文章以应用语言学类英汉学术书评中投射结构的使用为切入点,考察书评语篇中评价意义的跨文化差异。文章对所收集的语料进行量化统计与语篇分析,结果发现:(1)与英语书评相比,汉语书评投射结构的使用相对较少,尤其在著者行为和作者立场上存在显著性差异;(2)投射结构使用的差异体现出汉语书评评价潜势与英语书评相比更倾向于经验意义,而非评价意义。这些差异可能源于不同学术文化、学科社团内人际关系和写作者声音的影响。
Based on an analysis of the use of projections in English and Chinese academic book reviews in Applied Linguistics, this study aims to explore the evaluative meanings in the review discourses from a cross-cultural perspective. The quantitive and textual analyses of the corpus data reveals that compared with English academic book review, there exists a marked difference in a less frequent use of projections in Chinese book reviews, specifically, in the categories of Author’s Acts and Writer’s Stance, and that a reduced interpersonal investment is made in Chinese book reviews with a preference for the experiential meaning potential, in contrast with the evaluative meaning potential. These differences are interpreted in reference to the nature of academic culture, interpersonal relations in the disciplinary community and the authorial voice.
Bondi, M. 2009. Historians at work: Reporting frameworks in English and Italian book review articles [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 179-98.
Diani, G. 2009. Reporting and evaluation in English book review articles: A cross-disciplinary study [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 87-104.
Gao, Y., L. Li & J. Lu. 2001. Trends in research methods in applied linguistics: China and west [J]. English for Specific Purposes 20: 1-4.
Halliday, M. A. K. 2000. An Introduction to Functional Grammar [M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.
Hinkel, E. 2004. Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar [M]. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hu, G. & F. Cao. 2011. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English-and Chinese-medium journals [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 2795-2809.
Hu, G. & G. Wang. 2014. Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles [J]. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 14: 14-28.
Hunston, S. 2000. Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts [A]. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (eds.). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse [C]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 176-207.
Hyland, K. 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation [J]. English for Specific Purposes 27: 4-21.
Hyland, K. 2009. Writing in the disciplines: Research evidence for specificity [J]. Taiwan International ESP Journal 1: 5-22.
Hyland, K. 2013. Writing in the university: Education, knowledge and reputation [J]. Language Teaching 46: 53-70.
Hyland, K. & G. Diani (eds.). 2009. Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. London: Palgrave.
Khoutyz, I. 2013. Engagement features in Russian & English: A cross-cultural analysis of academic written discourse [J]. Teacher College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics 13: 1-20.
Lea, M. & B. Street. 2006. The academic literacies model: Theory and applications [J]. Theory into Practice 45: 368-77.
Lillis, T. & M. J. Curry (eds.). 2010. Academic Writing in a Global Context: The Politics and Practices of Publishing in English [C]. London: Routledge.
Lim, J. M. H. 2008. Indicating significance of current research: Pedagogical implications of a genre analysis for dissertation writing [J]. Open Applied Linguistics Journal 1: 46-55.
Lin, L. & S. Evans. 2012. Structural patterns in empirical research articles: A cross-disciplinary study [J]. English for Specific Purposes 31: 150-60.
Martin, J. R. & P. R. R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English [M]. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave.
Moreno, A. & L. Suárez. 2009. Academic book reviews in English and Spanish: Critical comments and rhetorical structure [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 161-78.
Mur-Duenas, P. 2011. An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish [J]. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3068-79.
Paltridge, B. 2002. Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice [J]. English for Specific Purposes 21: 125-43.
Ryshina-Pankova, M. 2011. Developmental changes in the use of interactional resources: Persuading the reader in FL book reviews [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing 20: 243-56.
Shi, L., W. Wang & J. Xu. 2005. Publication culture of foreign language education journals in China [J]. TESOL Quarterly 39: 765-75.
Swales, J. 2004. Research Genres: Explorations and Applications [M]. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, G. & Y. Ye. 1991. Evaluation of the reporting verbs used in academic papers [J]. Applied Linguistics 12: 365-82.
Tse, P. & K. Hyland. 2009. Discipline and gender: Constructing rhetorical identity in book reviews [A]. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (eds.). Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings [C]. New York: Palgrave. 105-21.
陈令君.2010.语篇评价的语用维度阐释——兼论英语学术书评中的评价策略[J].当代外语研究(3):17-20.
黑玉琴.2010.应用语言学期刊中书评文章的辩论修辞结构[J].外语教学(2):23-28.
唐丽萍.2004.学术书评语类结构的评价分析[J].外国语(3):35-43.
唐青叶.2004.书评的语类结构及其情态的力量动态阐释[J].外语学刊(1):51-55.
许家金.2013.中国学习者英语口头叙事中的话语评价研究[J].外语教学与研究(1):69-79.
姚银燕、陈晓燕.2012.英语学术书评语篇让步语义资源的介入意义[J].外语教学理论与实践(1):38-46.
