대한언어학회 전자저널

Eun, Hoyoon. (2022). Authorial reference and rhetorical functions in research articles of mathematics and linguistics. The Linguistic Association of Korea Journal, 30(4), 191-210. This study explores how academic authors of different fields present themselves in the text and how they build up authorial identities with rhetorical functions of authorial referential expressions. The corpus for this study is comprised of 72 research articles (RAs) written in English in the areas of mathematics and linguistics. The frequency of authorial referential expressions was analyzed statistically and their rhetorical functions were also investigated qualitatively, based on Hylands (2002) classifications. The results report the significant overuse of first-person plural pronouns in the corpus of mathematics although the corpus consists of all single-authored RAs. Meanwhile, various types of authorial referential markers are used in the corpus of linguistics. Also, authors of linguistics select more diverse rhetorical functions than the ones of mathematics. We can say that a discipline influences the choice of authorial referential markers more significantly than a language. The study ends with suggestions that EAP learners and RA authors should be more aware of authorial reference and their rhetorical functions.

# authorial reference # rhetorical function # research article # EAP

• Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1999). Exploring the interlanguage of interlanguage pragmatics: A research agenda for acquisitional pragmatics. Language Learning, 49(4), 677-713.
• Charles, M. (2003). ‘This mystery...’: a corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 16(1), 3-14.
• Chen, R. (2020). Single author self-reference: Identity construction and pragmatic competence. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 45, 203-214.
• Choi, Y.-H. (2020). Authorial references in single-author research articles of L2 English student writers and L1 English authors. Korean Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 21, 226-246.
• Eun, H.-Y. (2020). Study on hedges and boosters in the conclusions of research articles. English Language & Literature Teaching, 26(3), 19-37.
• Fløttum, K., Dahl, T., & Kinn, T. (2006). Academic voices: Across languages and disciplines. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Gao, X. (2018). A cross-disciplinary corpus-based study on English and Chinese native speakers’ use of first person pronouns in academic English writing. Text & Talk, 38(1), 93-113.
• Hardwood, N. (2005). Nowhere has anyone attempted...In this article I aim to do just that: A corpus based study on self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1207-1231.
• Hardwood, N. (2006). Appropriate personal pronoun use in political science: A qualitative study and a proposed heuristic for future research. Written Communication, 23(4), 424-450.
• House, J. (2013). Developing pragmatic competence in English as a lingua franca: Using discourse markers to express (inter) subjectivity and connectivity. Journal of Pragmatics, 59, 57-67.
• Hryniuk, K. (2018). Expressing authorial self in research articles written by Polish and English native-speaker writers: A corpus-based study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(3), 621-642.
• Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman.
• Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207-226.
• Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1091-1112.
• Hyland, K. (2003). Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 251-259.
• Hyland, K. (2011). The presentation of self in scholarly life: identity and marginalization in academic homepages. English for Specific Purposes, 30(4), 286-297.
• Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: the discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
• Ivanic, R., & Camps, D. (2001). I am how I sound: Voice as self-representation in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1-2), 3-33.
• Kafes, H. (2017). The use of authorial self-mention words in academic writing. International Journal of Language Academy, 5, 165-180.
• Karahan, P. (2013). Self-mention in scientific articles written by Turkish and non-Turkish authors. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 305-322.
• Kasper, G., & Rose, K. (2001). Pragmatic development in a second language. Oxford: Blackwell.
• Khedri, M., & Kritsis. K. (2020). How do we make ourselves heard in the writing of a research article? A study of authorial references in four disciplines. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 40, 194-217.
• Kuo, C.-H. (1999). The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 121-138.
• Lee, Y.-J. (2014). A study on the ‘authorial self-mention’ of journal articles in Korean. Research on Writing, 20, 231-266.
• Li, Z. (2021). Authorial presence in research article abstracts: A diachronic investigation of the use of first person pronouns. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, 100977. DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977.
• Martín-Martín, P. (2003). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 25-43.
• Martínez, I. (2005). Native and non-native writer’s use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 174-190.
• McGrath, L. (2016). Self-mentions in anthropology and history research articles: Variation between and within disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 86-98.
• Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 86-101.
• Rundblad, G. (2007). Impersonal, general, and social: The use of metonymy versus passive voice in medical discourse. Written Communication, 24, 250-277.
• Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 149-170.
• Sheldon, E. (2009). From one I to another: Discursive construction of self-representation in English and Castilian Spanish research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 251-265.
• Sheldrake, R. (2001). Personally speaking. New Scientist, 19 July.
• Sheldrake, R. (2012). The science delusion: Freeing the spirit of enquiry. London: Coronet.
• Starfield, S., & Ravelli, L. (2006). The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist: Self and structure in New Humanities research theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 222-243.
• Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Tang, R., & John, S. (1999). The ‘I’ in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing through the first person. English for Specific Purposes, 18, S23-S39.
• Thompson, L. (1996). The development of pragmatic competence: Past findings and future directions for research. Language in Society, 3, 3-21.
• Vassileva, I. (1998). Who am I/who are we in academic writing? A contrastive analysis of authorial presence in English, German, French, Russian and Bulgarian. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8, 163-190.
• Young, E., & Brown, L. (2014). Negotiating pragmatic competence in computer mediated communication: The case of Korean address terms. CALICO Journal, 31(3), 264-282.