Nominalization in Applied Linguistics and Medicine: The Case of Textbook Introductions and Book Reviews
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/rela-2018-0018Keywords:
book reviews, introduction, nominalization, systemic functional linguisticsAbstract
Drawing on Systemic Functional Linguistics, this study explored variational use of nominalization in 600 textbook introductions and 200 book reviews in applied linguistics and medicine. The nominalized expressions were identified in the texts, the frequencies of the nominalization types were counted, and eventually a chi-square test was administered. Analysis of nominalization patterns across the different informational/promotional moves revealed divergent patterns in the two disciplines but insignificant differences across the genres in focus. The density of nominalizations was acknowledged in the applied linguistics introductions and book reviews. However, functional variations in the use of nominalizations were found only in the introductions. As for the proportion of nominalization to grammatical metaphor, results demonstrated a lower tendency towards nominalizing scientific information in the medicine corpus. Further research is needed to see how nominalization is exploited in other genres and other disciplines.
References
Abdollahzadeh, Esmaeel and Hossein Salarvand. 2013. Book prefaces in basic, applied, and social sciences: A genre-based study. Journal of World Applied Sciences, 28(11), 1618–1626.
Google Scholar
Alcaraz-Ariza, María Ángeles. 2010. Complimenting others: The case of English-written medical book reviews. Fachsprache, 31(1– 2), 50–65.
Google Scholar
Banks, David. 2003. The evolution of grammatical metaphor in scientific writing. In: Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, Miriam Taverniers and Louise J. Ravelli (eds.), Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics, 127–147. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Banks, David. 2005.On the historical origins of nominalized process in scientific texts. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 347–357.
Google Scholar
Baratta, Alexander M. 2010. Nominalization development across an undergraduate academic degree program. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(4), 1017–1036.
Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London: Longman.
Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 1997. Genre mixing in academic introductions. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 16(3), 181–195.
Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 2002. Applied genre analysis: A multi-perspective model. Ibérica, 4(1), 3–19.
Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay K. 2004. Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-based View. London: Continuum.
Google Scholar
Bloor, Tom and Meriel Bloor. 2004. The Functional Analysis of English: A Hallidayan Approach. London: Arnold.
Google Scholar
Bunton, David. 2002. Generic moves in PhD thesis introductions. In: John Flowerdew (ed.), Academic Discourse, 57–75. London: Longman.
Google Scholar
Coffin, Caroline, Curry, Mary J., Goodman, Sharon, Hewings, Ann, Lillis, Theresa M. and Joan Swann. 2003. Teaching Academic Writing: A Toolkit for Higher Education. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Diani, Giuliana. 2007. Reporting and evaluation in English book review articles: a cross disciplinary study. In: Ken Hyland and Giuliana Diani (eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings. 87–105. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Dudley-Evans, Tony. 1986. Genre analysis: An investigation of the introduction and discussion sections of MSc dissertations. In Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), Talking about Text: Studies Presented to David Brazil on his Retirement, 128–145. Birmingham: ELR.
Google Scholar
Eggins, Suzanne. 2004. An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.
Google Scholar
Farahani, Ali Akbar and Yaser Hadidi. 2008. Semogenesis under scrutiny: Grammatical metaphor in science and modern prose fiction. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 51–82.
Google Scholar
Galve, Guillén I. 1998. The textual interplay of grammatical metaphor on the nominalization occurring in written medical English. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(3), 363–385.
Google Scholar
Gea Valor, Maria-Lluisa and María Mar del Saz Rubio. 2000-2001. The coding of linguistic politeness in the academia book review. Pragmalingüística, 8–9, 165–178.
Google Scholar
Gesuato, Sara. 2004. Read Me First: Promotional strategies in back-cover blurbs. Paper presented at the 2nd Inter-Varietal Applied Corpus Studies Conference, Belfast, 25th-26th June. [Online] Available from: http://www.units.it/∼didactas/pub/unipd/presIVACS2004.doc Accessed: 14th March 2015.
Google Scholar
Giannoni, Davide Simone. 2009. Negotiating research values across review genres: A case study in applied linguistics. In: Ken Hyland and Giuliana Diani (eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings, 17–33. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Glanzel, Wolfgang and András Schubert, 2003. A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56 (3), 357–367.
Google Scholar
Gray, Bethany and Douglas Biber. 2010. Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2–20.
Google Scholar
Groom, Nicholas. 2009. Phraseology and epistemology in academic book reviews: A corpus-driven analysis of two humanities disciplines. In: Ken Hyland and Giuliana Diani (eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings, 122–39. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold.
Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (3rd ed., revised by Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen). London: Arnold.
Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. and James R. Martin. 2005. Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 1999. Construing Experience through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. London: Cassell.
Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. and Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.
Google Scholar
Heyvaert, Liesbet. 2003. Nominalization as grammatical metaphor: On the need for a radically systemic and metafunctional approach. In: Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen, Miriam Taverniers and Louise J. Ravelli (eds.), Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics, 65–99. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Ho, Victor. 2010. Grammatical metaphor in request e-mail discourse. Applied Language Studies, 14(1), 1– 24.
Google Scholar
Holmes, Richard. 1997. Genre analysis and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 321–337.
Google Scholar
Holtz, Mônica. 2009. Nominalization in scientific discourse: A corpus-based study of abstracts and research articles. In: Michaela Mahlberg, Victorina Gonzalez-Diaz and Catherine Smith (eds.), Proceedings of the 5th Corpus Linguistics Conference Liverpool, UK. September 25th. [Online] Available from: http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/cl2009/ Accessed: 4th May 2015.
Google Scholar
Hopkins, Andy and Tony Dudley-Evans. 1988. A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations. English for Specific Purposes, 7, 113–122.
Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2004. Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2006. English for Academic Purposes: An Advanced Resource Book. London: Routledge.
Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2009. Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London: Continuum.
Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken and Giuliana Diani. 2009. Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings. London: Palgrave-MacMillan.
Google Scholar
Hyon, Sunny. 1996. Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 693–722.
Google Scholar
Jalilifar, Alireza, Alipour, Mohammad and Sara Parsa. 2014. Comparative study of nominalization in applied linguistics and biology books. RALs, 5(1), 24–43.
Google Scholar
Jalilifar, Alireza, and Zeinab Golkar Musavi. 2016. Genre analysis and genre-mixing across various realizations of academic book introductions in applied linguistics. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 35(1), 111–138.
Google Scholar
Kuhi, Davud. 2008. An analysis of move structure of textbook prefaces. Asian ESP Journal, 7, 63–78.
Google Scholar
Kuteeva, Maria. 2013. English in academic and professional contexts. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 13(1), 1–6.
Google Scholar
Lindholm-Romantschuk, Ylva. 1998. Scholarly Book Reviewing in the Social Sciences and Humanities: The Flow of Ideas within and among Disciplines. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Google Scholar
Lock, Graham. 1996. Functional English Grammar: An Introduction for Second Language Teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Lorés Sanz, Rosa. 2012. (Non-)critical voices in the reviewing of history discourse: A cross-cultural study of evaluation. In: Ken Hyland and Giuliana Diani (eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings, 143–160. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Marefat, Hamideh and Shirin Mohammadzadeh. 2013. Genre analysis of literature research article abstracts: A cross-linguistic, cross-cultural study. Applied Research on English Language, 2(2), 37–50.
Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 1990. Literacy in science: Learning to handle text as technology. In: Frances Christie (ed.), Literacy for a Changing World. 79–117. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 1993. Genre and literacy: Modelling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics: Issues in Teaching and Learning, 13, 141–172.
Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 2003. Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In: Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, 142–177. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Google Scholar
Martin, James R., Christie, Frances and Joan Rothery. 1987. Social processes in education: A reply to Sawyer and Watson (and others). In: Ian Reid (ed.), The Place of Genre in Learning: Current Debates, 35–45. Geelong, Australia: Deakin University Press.
Google Scholar
Motta-Roth, Désirée. 1998. Discourse analysis and academic book reviews: a study of text and disciplinary cultures. In: Inmaculada Fortanet, Santiago Posteguillo, Juan C. Palmer and Juan. F. Coll (eds.), Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes, 29–59. Castellón: Collecció Summa, Sèrie Filología/9.
Google Scholar
Nwogu, Kevin N. 1997. The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119–38.
Google Scholar
Paltridge, Brain. 1997. Genre, Frames, and Writing in Research Setting. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Römer, Ute. 2005. “This seems somewhat counterintuitive, though…”: Negative evaluation in linguistic book reviews by male and female authors. In: Elena Tognini Bonelli and Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds.), Strategies in Academic Discourse, 97–115. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Römer, Ute. 2008. Identification impossible? A corpus approach to realizations of evaluative meaning in academic writing. Functions of Language, 15(1), 115–130.
Google Scholar
Salager-Meyer, Françoise and María Ángeles Alcaraz-Ariza. 2004. Las reseñas de libros en español: estudio retórico y diacrónico. Spanish in Context, 2(1), 29–49.
Google Scholar
Samraj, Betty. 2005. An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141–156.
Google Scholar
Schleppegrell, Mary J. 2001. Linguistic features of the language of schooling. Linguistics and Education, 12(4), 431–459.
Google Scholar
Shaw, Philip. 2004. How do we recognize implicit evaluation in academic book reviews? In: Del Lungo Camiciotti and Elena Tognini-Bonelli (eds.), Academic Discourse: New Insights into Evaluation, 121–140. Bern: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar
Shaw, Philip. 2009. The lexis and grammar of explicit evaluation in academic book reviews? In: Ken Hyland and Giuliana Diani (eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genre in University Setting, 217–235. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
Google Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie, Taverniers, Miriam and Louise, J. Ravelli. 2003. Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Google Scholar
Sorayyaei Azar, Ali. 2012. The self-promotion of academic textbooks in the preface section: A genre analysis. Journal of the Spanish Association of Anglo-American Studies, 34(2), 147–165.
Google Scholar
Sušinskienė, Solvegia. 2009. Textual functions of nominalizations in English scientific discourse. Žmogus ir žodis, 11(3), 58–64.
Google Scholar
Sušinskienė, Solvegia. 2010. Nominalization as a cohesive device in British newspaper editorials. Filologija, 15, 142–150.
Google Scholar
Swales, John. M. 2004. Research Genres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoffrey. 1994. Introducing functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Google Scholar
Tse, Polly and Hyland, Ken. 2009. Gender and discipline: Exploring metadiscourse variation in academic book reviews. In: Ken Hyland and Marina Bondi (eds.), Academic Discourse across Disciplines, 177–202. Bern: Peter Lang.
Google Scholar
Văn, Luan. 2011. A Study on Grammatical Metaphor in English Business Letters (M.A. Thesis). Hanoi: Vietnam National University.
Google Scholar
Vassileva, Irena. 2010. Critical book reviews in German. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(3), 354–367.
Google Scholar
Wenyan, Gao. 2012. Nominalization in medical papers: A comparative study. Studies in Literature and Language, 4(1), 86–93.
Google Scholar
Xue-feng, Wang. 2010. Grammatical metaphor and its difficulties in application. US-China Foreign Language, 8(12), 29–37.
Google Scholar
Zepetnek, Steven T. D. 2010. Towards a taxonomy of the preface in English, French, and German. Neohelicon, 37(1), 75–90.
Google Scholar
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
