98
variety of resources. (No. 17) and its semiparaphrase: In our analysis, hyperlinks pointed… However, on balance, the verb-inclusive clause realization (we noted) is fuller, explicit and more foregrounded, which allows the producer to identify accurately the type of act (see Hyland, 2000: 20–40) as a Discourse act, whereas in the semiparaphrase (in our analysis) this becomes a Research act, backgrounded by nominalization. Tellingly, rather than *In our note, hyperlinks pointed…, we may use Our note that hyperlinks pointed…, although solely as part of a complex T0. Besides, whereas the original (We noted that hyperlinks pointed…) seems to serve reminding (intratextuality) functions, the semiparaphrase (Our note that…) may presumably point to different ends (e.g., commenting, evaluating). It is perhaps needless to add that the use of note would again background the respective act. Hence, despite the fuzzy area of nominal content clauses it appears that the actual pattern choice does indeed reflect the producerʼs particular, finely graded communicative needs. Furthermore, it is well recognized that complex and sophisticated academic content in the multifunctional genre of RAs is seldom just simply presented. Rather, it is constantly negotiated with the recipient, interpreted, assessed, framed, contextualized within the existing research, etc., all of which adds to the complexity of academic formulation. One layer of the resources implementing such functions represents academic metadiscourse (e.g., Hyland, 2017: 20) “a heterogeneous array of features which assist readers not only to connect and organize material but also to interpret it in a way preferred by the writer and with regard to the understandings and values of a particular discourse community.” Indeed, at MC level, many thematic functions (T0) were not undertaken by the KW tokens themselves, but were often employed to denote the author, other researchers, the present RA, its parts, elements of the research frame (the findings, etc.), abstract rhetors (i.e., typically an inanimate item as quasi-agent, see Hyland e.g., 2000: esp. 85–103) and the like, or were made available for other purposes, such as suggesting intertextuality, framing content, reporting other discourse or evaluating it, see, e.g., Example 15 above and a variety of others: (16) Grosjean (2010) points out that in the case of bilinguals (R — T — R) the first language may not necessarily be the stronger or dominant language… (No. 7) (17) This study also adds an acculturation (R — θ — R) perspective to Dewaele (2015a, 2006b) by showing that inner speech (R — T— θ) does contain the highest ratio of L1 use in comparison to cognitive (R — R— θ) and communicative functions (R — R— θ) even in highly acculturated (R — R— R) bilinguals. (R — R — T) (No. 7) (18) Excerpt 7 illustrates the lengthy Type 2 collaborative navigation episodes that can occur in the library chats. (R — R— T) (No. 17) (19) This negotiation may even lead to Type 3 hyperlink (R— θ — T) (a supplemental resource). (No. 17) (20) Both datasets come from web-based chat (R — θ — R) services which connect (…abridged by R. Pípalová) (No. 17) (21) This implies the link (R — T — θ) is not only a proposal to the client, but also an instant resource for the professional. (No. 17)
chapter four. constructing the global from the local
99
Since numerous thematic functions at MC level served such needs, the actual content, epitomized by the KWs, had to be assigned more dynamic functions, frequently resulting in submerged theme cases. (For more on submerging, see Chapter Six) (22) We found that hyperlinks (R —T — θ) are embedded in and work as responses to information or advice requests. (No. 17)
Conversely, there are also some good grounds for employing KWs in a far less dynamic capacity. For example, irrespective of whether at CF0 or CF1 thematic or rhematic, in some specimens the KW item expresses a core notion whose diverse aspects, types, and categories are gradually discussed. Hence, at CF2 level, such KW tokens adopt thematic functions in the respective NP. (23) Type 2 hyperlinks (T — θ — T) were the most common in the counselling chats. (R— θ — T) (No. 17)
Furthermore, the relatively remarkable degrees of thematicity attested to in some earlier subgenres, especially in Introductions, rather than in later sections in the RAs, stem, among other concerns, from the frequent need to provide definitions of crucial concepts initially. Moreover, such paragraphs tend to be organized paradigmatically. (For more, see Chapter Five) (24) Inner speech (T — θ — θ) is understood as private language use which fulfills needs other than social and interpersonal communication… (abridged by R. Pípalová). (No. 7) (25) Language development across the lifespan (T — θ — θ) is a growing area of research which focuses… (abridged by R. Pípalová) (No. 7)
Thus, it appears that each discourse type category may have its own unique FSP tendencies. Put differently, FSP seems to be determined stylistically. Hence, the various degrees of thematicity and rhematicity assigned to individual KW (cluster) tokens at different levels, especially in the mixed category patterns, reflect the delicate shades of the authorʼs communicative needs, which strive to strike the right balance between ensuring clarity and facilitating felicitous negotiation of meaning in the interest of a coherent reception of the discourse. Diverse frequencies, distributions, degrees of dynamicity and FSP patterns detected for each KW cluster seem to be indicative of the clusterʼs role and its relative standing in encoding the Global Theme. Naturally, since for reasons of manageability the data explored were rather limited, far more research would be required to verify the tendencies suggested.
100
corpus broad corpus (no. 1–20) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.
Al-Gahtani, S. & Roever, C. (2018). Proficiency and preference organization in second language refusals. Journal of Pragmatics 129, 140–153. Ames, K. (2018). ‘Ironic detachment’: Locals laughing ‘at’ the local on commercial breakfast radio. Journal of Pragmatics 123, 1–10. Catedral, L. (2018). ‘That’s not the kind of church we are’: Heteroglossic ambiguity and religious identity in contexts of LGB exclusion. Language & Communication 60, 108–119. Chaidas, D. (2018). Legitimation strategies in the Greek paradigm: A comparative analysis of Syriza and New Democracy. Language & Communication 60, 136–149. Dewaele, J. M. & Salomidou, L. (2017). Loving a partner in a foreign language. Journal of Pragmatics 108, 116–130. Duncan, D. (2017). Australian singer, American features: Performing authenticity in country music. Language & Communication 52, 31–44. Hammer, K. (2017). Language through the prism: Patterns of L2 internalisation and use in acculturated bilinguals. Journal of Pragmatics 117, 72–87. Hammer, K. (2017). They speak what language to whom?! Acculturation and language use for com municative domains in bilinguals. Language & Communication 56, 42–54. Loureiro-Rodríguez, V., Moyna, M. I., & Robles, D. (2018). Hey, baby, ¿Qué Pasó?: Performing bilingual identities in Texan popular music. Language & Communication 60, 120–135. Morrison, M. E. (2018). Beyond derivation: Creative use of noun class prefixation for both semantic and reference tracking purposes. Journal of Pragmatics 123, 38–56. Myketiak, C., Concannon, S., & Curzon, P. (2017). Narrative perspective, person references, and evidentiality in clinical incident reports. Journal of Pragmatics 117, 139–154. Ramírez-Cruz, H. (2017). No manches, güey! Service encounters in a Hispanic American intercultural communication setting. Journal of Pragmatics 118, 28–47. Reynolds, E. (2017). Description of membership and enacting membership: Seeing-a-lift, being a team. Journal of Pragmatics 118, 99–119. Robles, J. S., DiDomenico, S., & Raclaw, J. (2018). Doing being an ordinary technology and social media user. Language & Communication 60, 150–167. Secova, M. (2017). Discourse-pragmatic variation in Paris French and London English: Insights from general extenders. Journal of Pragmatics 114, 1–15. Shvidko, E. (2018). Writing conference feedback as moment-to-moment affiliative relationship building. Journal of Pragmatics 127, 20–34. Stommel, W., Paulus, T. M., & Atkins, D. P. (2017). “Here’s the link”: Hyperlinking in service-focused chat interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 115, 56–67. Su, D. (2017). Significance as a lens: Understanding the Mandarin ba construction through discourse adjacent alternation. Journal of Pragmatics 117, 204–230. Vergis, N. (2017). The interaction of the Maxim of Quality and face concerns: An experimental approach using the vignette technique. Journal of Pragmatics 118, 38–50. Zhao, L., Dehé, N., & Murphy, V. A. (2018). From pitch to purpose: The prosodic-pragmatic mapping of [I + verb] belief constructions in English and Mandarin. Journal of Pragmatics 123, 57–77.
narrow corpus (no. 7; no. 17) 7. 17.
Hammer, K. (2017). Language through the prism: Patterns of L2 internalisation and use in acculturated bilinguals. Journal of Pragmatics 117, 72–87. Stommel, W., Paulus, T. M., & Atkins, D. P. (2017). “Here’s the link”: Hyperlinking in service-focused chat interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 115, 56–67.
Ukázka elektronické knihy