 Table 4.47 Low-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal verb móc . . . . . 234 Table 4.48 Low-value epistemic markers in PLA: Modal modifiers . . . . 238 Table 4.49 Low-value epistemic markers in PLA: Adjectives and nouns . . . 242 Table 4.50 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Ad- jectives and nouns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243 Table 4.51 Low-value epistemic markers in PLA: Lexical verbs . . . . . . 244 Table 4.52 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers in PLA: Lexi- cal verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246 Table 4.53 Distribution of low-value epistemic modality markers by categories in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250 Table 4.54 Distribution of negative possibility in ELA and PLA . . . . . . 251 Table 5.1 Frequency of epistemic markers in Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion: ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259 List of figures Fig. 2.1 Modal subdomains based on Lyons (1977) and Palmer (1979, 1986, 2001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.2 Modal subdomains based on Sweetser (1990), Kiefer (1997), and Papa- fragou (2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.3 Modal subdomains according to Bybee et al. (1994) . . . . . . . Fig. 2.4 Modal subdomains according to van der Auwera and Plungian (1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.5 Evidentiality within the epistemic modal system – an inclusion/ over- lap view . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.6 Scale of probability: modal values, orientations and realisations (based on Halliday, 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.7 Scale of obligation: modal values, orientations and realisations (based on Halliday, 1994) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fig. 2.8 The epistemic modality system in English: modal auxiliaries and qu- asi-modals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Fig. 2.9 Epistemic true modal verbs in Polish . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Fig. 4.1 Modal and quasi-modal verbs as high-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 74 78 80 82 84 89 90 Fig. 4.2 Selected syntactic features of high-value epistemic modal verbs in ELA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135 Fig. 4.3 High-value epistemic modal and quasi-modal verbs in article sections (ELA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139 Fig. 4.4 Modal modifiers as high-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . 140 Fig. 4.5 Selected syntactic features of high-value modal modifiers in ELA . . 141 Fig. 4.6 High-value modal modifiers in article sections (ELA) . . . . . . 145 Fig. 4.7 High-value modal modifiers at I in article sections (ELA) . . . . . 145 Fig. 4.8 Adjectives as high-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . . 146 Fig. 4.9 Nouns as high-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . . . 146 310 List of figures Fig. 4.10 Objective and subjective orientation in article sections: High-value modal adjectives and nouns (ELA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149 Fig. 4.11 Modal verbs and forms of the future as high-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 Fig. 4.12 Selected syntactic features of high-value epistemic modal verbs and future forms in PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151 Fig. 4.13 High-value epistemic modal verbs and forms of the future in article sections (PLA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 Fig. 4.14 Modal modifiers as high-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . 155 Fig. 4.15 Selected syntactic features of high-value modal modifiers in PLA . . 155 Fig. 4.16 High-value modal modifiers in article sections (PLA) . . . . . . 158 Fig. 4.17 Categories of high-value epistemic markers in ELA and PLA . . . 161 Fig. 4.18 High-value modal verbs, modal modifiers, and modal adjectives and nouns in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161 Fig. 4.19 Distribution of high-value modality markers in article sections in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162 Fig. 4.20 Modal and quasi-modal verbs as middle-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167 Fig. 4.21 Selected syntactic features of middle-value epistemic modal verbs in ELA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Fig. 4.22 Middle-value epistemic modal and quasi-modal verbs in article sec- tions (ELA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Fig. 4.23 Modal modifiers as middle-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . 172 Fig. 4.24 Selected syntactic features of middle-value modal modifiers in ELA . 172 Fig. 4.25 Middle-value modal modifiers in article sections (ELA) . . . . . 176 Fig. 4.26 Adjectives and nouns as middle-value epistemic markers in ELA . . 176 Fig. 4.27 Lexical verbs as middle-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . 179 Fig. 4.28 Subjective and objective orientation in article sections: Middle-value lexical verbs (ELA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186 Fig. 4.29 Modal verbs as middle-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . . 187 Fig. 4.30 Selected syntactic features of middle-value epistemic modal verbs in PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188 Fig. 4.31 Middle-value epistemic modal verbs in article sections (PLA) . . . 190 Fig. 4.32 Modal modifiers as middle-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . 192 Fig. 4.33 Selected syntactic features of middle-value modal modifiers in PLA . 192 Fig. 4.34 Middle-value modal modifiers in article sections (PLA) . . . . . 196 Fig. 4.35 Lexical verbs as middle-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . . 199 Fig. 4.36 Subjective and objective orientation in article sections: Middle-value lexical verbs (PLA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205 Fig. 4.37 Categories of middle-value epistemic markers in ELA and PLA . . 206 Fig. 4.38 Middle value modal verbs, modifiers, adjectives and nouns, and lexi- cal verbs in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 List of figures 311 Fig. 4.39 Middle-value modal meanings in ELA and PLA: explicit and implicit; subjective and objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207 Fig. 4.40 Distribution of middle-value modality markers in article sections in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 Fig. 4.41 Modal verbs as low-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . 214 Fig. 4.42 Selected syntactic features of low-value epistemic modal verbs in ELA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 Fig. 4.43 Low-value epistemic modal verbs in article sections (ELA) . . . . 219 Fig. 4.44 Modal modifiers as low-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . 220 Fig. 4.45 Selected syntactic features of low-value modal modifiers in ELA . . 220 Fig. 4.46 Low-value modal modifiers in article sections (ELA) . . . . . . 225 Fig. 4.47 Low-value modal modifiers at I and iM in article sections (ELA) . . 225 Fig. 4.48 Adjectives and nouns as low-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . 226 Fig. 4.49 Lexical verbs as low-value epistemic markers in ELA . . . . . . 228 Fig. 4.50 Subjective and objective orientation in article sections: Low-value le- xical verbs (ELA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233 Fig. 4.51 Low-value epistemic modal verb móc in article sections (PLA) . . . 236 Fig. 4.52 Modal modifiers as low-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . . 237 Fig. 4.53 Selected syntactic features of low-value modal modifiers in PLA . . 237 Fig. 4.54 Low-value modal modifiers in article sections (PLA) . . . . . . 241 Fig. 4.55 Low-value modal modifiers at I in article sections (PLA) . . . . . 241 Fig. 4.56 Lexical verbs as low-value epistemic markers in PLA . . . . . . 243 Fig. 4.57 Categories of low-value epistemic markers in ELA and PLA . . . 247 Fig. 4.58 Low-value modal verbs, modifiers, adjectives and nouns, and lexical verbs in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Fig. 4.59 Low-value modal meanings in ELA and PLA: explicit and implicit; subjective and objective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248 Fig. 4.60 Distribution of low-value modality markers in article sections in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249 Fig. 5.1 Epistemic markers in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . 256 Fig. 5.2 Epistemic modal values in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . 256 Fig. 5.3 Proportion of high, middle and low epistemic values in ELA and PLA 256 Fig. 5.4 Categories of epistemic markers in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . 257 Fig. 5.5 Distribution of epistemic modality markers in ELA and PLA: Introduc- tion, Main Body and Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258 Fig. 5.6 Realisation and orientation of epistemic values in ELA and PLA: expli- cit and implicit; objective and subjective . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Fig. 5.7 Subjective and objective orientation for particular epistemic values in ELA and PLA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260 Copy editor Michał Pelczar
Pobierz darmowy fragment (pdf)

Gdzie kupić całą publikację:

Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles
Autor:

Opinie na temat publikacji:


Inne popularne pozycje z tej kategorii:


Czytaj również:


Prowadzisz stronę lub blog? Wstaw link do fragmentu tej książki i współpracuj z Cyfroteką: