學術論文中第一人稱代詞的使用研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-08-19 21:12
【摘要】： 學術寫作的理論研究表明:學術論文是科學研究成果的重要表現(xiàn)形態(tài),是衡量研究者學術造詣及水平高低的最重要、最公正、最客觀的尺度。毋庸置疑,學術論文的寫作越來越受到廣大學者的重視,對這種特定的書面語篇的研究也已經展開。傳統(tǒng)觀點認為,科研報道是客觀的、非人稱的。但近幾年的研究表明,在學術寫作中,作者本人也參與到整個創(chuàng)作過程之中。一方面他要報告自己的研究成果,闡述自己對某一問題的觀點和看法以及展現(xiàn)自己對某一領域的創(chuàng)新貢獻;另一方面他要建構自己的主體地位,使其研究成果具有說服力和可信度。作為作者自己明顯的指稱----自我指代在文章中常常與一些非人稱結構伴隨出現(xiàn),并被看成一種修辭策略,學者可用以體現(xiàn)自己的主體地位,概述其具體的研究貢獻。因此,當強調作者在學術語篇中的貢獻時,第一人稱代詞的使用成為一種強有力的手段。然而迄今為止,我們對第一人稱代詞這種語言策略在不同文化、不同學科的學術語篇中如何使用及表達的功能所知甚少。 近年來,越來越多的國外學者和語言學家對第一人稱代詞這種語言策略在學術寫作中的使用產生了濃厚的興趣,并從不同的角度進行了研究。然而,在中國這樣的研究相對較少。筆者進行此類研究主要基于以下幾點原因:首先,與國外學者廣泛而深入的研究相比,中國學者對學術語篇中第一人稱代詞的系統(tǒng)研究卻相當有限。因此,在這一領域有廣泛的研究空間,就是這一理由激發(fā)了我對此問題的思考。其次,國內的研究成果顯示,第一人稱代詞的實證研究不多,尤其是基于真實語料的定量定性分析則更少�？紤]到這些因素,我認為從語料庫語言學的角度出發(fā)研究這一語言現(xiàn)象將是一個有意義的嘗試。第三,盡管中國學者已經開始從不同的角度研究第一人稱代詞,但對不同學科學術論文中第一人稱代詞使用的對比分析卻寥寥無幾,更不用說對其在學術論文引言部分使用情況的跨文化比較了。第四,到現(xiàn)在為止,還沒有人對第一人稱代詞在博士論文中的使用進行過研究。這一空白需要研究者填補。此外,基于學術寫作教學的考慮。了解不同學科第一人稱代詞使用的差異,將有利于學生及研究人員寫作學術論文,特別是引言部分的寫作。最后,受到假說的驅動。我設想文化差異可能導致以英語為其母語的外國學者使用第一人稱代詞,特別是第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式比中國學者要多。為了證明我提出的假設,此項研究將逐步展開。 本文是一種定量和定性相結合的實證研究,主要探討第一人稱代詞在不同文化背景下的學術論文中使用情況以及表達的功能。眾所周知,學術論文通常都遵循一種標準的正式結構,即引言,方法,結果和結論。作為不可或缺的一部分---引言主要說明研究工作的目的、范圍、相關領域的前人工作和知識空白、理論基礎和分析、研究設想、研究方法、預期結果以及意義和貢獻等等,一個好的引言引導讀者快速便捷的了解整個研究內容。鑒于此,本文擬以數(shù)學,教育學和語言學三門學科中外學者的博士學位論文引言部分為語料進行共時的對比分析。研究者建立了一個學術論文引言部分共時語料庫,由兩個子語料庫組成,即英語為其母語的外國學者博士論文引言部分語料庫(NES)和中國學者博士論文引言部分語料庫(NCS)。論文均選自中外高校博士學位論文全文數(shù)據(jù)庫,隨機選出2006年度中國和外國學者的數(shù)學、教育學和語言學學位論文各15篇,共90篇組成語料庫。為了更好的展示英語學術論文中第一人稱代詞的使用情況,其外國作者均選自英美國家。之所以選擇數(shù)學、教育學和語言學進行分析,其一是因為他們來自人類社會三大類型科學即自然科學(數(shù)學)、社會科學(教育學)和人文科學(語言學)(20世紀以后,西方已把人類社會三大類型科學劃分為自然科學、社會科學、人文科學);其二是因為到現(xiàn)在為止,除了語言學這門學科外,還沒有人對另外兩門學科學術論文中第一人稱代詞的使用進行過研究。 本文試圖以功能語言學人際功能系統(tǒng)的人稱代詞子系統(tǒng)為理論框架,從共時的角度出發(fā)探討第一人稱代詞在中外高級學者撰寫的不同學科學術論文中使用的異同點及表達的功能,并通過對語料庫的實證研究揭示導致這種異同的原因。為了進行更有意義的比較,我把研究范圍限制在第一人稱代詞的非包括性用法的研究,即用于專門指代作者本人的第一人稱代詞的研究。同時考慮到比較的平衡性,漢語的第一人稱代詞“我”“我們”細化為主語和賓語兩種用法�；诒疚牡难芯磕康�,筆者提出以下兩個主要問題: 1.所選擇的第一人稱代詞每一形式在中外數(shù)學,教育學和語言學的博士學位論文引言部分的出現(xiàn)頻率是多少?有哪些相同點和不同點及可能的原因?其中哪些形式出現(xiàn)頻率較高或較低? 2.中國學者和英語為其母語的外國學者在引言部分使用第一人稱代詞時表達的功能是什么? 本文采取定量和定性互為補充的研究方法。首先研究者用專業(yè)檢索工具Concordancer對所確定的第一人稱代詞逐一在幾組語料庫中進行檢索,得到每個代詞形式在語料庫中出現(xiàn)的頻率。為了便于比較,將結果又轉化為10,000詞的標準語料庫的出現(xiàn)頻率。然后,通過對比第一人稱代詞的頻率來探討中外學者在不同學科學術論文引言部分使用的異同。對于學科之間以及中外學者使用第一人稱代詞時具有的差異性,研究者借助社科統(tǒng)計軟件包SPSS(13.0)中的卡方檢驗計算差異的顯著性,并對二者的異同進行了深入的定性分析。其研究結果如下: 1.通過對語料庫數(shù)據(jù)的對比分析發(fā)現(xiàn),英語為其母語的外國學者和中國學者在使用第一人稱代詞上確實存在著相似和差異。 2.總的看來,第一人稱代詞的主格形式在兩個子語料庫中出現(xiàn)比例最高,分別占整個使用的第一人稱代詞的70.9 %和70 %。這可能歸因于它們代表的語義所指和語篇功能。第一人稱代詞的主格形式通常指代作者或讀者,是較強的作者自我指代形式。就其表達的功能而言,較之其它形式,它們是作者權威性和主體性最明顯的標識。 3.在兩個子語料庫的數(shù)學學科中第一人稱代詞復數(shù)主格形式出現(xiàn)的頻率均最高,而單數(shù)主格形式出現(xiàn)頻率最低甚至為零。這也許是由于該學科屬于自然科學領域,在科研活動中作者為了建立實證研究的一致性,會使用第一人稱復數(shù)而不是單數(shù)形式來淡化其個人在研究中的作用,以增強研究的客觀性和可信度。 4.第一人稱代詞賓格形式在兩個子語料庫中的使用相當稀少,每一萬詞中才出現(xiàn)一到兩個,可以看出學術論文的作者在指代自己時這些形式是不受青睞的。 5.所選擇的第一人稱代詞每一形式均出現(xiàn)在兩個子語料庫的教育學學科中。這可能意味著第一人稱代詞在主觀性很強的社會科學---教育學中充當較好的修辭策略,實現(xiàn)作者表達自己觀點、突出對本學科貢獻、達到與讀者進行學術交流的目的。 6.通過對學科間顯著性差異的定性分析,我發(fā)現(xiàn)兩個子語料庫中數(shù)學和教育學在第一人稱代詞使用頻率上存在著顯著差別,這是由自然科學和社會科學對學術論文的寫作不同的要求造成的。 7.卡方檢驗的結果證明在使用第一人稱代詞上兩個子語料庫間確實存在明顯差異。這表明,以英語為其母語的學者較之他們的中國同行在學術寫作中更愿意突顯自己的主體性。 8.經比較,第一人稱代詞的主格形式在兩子語料庫中的使用是不同的。以英語為其母語的學者使用第一人稱代詞單數(shù)遠遠多于復數(shù),而中國學者卻恰恰相反。原因在于英語所屬文化體系提倡個人主義,而中國文化的典型特征是集體主義。這反映在作者的自我指代上就表現(xiàn)為第一人稱代詞的單復數(shù)的使用差異。 9.對比語料庫可顯見,第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式在英語為母語的學者論文中出現(xiàn)的頻率比中國學者的論文要高出許多,足以說明前者在指代自我時比后者更喜歡用第一人稱代詞的單數(shù)形式。 10.此外還發(fā)現(xiàn),在中國學者的語料庫中“我的”“我們的”幾乎很少出現(xiàn),而英語為其母語的外國學者卻使用了一定數(shù)量的第一人稱代詞的所有格形式,這反映了兩種語言在語法上的一些差異。 11.對本研究中第一人稱代詞的主要形式在學術語篇引言部分表達的功能總結如下: 1)作者用以陳述寫作目的,表明寫作意圖,并為讀者提供一目了然的文本框架。 2)幫助作者描述研究步驟,闡明其使用的研究方法,展示對文本的整合能力。 3)幫助作者表達觀點,力求在研究性文章中明確地提出自己的想法或觀點,以此加強其陳述的說服力。 4)用來提出假設或展示作者對本研究的期望,使讀者清晰了解研究者的構想。綜上所述,學術論文中第一人稱代詞的使用確實存在著跨文化和學科之間的差異,值得研究者的關注。兩個子語料庫的研究結果表明第一人稱代詞在博士論文中的使用不僅受到作者所屬學科的限制,同時也受特定文化語境的影響。此外,分析表明第一人稱代詞在引言部分的使用能幫助作者表達觀點,闡述研究方法,陳述寫作目的,突顯自己的創(chuàng)新貢獻,以此達到提升其在語篇中的主體地位的目的。 理論和方法上,從語料庫語言學角度出發(fā)對第一人稱代詞在兩種文化、不同學科學術論文引言部分的使用進行共時的實證研究,為這一領域的研究提供了一些有價值的數(shù)據(jù)參考,并作為國內相關研究的一種補充。 教學上,通過真實語料的對比分析,使國內科研人員和研究生對第一人稱代詞在學術語篇中的使用情況有了較清晰的了解,特別是對數(shù)學、教育學和語言學等學科的學術寫作提供一些有益的幫助。更重要的是,通過展示英語為其母語的外國學者在學術論文中使用第一人稱代詞的情況,中國高級英語學習者可以更好地理解并有效地撰寫相關英語文章,以期被國際上的主流學術刊物所接受,達到國與國之間學術交流的目的。 然而需要指出的是,由于時間和水平的限制,該論文不可避免存在一些缺點和不足,懇請專家學者進行批評指正。
[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.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2008
【分類號】：H042
本文編號：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.
【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2008
【分類號】：H042
【引證文獻】
相關碩士學位論文 前1條
1 寶柱;“本文+動作動詞”漢英對比研究[D];吉林大學;2011年
，本文編號：2192840
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/wenshubaike/lwzy/2192840.html
