Cover not available
Part of
Evidentiality Revisited: Cognitive grammar, functional and discourse-pragmatic perspectives
Edited by Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Gerda Haßler and Marta Carretero
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 271] 2017
► pp. 225–248

Chapter 9
Evidential and epistemic stance strategies in scientific communication

A corpus study of semi-formal and expert publications

 | Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
The present paper presents the results of a corpus study of evidential and epistemic strategies as stance markers in two subgenres of scientific discourse, a sample of semi-formal publications (New Scientist) and one of expert publications (PubMed). First, an onomasiological approach to evidentiality and epistemic stance is adopted, following Marín-Arrese (2015b). Second, the evidential and epistemic strategies performed in the context of the two genres are discussed, following recent research which points to the need to explore this dimension (Mushin 2012; Nuckolls and Michael 2014). Results show that within the distinction between direct and indirect markers of evidentiality and epistemic stance, both samples show a preference for indirect strategies. Within the four categories of evidentiality and epistemic stance, the semi-formal corpus shows an overall significant higher frequency of indirect markers than the expert corpus. These differences reveal communicative discourse-pragmatic strategies which underlie the discipline specific conventions and interactive motivations in the two sub-genres.
Keywords: corpus study, evidential and epistemic strategies, scientific discourse, stance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
    • 2.1Evidentiality and epistemic stance
    • 2.2Evidential and epistemic stance strategies in scientific discourse
  • 3.Data and method
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Direct evidentiality
      • 4.1.1Frequency and distribution
      • 4.1.2Discourse-pragmatic strategies
    • 4.2Indirect evidentiality and epistemic stance
      • 4.2.1IIE
        • 4.2.1.1Frequency and distribution
        • 4.2.1.2Discourse-pragmatic strategies
      • 4.2.2IRE
        • 4.2.2.1Frequency and distribution
        • 4.2.2.2Discourse-pragmatic strategies
      • 4.2.3EM
        • 4.2.3.1Frequency and distribution
        • 4.2.3.2Discourse-pragmatic functions
      • 4.2.4CGA
        • 4.2.4.1Frequency and distribution
        • 4.2.4.2Discourse-pragmatic functions
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 21 March 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.271.10hid
References (33)
References
Anderson, Lloyd B. 1986. “Evidentials, Paths of Change, and Mental Maps: Typologically Regular Asymmetries.” In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe, and Joanna Nichols, 273–312. Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, and Edward Finegan. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Boye, Kasper. 2012. Epistemic Meaning: A Crosslinguistic and Functional-Cognitive Study. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Calsamiglia, Helena, and Teun A. Van Dijk. 2004. “Popularization Discourse and Knowledge about the Genome.” Discourse & Society 15: 369–389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1986. “Evidentiality in English Conversation and Academic Writing.” In Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology, ed. by Wallace Chafe, and Joanna Nichols, 261–272. New York: Ablex.Google Scholar
DuBois, John W. 2007. “The Stance Triangle.” In Stancetaking in Discourse, ed. by Robert Englebretson, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio. 2014. “Reformulation and Recontextualization in Popularization Discourse.” Ibérica 27: 15–34Google Scholar
Hidalgo Downing, Laura. 2013. “The Role of Negative-modal Synergies in Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species.” In Evaluation in Discourse, ed. by Geoff Thompson, and Laura Alba-Juez, 259–279. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Horvitz, Herbert Robert. 2003. “Nobel Lecture. Worms, Life and Death.” Biosci Rep Dev 23: 239–303. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, Susan, and Geoff Thompson (eds.). 2000. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 1998. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. “Genre and Academic Writing in the Disciplines.” Language Teaching. 41: 543–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly. 2001. Evidentials and Relevance. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kamio, A. 1997. Territory of Information. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kerr, John. F., Andrew H. Wyllie, and Alastair R. Currie. 1972. “Apoptosis: a Basic Biological Phenomenon with Wide-ranging Implications in Tissue Kinetics.” Br J Cancer Dev 26: 239–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lockshin, Richard A., and Jacques Beaulaton. 1964. “Programmed Cell Death.” Life Sci Dev 15: 1549–1565. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marín-Arrese, Juana I. 2013. “Stancetaking and Inter-subjectivity in the Iraq Inquiry. Blair vs. Brown.” In English Modality: Core, Periphery and Evidentiality, ed. by Juana I. Marín-Arrese, Marta Carretero, Jorge Arús Hita, and Johan van der Auwera, 411–445. Berlin and Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015a. “Epistemic Legitimisation and Inter/subjectivity in the Discourse of Parliamentary and Public Enquiries.” Critical Discourse Studies 12 (3): 261–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marín Arrese, Juana I. 2015b. “Epistemicity and Stance: A Cross-linguistic Study of Epistemic Stance Strategies in Journalistic Discourse in English and Spanish.” Discourse Studies 17 (2): 210–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James, and Peter White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mushin, Ilana. 2012. “‘Watching for Witness’ Evidential Strategies and Epistemic Authority in Garrwa Conversation.” Pragmatics and Society 3 (2): 270–293. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers, Greg. 1990. Writing Biology. Texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. “Narratives of Science and Nature in Popularizing Molecular Genetics.” In Advances in Written Text Analysis, ed. by Malcolm Coulthard, 179–190. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nerlich, Brigitte, Robert Elliott, and Brendan Larson. 2009. Communicating Biological Sciences. Ethical and Metaphorical Dimensions. Farnham and Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Nuckolls, Janis, and Lev Michael (eds.). 2014. Evidentiality in Interaction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkinson, Jean, and Ralph Adendorff. 2004. “The Use of Popular Science Articles in Teaching Scientific Literacy.” English for Specific Purposes 23: 379–396. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peacock, Matthew. 2014. “Modals in the Construction of Research Articles: A Cross-disciplinary Perspective.” Ibérica 27: 143–164.Google Scholar
. 2015. “Stance Adverbials in Research Writing.” Ibérica 29: 35–62.Google Scholar
Siau, Annelien. 2013. “A Corpus-based Analysis of Evidentiality in Popularised Scientific Discourse.” Unpublished Master paper submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of “Master in de Taal- en Letterkunde: Engels – Spaans”. University of Ghent.Google Scholar
Tarantino, Maria. 2004. “Epistemic and Dialectic Pathway to Knowledge, Meaning and Language Advancement.” LSP & Professional Communication 4 (1): 69–88.Google Scholar
. 2011. “Inter-subjectivity, Cognition, Nature and Multimedia Representations: Modal Categories in Professional Discourse.” LSP & Professional Communication 2 (1): 16–43.Google Scholar
Teubert, Wolfgang. 2010. Meaning, Discourse and Society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Williams, Geoffrey. 2002. “In Search of Representativity in Specialised Corpora: Categorisation through Collocation.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7: 43–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Grichin, Sergei & Olga Ulyanova
2023. Evidential Text Units in Russian Research Articles. In Science and Global Challenges of the 21st Century – Innovations and Technologies in Interdisciplinary Applications [Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, 622], ► pp. 135 ff. DOI logo
Hasselgård, Hilde
2023. SeemandAppearand Their Norwegian Verbal Counterparts: A Cross-Register Contrastive Study. English Studies 104:1 ► pp. 173 ff. DOI logo
Meier, Franz
2023. Marking the sources of knowledge, asserting the epistemic stance. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 37 ► pp. 12 ff. DOI logo
Ruskan, Anna, Helen Hint, Djuddah Arthur Joost Leijen & Jolanta Šinkūnienė
2023. Lithuanian academic discourse revisited: Features and patterns of scientific communication. Open Linguistics 9:1 DOI logo
Huang, Jinyi & Jinjun Wang
2021. Evidentiality in science from specialization to popularization: A case study of COVID-19 texts. Journal of World Languages 7:1 ► pp. 124 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Bibliographie. In Les routines discursives dans le discours scientifique oral et écrit, ► pp. 265 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 december 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.