《Contrastingtheanduseofreulationmarkers.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Contrastingtheanduseofreulationmarkers.docx（25页珍藏版）》请在金锄头文库上搜索。
1、Contrasting the form and use of reformulation markersMaria Josep Cuenca (Universitat de Valencia)Carme Bach (Universitat Pompeu Fabra)Introduction: Specialized discourse and reformulationSpecialized discourse is generally analized from a lexical point of view focusing on terminology. Nevertheless, t
2、here are other important aspects dealing with the construction of specialized discourse or rather with the types of texts and genres prototypically associated with specialization.Specialized discourse can be associated with expository texts, in which the use of connectives is highly significant. The
3、 author often highlights the relationship between ideas by means of connectives, and builds a coherent discourse by making these links explicit.The explanation of terms and ideas becomes a basic discourse operation in expository prose both in scientific and in popular science texts. There are severa
4、l papers that insist on the importance of reformulation in scientific texts (Candcl 1984, Thoiron & Bcjoint 1991) and also in popular-science texts (Ciapuscio 1997, 2003, F10ttum 1993, 1995, Bach 2001b, 2001c): authors reformulate their discourse in order to facilitate communication and specifically
5、 to contribute to the understanding and the diffusion of specialized knowledge:Cette diffusion de Iexpression scientifique par touches successives, par corrections, par ameliorations, est souvent due a un souci pedagogique developpe. On a note la volonte des scientifiques de se fa ire comp rend re.
6、(Candel 1984: 106)In addition, it has been pointed out that the identification of reformulation becomes a way to identify terms in specialized discourse (Candcl 1984, Thoiron & Bcjoint 1991, Suarez 2004).We want to thank Montserrat Gonzalez, Santiago Posteguillo and Mercedes Suarez for their comment
7、s on draft versions of this paper. This research is part of the network Coneixement, llenguatge i discurs especialitzat (CiRIT, Generalitat de Catalunya, 2003XT00051).In addition, it has been pointed out that the identification of reformulation becomes a way to identify terms in specialized discours
8、e (Candcl 1984, Thoiron & Bcjoint 1991, Suarez 2004).We want to thank Montserrat Gonzalez, Santiago Posteguillo and Mercedes Suarez for their comments on draft versions of this paper. This research is part of the network Coneixement, llenguatge i discurs especialitzat (CiRIT, Generalitat de Cataluny
9、a, 2003XT00051). Thoiron and Bejoint (1991: 101) express this idea in the following way:. on peut voir les reformulations comme des symptomes de la presence de termes et quon peut done les utiliser comine des outils de reperage. On the other hand, Morturcux (1982: 50) defends that paraphrastic refor
10、mulation is a key element in popular science texts in order to avoid the problems that terminology can imply for a non-expert receiver:La definition globale de la vulgarisation comme production denonces paraphrastiques de discours-sources recouvre des realisations variees . Le traitement de ces term
11、inologies est alors 1un des problemes majeurs a resoudre; or, un trait caracteristique de la vulgarisation, qui 1oppose a unc traduction, eest que In (5), reduction implies a second level instruction of exemplification.(5) Al considerarlos como cosas diferentes, la primera consecuencia es que se con
12、tabilizan aparte, haciendo sospechosos I os porcentajes (con independencia de que ya Io sean por sf mismos) y sin hacerse jamds las tres preguntas cientificas obligatorias que proceden; es decir, a)匕son dos cosas distintas?; b) en que consiste su diferencia semantica, si la hay?; c) cuales pueden se
13、r las causas de la mayor abundancia del uso de probabilidad? (PRAG, 252)When considering them as different things, the first consequence is that they are counled” separatedly, so that percentages are suspicious and without ever posing the three compulsory scientific questions needed; es decir (lit.:
14、 *(it) is to say) a) are they different?; b) what kind of semantic difference do they have, if any?; c) which can be the causes of the higher frequence of (he use of probability?The author in (5) reformulates the “three scientific questions by means of three specific questions which specify the prev
15、ious concept. The operation is clearly an inclusive one.For the purposes of this paper, our analysis will be restricted to the basic movements expressed by the paraphrastic reformulation markers identified in our corpus.5. Reformulation markers: usesOur corpus of academic papers in linguistics inclu
16、des 395 markers, whose distribution in languages and movements is represented in Table 2.Table 2. Markers according to the three movementsExpansionReductionPermutationTotalCatalan61 (44.5%)69 (50.3%)6 (4.3%)136(100%)Spanish75 (42.1%)88 (49.4 %)15(8.4%)178(100%)English54 (66.6%)19(23.4%)8 (9.8%)81 (100%)Total 017629395Tabic 2 shows significant differences regarding the number of mar
