学术论文中第一人称代词的使用研究
发布时间：2018-08-19 21:12
【摘要】： 学术写作的理论研究表明:学术论文是科学研究成果的重要表现形态,是衡量研究者学术造诣及水平高低的最重要、最公正、最客观的尺度。毋庸置疑,学术论文的写作越来越受到广大学者的重视,对这种特定的书面语篇的研究也已经展开。传统观点认为,科研报道是客观的、非人称的。但近几年的研究表明,在学术写作中,作者本人也参与到整个创作过程之中。一方面他要报告自己的研究成果,阐述自己对某一问题的观点和看法以及展现自己对某一领域的创新贡献;另一方面他要建构自己的主体地位,使其研究成果具有说服力和可信度。作为作者自己明显的指称----自我指代在文章中常常与一些非人称结构伴随出现,并被看成一种修辞策略,学者可用以体现自己的主体地位,概述其具体的研究贡献。因此,当强调作者在学术语篇中的贡献时,第一人称代词的使用成为一种强有力的手段。然而迄今为止,我们对第一人称代词这种语言策略在不同文化、不同学科的学术语篇中如何使用及表达的功能所知甚少。 近年来,越来越多的国外学者和语言学家对第一人称代词这种语言策略在学术写作中的使用产生了浓厚的兴趣,并从不同的角度进行了研究。然而,在中国这样的研究相对较少。笔者进行此类研究主要基于以下几点原因:首先,与国外学者广泛而深入的研究相比,中国学者对学术语篇中第一人称代词的系统研究却相当有限。因此,在这一领域有广泛的研究空间,就是这一理由激发了我对此问题的思考。其次,国内的研究成果显示,第一人称代词的实证研究不多,尤其是基于真实语料的定量定性分析则更少。考虑到这些因素,我认为从语料库语言学的角度出发研究这一语言现象将是一个有意义的尝试。第三,尽管中国学者已经开始从不同的角度研究第一人称代词,但对不同学科学术论文中第一人称代词使用的对比分析却寥寥无几,更不用说对其在学术论文引言部分使用情况的跨文化比较了。第四,到现在为止,还没有人对第一人称代词在博士论文中的使用进行过研究。这一空白需要研究者填补。此外,基于学术写作教学的考虑。了解不同学科第一人称代词使用的差异,将有利于学生及研究人员写作学术论文,特别是引言部分的写作。最后,受到假说的驱动。我设想文化差异可能导致以英语为其母语的外国学者使用第一人称代词,特别是第一人称代词的单数形式比中国学者要多。为了证明我提出的假设,此项研究将逐步展开。 本文是一种定量和定性相结合的实证研究,主要探讨第一人称代词在不同文化背景下的学术论文中使用情况以及表达的功能。众所周知,学术论文通常都遵循一种标准的正式结构,即引言,方法,结果和结论。作为不可或缺的一部分---引言主要说明研究工作的目的、范围、相关领域的前人工作和知识空白、理论基础和分析、研究设想、研究方法、预期结果以及意义和贡献等等,一个好的引言引导读者快速便捷的了解整个研究内容。鉴于此,本文拟以数学,教育学和语言学三门学科中外学者的博士学位论文引言部分为语料进行共时的对比分析。研究者建立了一个学术论文引言部分共时语料库,由两个子语料库组成,即英语为其母语的外国学者博士论文引言部分语料库(NES)和中国学者博士论文引言部分语料库(NCS)。论文均选自中外高校博士学位论文全文数据库,随机选出2006年度中国和外国学者的数学、教育学和语言学学位论文各15篇,共90篇组成语料库。为了更好的展示英语学术论文中第一人称代词的使用情况,其外国作者均选自英美国家。之所以选择数学、教育学和语言学进行分析,其一是因为他们来自人类社会三大类型科学即自然科学(数学)、社会科学(教育学)和人文科学(语言学)(20世纪以后,西方已把人类社会三大类型科学划分为自然科学、社会科学、人文科学);其二是因为到现在为止,除了语言学这门学科外,还没有人对另外两门学科学术论文中第一人称代词的使用进行过研究。 本文试图以功能语言学人际功能系统的人称代词子系统为理论框架,从共时的角度出发探讨第一人称代词在中外高级学者撰写的不同学科学术论文中使用的异同点及表达的功能,并通过对语料库的实证研究揭示导致这种异同的原因。为了进行更有意义的比较,我把研究范围限制在第一人称代词的非包括性用法的研究,即用于专门指代作者本人的第一人称代词的研究。同时考虑到比较的平衡性,汉语的第一人称代词“我”“我们”细化为主语和宾语两种用法。基于本文的研究目的,笔者提出以下两个主要问题: 1.所选择的第一人称代词每一形式在中外数学,教育学和语言学的博士学位论文引言部分的出现频率是多少?有哪些相同点和不同点及可能的原因?其中哪些形式出现频率较高或较低? 2.中国学者和英语为其母语的外国学者在引言部分使用第一人称代词时表达的功能是什么? 本文采取定量和定性互为补充的研究方法。首先研究者用专业检索工具Concordancer对所确定的第一人称代词逐一在几组语料库中进行检索,得到每个代词形式在语料库中出现的频率。为了便于比较,将结果又转化为10,000词的标准语料库的出现频率。然后,通过对比第一人称代词的频率来探讨中外学者在不同学科学术论文引言部分使用的异同。对于学科之间以及中外学者使用第一人称代词时具有的差异性,研究者借助社科统计软件包SPSS(13.0)中的卡方检验计算差异的显著性,并对二者的异同进行了深入的定性分析。其研究结果如下: 1.通过对语料库数据的对比分析发现,英语为其母语的外国学者和中国学者在使用第一人称代词上确实存在着相似和差异。 2.总的看来,第一人称代词的主格形式在两个子语料库中出现比例最高,分别占整个使用的第一人称代词的70.9 %和70 %。这可能归因于它们代表的语义所指和语篇功能。第一人称代词的主格形式通常指代作者或读者,是较强的作者自我指代形式。就其表达的功能而言,较之其它形式,它们是作者权威性和主体性最明显的标识。 3.在两个子语料库的数学学科中第一人称代词复数主格形式出现的频率均最高,而单数主格形式出现频率最低甚至为零。这也许是由于该学科属于自然科学领域,在科研活动中作者为了建立实证研究的一致性,会使用第一人称复数而不是单数形式来淡化其个人在研究中的作用,以增强研究的客观性和可信度。 4.第一人称代词宾格形式在两个子语料库中的使用相当稀少,每一万词中才出现一到两个,可以看出学术论文的作者在指代自己时这些形式是不受青睐的。 5.所选择的第一人称代词每一形式均出现在两个子语料库的教育学学科中。这可能意味着第一人称代词在主观性很强的社会科学---教育学中充当较好的修辞策略,实现作者表达自己观点、突出对本学科贡献、达到与读者进行学术交流的目的。 6.通过对学科间显著性差异的定性分析,我发现两个子语料库中数学和教育学在第一人称代词使用频率上存在着显著差别,这是由自然科学和社会科学对学术论文的写作不同的要求造成的。 7.卡方检验的结果证明在使用第一人称代词上两个子语料库间确实存在明显差异。这表明,以英语为其母语的学者较之他们的中国同行在学术写作中更愿意突显自己的主体性。 8.经比较,第一人称代词的主格形式在两子语料库中的使用是不同的。以英语为其母语的学者使用第一人称代词单数远远多于复数,而中国学者却恰恰相反。原因在于英语所属文化体系提倡个人主义,而中国文化的典型特征是集体主义。这反映在作者的自我指代上就表现为第一人称代词的单复数的使用差异。 9.对比语料库可显见,第一人称代词的单数形式在英语为母语的学者论文中出现的频率比中国学者的论文要高出许多,足以说明前者在指代自我时比后者更喜欢用第一人称代词的单数形式。 10.此外还发现,在中国学者的语料库中“我的”“我们的”几乎很少出现,而英语为其母语的外国学者却使用了一定数量的第一人称代词的所有格形式,这反映了两种语言在语法上的一些差异。 11.对本研究中第一人称代词的主要形式在学术语篇引言部分表达的功能总结如下: 1)作者用以陈述写作目的,表明写作意图,并为读者提供一目了然的文本框架。 2)帮助作者描述研究步骤,阐明其使用的研究方法,展示对文本的整合能力。 3)帮助作者表达观点,力求在研究性文章中明确地提出自己的想法或观点,以此加强其陈述的说服力。 4)用来提出假设或展示作者对本研究的期望,使读者清晰了解研究者的构想。综上所述,学术论文中第一人称代词的使用确实存在着跨文化和学科之间的差异,值得研究者的关注。两个子语料库的研究结果表明第一人称代词在博士论文中的使用不仅受到作者所属学科的限制,同时也受特定文化语境的影响。此外,分析表明第一人称代词在引言部分的使用能帮助作者表达观点,阐述研究方法,陈述写作目的,突显自己的创新贡献,以此达到提升其在语篇中的主体地位的目的。 理论和方法上,从语料库语言学角度出发对第一人称代词在两种文化、不同学科学术论文引言部分的使用进行共时的实证研究,为这一领域的研究提供了一些有价值的数据参考,并作为国内相关研究的一种补充。 教学上,通过真实语料的对比分析,使国内科研人员和研究生对第一人称代词在学术语篇中的使用情况有了较清晰的了解,特别是对数学、教育学和语言学等学科的学术写作提供一些有益的帮助。更重要的是,通过展示英语为其母语的外国学者在学术论文中使用第一人称代词的情况,中国高级英语学习者可以更好地理解并有效地撰写相关英语文章,以期被国际上的主流学术刊物所接受,达到国与国之间学术交流的目的。 然而需要指出的是,由于时间和水平的限制,该论文不可避免存在一些缺点和不足,恳请专家学者进行批评指正。
[Abstract]:Theoretical research on academic writing shows that academic papers are an important manifestation of scientific research achievements and the most important, fair and objective yardstick to measure the academic attainment and level of researchers. Kai. Traditionally, scientific research reports are objective and impersonal. However, recent studies have shown that in academic writing, the author himself participates in the whole creative process. On the one hand, he should construct his own subjectivity to make his research results convincing and credible. As the author's own obvious reference, self-reference often appears with some non-personal structures in his articles, and is regarded as a rhetorical strategy. Scholars can use it to embody their subjectivity and summarize their specific research contributions. Therefore, the use of first-person pronouns has become a powerful tool when emphasizing the author's contribution to academic discourse. However, up to now, little has been known about how the first-person pronouns are used and expressed in academic discourse of different cultures and disciplines.
In recent years, more and more foreign scholars and linguists have shown great interest in the use of first-person pronouns as a linguistic strategy in academic writing and have studied it from different perspectives. Compared with the extensive and in-depth study, the systematic study of the first-person pronouns in academic discourse by Chinese scholars is rather limited. Therefore, there is a wide range of research space in this field, which stimulates my thinking on this issue. Secondly, the domestic research results show that there are not many empirical studies on the first-person pronouns, especially the basic pronouns. Considering these factors, I think it would be a meaningful attempt to study this linguistic phenomenon from the perspective of corpus linguistics. Thirdly, although Chinese scholars have begun to study first-person pronouns from different perspectives, first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines have been studied. Fourth, up to now, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in doctoral dissertations. This gap needs to be filled by researchers. Moreover, based on the consideration of teaching academic writing, no one knows. Finally, driven by the hypothesis, I envisage that cultural differences may lead to the use of first-person pronouns by English-speaking foreign scholars, especially in the singular form ratio of first-person pronouns. There are many scholars in China. In order to prove my hypothesis, this study will be carried out step by step.
As we all know, academic papers usually follow a standard formal structure, i.e. introduction, method, result and conclusion. As an indispensable part, introduction The introduction mainly explains the purpose, scope, previous work and knowledge gaps in related fields, theoretical basis and analysis, research assumptions, research methods, expected results, significance and contributions, etc. A good introduction guides readers to understand the whole research content quickly and conveniently. The introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in different disciplines is a synchronic corpus, which consists of two sub-corpuses, namely, the introduction corpus of foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English (NES) and the introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese scholars. Corpus (NCS). The dissertations were selected from the full-text database of doctoral dissertations in Chinese and foreign universities. Fifteen dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in 2006 were selected randomly, and 90 of them constituted a corpus. In order to better display the use of first-person pronouns in English academic papers, the foreign authors were selected from Britain and the United States. Country. One of the reasons for choosing mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics for analysis is that they come from three major types of Science in human society: Natural Science (mathematics), social science (pedagogy) and Humanities (linguistics). Second, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of two other disciplines except linguistics.
Based on the interpersonal pronoun subsystem of functional linguistics, this paper attempts to explore the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines written by senior Chinese and foreign scholars from a synchronic perspective, and to reveal the reasons for these differences through an empirical study of the corpus. In order to make a more meaningful comparison, I limit my study to the non-inclusive use of first-person pronouns, i.e. the study of first-person pronouns that refer specifically to the author himself. For the purpose of this study, the author raises the following two main questions:
1. What are the frequencies of each form of the first-person pronoun used in the introduction of doctoral dissertations in mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics at home and abroad? What are the similarities and differences and possible reasons? Which of these forms appear more frequently or less frequently?
2. What are the functions of the first-person pronouns used by Chinese scholars and foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English?
This paper adopts a quantitative and qualitative complementary approach. Firstly, the researcher uses Concordancer, a professional retrieval tool, to retrieve the first-person pronouns one by one from several corpuses, and obtains the frequency of each pronoun form appearing in the corpus. Then, by comparing the frequencies of first-person pronouns, this paper explores the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns by Chinese and foreign scholars in the introduction of academic papers of different disciplines. It also makes an in-depth qualitative analysis of the similarities and differences between the two.
1. Through a comparative analysis of the corpus data, it is found that there are similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns between English-speaking foreign scholars and Chinese scholars.
2. Generally speaking, the nominative form of the first-person pronoun is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, accounting for 70.9% and 70% of the first-person pronouns used in the whole corpus, respectively. This may be attributed to the semantic and textual functions they represent. The nominative form of the first-person pronoun usually refers to the author or the reader, and it is a stronger author's self-referential form. As far as the function of expression is concerned, they are the most obvious marks of authoritativeness and subjectivity than other forms.
3. The frequency of the first-person pronoun plural nominative form is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, while the frequency of the singular nominative form is the lowest or even zero. It is not a singular form to weaken the role of individuals in research, so as to enhance the objectivity and credibility of research.
4. The first-person pronoun object forms are rarely used in the two sub-corpuses. Only one or two of every ten thousand words appear. It can be seen that the authors of academic papers are not favored when referring to themselves.
5. Each form of the first-person pronoun selected appears in the pedagogical disciplines of the two sub-corpuses. This may mean that the first-person pronoun acts as a better rhetorical strategy in the highly subjective social sciences-pedagogy, realizing the author's expression of his own views, highlighting his contribution to the discipline, and achieving academic communication with readers. The purpose.
6. Through a qualitative analysis of the significant differences between disciplines, I find that there are significant differences in the frequency of first-person pronouns used by mathematics and Pedagogy in the two sub-corpuses, which is caused by the different requirements of natural and Social Sciences for academic paper writing.
7. Chi-square test results show that there are significant differences between the two sub-corpuses in the use of first-person pronouns. This shows that English-speaking students are more willing to highlight their subjectivity in academic writing than their Chinese counterparts.
8. By comparison, the use of the nominative form of first-person pronouns in the two corpuses is different. English-speaking scholars use far more singular first-person pronouns than plural pronouns, whereas Chinese scholars do the opposite. The reason is that the English-speaking cultural system advocates individualism, and the typical feature of Chinese culture is collectivism. This reflects the difference in the use of the singular plural of the first person pronouns in the author's self reference.
9. Contrastive corpus shows that the singular form of the first-person pronoun appears much more frequently in English-speaking academic papers than in Chinese academic papers, suggesting that the former prefers the singular form of the first-person pronoun to the latter when referring to the ego.
10. It is also found that "mine" and "ours" are seldom found in the corpus of Chinese scholars, while foreign scholars whose native language is English use a certain number of possessive forms of first-person pronouns, reflecting some differences in grammar between the two languages.
11. The main forms of the first-person pronouns in this study are summarized as follows:
1) the author states the purpose of writing, indicates the intention of writing, and provides readers with a clear text framework.
2) help authors describe research steps, clarify their research methods and demonstrate their ability to integrate texts.
3) Help the author to express his opinions and make every effort to put forward his own ideas or opinions clearly in the research articles so as to strengthen the persuasiveness of his statements.
To sum up, there are indeed cross-cultural and interdisciplinary differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers, which deserve researchers'attention. In addition, the analysis shows that the use of first-person pronouns in the preface can help the author express his views, elaborate his research methods, state his writing aims and highlight his innovative contributions so as to enhance his subjectivity in the text. Objective.
Theoretically and methodologically, from the perspective of corpus linguistics, this paper makes a synchronic empirical study of the use of first-person pronouns in the introduction of academic papers in two cultures and different disciplines, which provides some useful information for the study of this field.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：H042
本文编号：2192840
[Abstract]:Theoretical research on academic writing shows that academic papers are an important manifestation of scientific research achievements and the most important, fair and objective yardstick to measure the academic attainment and level of researchers. Kai. Traditionally, scientific research reports are objective and impersonal. However, recent studies have shown that in academic writing, the author himself participates in the whole creative process. On the one hand, he should construct his own subjectivity to make his research results convincing and credible. As the author's own obvious reference, self-reference often appears with some non-personal structures in his articles, and is regarded as a rhetorical strategy. Scholars can use it to embody their subjectivity and summarize their specific research contributions. Therefore, the use of first-person pronouns has become a powerful tool when emphasizing the author's contribution to academic discourse. However, up to now, little has been known about how the first-person pronouns are used and expressed in academic discourse of different cultures and disciplines.
In recent years, more and more foreign scholars and linguists have shown great interest in the use of first-person pronouns as a linguistic strategy in academic writing and have studied it from different perspectives. Compared with the extensive and in-depth study, the systematic study of the first-person pronouns in academic discourse by Chinese scholars is rather limited. Therefore, there is a wide range of research space in this field, which stimulates my thinking on this issue. Secondly, the domestic research results show that there are not many empirical studies on the first-person pronouns, especially the basic pronouns. Considering these factors, I think it would be a meaningful attempt to study this linguistic phenomenon from the perspective of corpus linguistics. Thirdly, although Chinese scholars have begun to study first-person pronouns from different perspectives, first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines have been studied. Fourth, up to now, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in doctoral dissertations. This gap needs to be filled by researchers. Moreover, based on the consideration of teaching academic writing, no one knows. Finally, driven by the hypothesis, I envisage that cultural differences may lead to the use of first-person pronouns by English-speaking foreign scholars, especially in the singular form ratio of first-person pronouns. There are many scholars in China. In order to prove my hypothesis, this study will be carried out step by step.
As we all know, academic papers usually follow a standard formal structure, i.e. introduction, method, result and conclusion. As an indispensable part, introduction The introduction mainly explains the purpose, scope, previous work and knowledge gaps in related fields, theoretical basis and analysis, research assumptions, research methods, expected results, significance and contributions, etc. A good introduction guides readers to understand the whole research content quickly and conveniently. The introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in different disciplines is a synchronic corpus, which consists of two sub-corpuses, namely, the introduction corpus of foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English (NES) and the introduction part of doctoral dissertations of Chinese scholars. Corpus (NCS). The dissertations were selected from the full-text database of doctoral dissertations in Chinese and foreign universities. Fifteen dissertations of Chinese and foreign scholars in 2006 were selected randomly, and 90 of them constituted a corpus. In order to better display the use of first-person pronouns in English academic papers, the foreign authors were selected from Britain and the United States. Country. One of the reasons for choosing mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics for analysis is that they come from three major types of Science in human society: Natural Science (mathematics), social science (pedagogy) and Humanities (linguistics). Second, no one has studied the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of two other disciplines except linguistics.
Based on the interpersonal pronoun subsystem of functional linguistics, this paper attempts to explore the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers of different disciplines written by senior Chinese and foreign scholars from a synchronic perspective, and to reveal the reasons for these differences through an empirical study of the corpus. In order to make a more meaningful comparison, I limit my study to the non-inclusive use of first-person pronouns, i.e. the study of first-person pronouns that refer specifically to the author himself. For the purpose of this study, the author raises the following two main questions:
1. What are the frequencies of each form of the first-person pronoun used in the introduction of doctoral dissertations in mathematics, pedagogy and Linguistics at home and abroad? What are the similarities and differences and possible reasons? Which of these forms appear more frequently or less frequently?
2. What are the functions of the first-person pronouns used by Chinese scholars and foreign scholars whose mother tongue is English?
This paper adopts a quantitative and qualitative complementary approach. Firstly, the researcher uses Concordancer, a professional retrieval tool, to retrieve the first-person pronouns one by one from several corpuses, and obtains the frequency of each pronoun form appearing in the corpus. Then, by comparing the frequencies of first-person pronouns, this paper explores the similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns by Chinese and foreign scholars in the introduction of academic papers of different disciplines. It also makes an in-depth qualitative analysis of the similarities and differences between the two.
1. Through a comparative analysis of the corpus data, it is found that there are similarities and differences in the use of first-person pronouns between English-speaking foreign scholars and Chinese scholars.
2. Generally speaking, the nominative form of the first-person pronoun is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, accounting for 70.9% and 70% of the first-person pronouns used in the whole corpus, respectively. This may be attributed to the semantic and textual functions they represent. The nominative form of the first-person pronoun usually refers to the author or the reader, and it is a stronger author's self-referential form. As far as the function of expression is concerned, they are the most obvious marks of authoritativeness and subjectivity than other forms.
3. The frequency of the first-person pronoun plural nominative form is the highest in the two sub-corpuses, while the frequency of the singular nominative form is the lowest or even zero. It is not a singular form to weaken the role of individuals in research, so as to enhance the objectivity and credibility of research.
4. The first-person pronoun object forms are rarely used in the two sub-corpuses. Only one or two of every ten thousand words appear. It can be seen that the authors of academic papers are not favored when referring to themselves.
5. Each form of the first-person pronoun selected appears in the pedagogical disciplines of the two sub-corpuses. This may mean that the first-person pronoun acts as a better rhetorical strategy in the highly subjective social sciences-pedagogy, realizing the author's expression of his own views, highlighting his contribution to the discipline, and achieving academic communication with readers. The purpose.
6. Through a qualitative analysis of the significant differences between disciplines, I find that there are significant differences in the frequency of first-person pronouns used by mathematics and Pedagogy in the two sub-corpuses, which is caused by the different requirements of natural and Social Sciences for academic paper writing.
7. Chi-square test results show that there are significant differences between the two sub-corpuses in the use of first-person pronouns. This shows that English-speaking students are more willing to highlight their subjectivity in academic writing than their Chinese counterparts.
8. By comparison, the use of the nominative form of first-person pronouns in the two corpuses is different. English-speaking scholars use far more singular first-person pronouns than plural pronouns, whereas Chinese scholars do the opposite. The reason is that the English-speaking cultural system advocates individualism, and the typical feature of Chinese culture is collectivism. This reflects the difference in the use of the singular plural of the first person pronouns in the author's self reference.
9. Contrastive corpus shows that the singular form of the first-person pronoun appears much more frequently in English-speaking academic papers than in Chinese academic papers, suggesting that the former prefers the singular form of the first-person pronoun to the latter when referring to the ego.
10. It is also found that "mine" and "ours" are seldom found in the corpus of Chinese scholars, while foreign scholars whose native language is English use a certain number of possessive forms of first-person pronouns, reflecting some differences in grammar between the two languages.
11. The main forms of the first-person pronouns in this study are summarized as follows:
1) the author states the purpose of writing, indicates the intention of writing, and provides readers with a clear text framework.
2) help authors describe research steps, clarify their research methods and demonstrate their ability to integrate texts.
3) Help the author to express his opinions and make every effort to put forward his own ideas or opinions clearly in the research articles so as to strengthen the persuasiveness of his statements.
To sum up, there are indeed cross-cultural and interdisciplinary differences in the use of first-person pronouns in academic papers, which deserve researchers'attention. In addition, the analysis shows that the use of first-person pronouns in the preface can help the author express his views, elaborate his research methods, state his writing aims and highlight his innovative contributions so as to enhance his subjectivity in the text. Objective.
Theoretically and methodologically, from the perspective of corpus linguistics, this paper makes a synchronic empirical study of the use of first-person pronouns in the introduction of academic papers in two cultures and different disciplines, which provides some useful information for the study of this field.
【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2008
【分类号】：H042
【引证文献】
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 宝柱;“本文+动作动词”汉英对比研究[D];吉林大学;2011年
，本文编号：2192840
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/wenshubaike/lwzy/2192840.html
