DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14483/udistrital.jour.calj.2014.2.a10Published:
2014-09-22Issue:
Vol 16, No 2 (2014) July-DecemberSection:
Reflections on PraxisScientific communication and the nature of science: an illustration of oscillations from researcher’s proximity to researcher's distance in scientific titles and its pedagogical implications
La comunicación científica y la naturaleza de la ciencia: ejemplos de oscilaciones entre la proximidad y distancia textuales del investigador a través de los títulos científicos y sus implicaciones pedagógicas
Keywords:
Inglés con fines específicos, comunicación científica, objetividad, títulos científicos, retórica de la ciencia (es).Keywords:
Scientific Communication, Scientific titles, English for Specific Purposes, Objectivity, science rhetorics (en).Abstract (en)
Although positive science has progressed under the spell of the objectivity paradigm and the primacy of its method, scientific discourse shows how this paradigm has not survived for long. Based on our research on scientific titles, the purpose of this work is to reflect on the demythification of this paradigm through title discoursive strategies. Thus, 1) reflections on science, particularly its communicative potential, from the point of view of the epistemology of science are provided, and 2) examples from a title database including 570 research and review paper titles written in English in the fields of biological and social sciences are analyzed as excerpts of pendulations to communicate knowledge via total agency concealment, particularly following an objectbased approach, to agency textual proximity. These title oscillations illustrate how scientists choose to show themselves in the process of knowledge communication and give clues on how to explicitly teach these strategies. Though restricted to a specific example, these clues shed light on what issues regarding the communicative approach of science could be explicitly taught to effectively guide title reading and writing in science
Abstract (es)
Basándonos en nuestros estudios sobre títulos científicos, este trabajo reflexiona sobre la desmitificación del paradigma de objetividad según las estrategias discursivas de los títulos científicos. Por tal razón: 1) se reflexiona sobre el quehacer científico, particularmente la comunicación, desde la perspectiva de la epistemología de la ciencia, y 2) se analizan a la luz de la perspectiva de la Gramática Sistémico Funcional ejemplos tomados de una base de datos construida con 570 títulos científicos de artículos de investigación y de revisión en inglés en áreas de ciencias biológicas y sociales. Nuestras reflexiones muestran que en la comunicación del conocimiento a través de los títulos, el científico/ comunicador elige mostrarse u ocultarse en el texto a través de distintas estrategias de discurso. Si bien nuestras reflexiones se restringen a un territorio muy pequeño de los artículos científicos, como lo es el territorio de los títulos, las oscilaciones observadas no solo ilustran esta elección sino que también determinan claves a seguir hacia una enseñanza explícita que garantice la escritura y lectura apropiadas de los títulos científicos.
References
Baratta, A. (2009). Revealing stance through passive voice. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 1406–1421.
Barnes, B., & Bloor, D. (1982). Relativism, rationalism and sociology of knowledge. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism (pp. 21–47). Oxford: Blackwell.
Barthes, R. (1987). El susurro del lenguaje. Más allá de la palabra y de la escritura. Barcelona, Spain: Paidos.
Bajtin, M. M. (1999). Estética de la creación verbal. Madrid: Siglo XXI Editores.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge. London: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Collins, H. (1985). Changing order. Replication and induction in scientific practice. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Dressen, D. (2003). Geologists’ implicit persuasive strategies and the construction of evaluative evidence. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 273–290.
Fowler, R., Hodge, B., Krees, G. & Trew, T. (1979). Language and control. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Books.
Garritz, A. (2006). Naturaleza de la ciencia e indagación: cuestiones fundamentales para la educación científica del ciudadano. Revista Iberoamericana de Educación, 42, 127–152.
Gross, A. G. (1990). The rhetoric of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M., & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science. Literacy and discursive power. London: the Palmer Press.
Hunston, S. (1994). Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 191–218). London, New York: Routledge.
Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. London: Oxford University Press (edited with G. Thompson).
Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 239–256.
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207–226.
Jauss, H. R. (1987). El lector como instancia de una nueva historia de la literatura. In J. A. Mayoral (Ed.). Estética de la recepción [Aesthetics of reception] (pp. 59–85). Madrid: Arco/Libros.
Knorr-Cetina, K. (1992). The couch, the cathedral and the laboratory: On the relationship between experiment and laboratory in science. In A. Pickering (Ed.) Science as practice and culture (pp. 113-138). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Latour, B., & Woolgar, S. (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts (rev. ed.). Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
Lemke, J. L. (1990). Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
Lorés Sanz, R. (2008). Genres in contrast: The exploration of writers´ visibility in research articles and research article reviews. In S. Burgess & P. Martín-Martín (Eds.) English as an additional language in research publication and communication (pp. 105–122). Bern: Peter Lang AG.
Martinez, I. (2001). Impersonality in the research article as revealed by analysis of the transitivity structure. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 227–247.
Master, P. (1991). Active verbs with inanimate subjects in scientific prose. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 15–33.
Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure, 3rd enlarged edn. New York: Free Press.
Nash, W. (1990). The stuff these people write. In W. Nash (Ed.), The writing scholar: studies in the language and conventions of academic discourse (pp. 8–30). Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Nielsen, K.H. (2013). Scientific communication and the nature of science. Science and Education, 22, 2067–2086.
Pickering, A. (1984). Constructing quarks: A sociological history of particle physics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Pinch, T. (1985). Towards an analysis of scientific observation: The externality and evidential significance of observational reports in physics. Social Studies in Science, 15, 3–36.
Quirk, R. (1973). A university grammar of English. Harlow: Longman.
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 149–170.
Schuster, F. G. (1990). Los límites de la objetividad en las ciencias sociales. In R. Gaeta & N. Robles (Eds.), Nociones de la epistemología. Buenos Aires: Eudeba.
Soler, V. (2007). Writing titles in science: an exploratory study (Research and Discussion Note). English for Specific Purposes, 26, 90-102.
Soler, V. (2009). Títulos científicos en lengua española: Estudio exploratorio. Lebende Sprachen, 2, 50-58.
Soler, V. (2011). Comparative and contrastive observations on scientific titles written in English and Spanish. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 124-137.
Thompson, G., & Yiyun, Y. (1991). Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12, 365–382.
How to Cite
APA
ACM
ACS
ABNT
Chicago
Harvard
IEEE
MLA
Turabian
Vancouver
Download Citation
Metrics
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.
NoDerivatives — If you remix, transform, or build upon the material, you may not distribute the modified material.
The journal allow the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions. Also, The Colombian Apllied Linguistics Journal will allow the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
.JPG)
