Startseite Academic writing and identity: evaluative discourse in academic papers across cohorts of 20th century linguists
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Academic writing and identity: evaluative discourse in academic papers across cohorts of 20th century linguists

  • Jesús David Guerra Lyons und Valentina Concu ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 10. April 2024
Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics
Aus der Zeitschrift Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics Band 10 Heft 1

Abstract

Using a cohort sequential quantitative design and evaluative features drawn from Systemic Functional Grammar, this study investigates diachronic variation in linguists’ use of evaluation to perform scholarly identities in English academic writing. More specifically, it focuses on the use of statements, commands, modality, comment assessment, and positive and negative lexis, in early and late career papers from 30 linguists born between 1905 and 1960. These linguists were grouped into three cohorts based on year of birth and studied in terms of variation along developmental and cross-generational timescales. Within the developmental timescale, scholars were found to use more evaluation in early career writing than in late career writing. Cohort-specific developmental changes are identified in the frequency of modality and comment assessment. Developmental and cohort-specific trends are found to occur within the backdrop of an overall decrease in the use of evaluative language within the discipline. Results point to a complex diachronic model of academic identity enactment in writing, whereby evaluative features pattern in similar or different ways depending on the timescale considered.

Keywords: evaluation; cohort sequential design; identity; multiple timescales
Corresponding author: Valentina Concu, 28003 Universidad del Norte , Barranquilla, Colombia, E-mail:

Appendixes

Appendix 1: Raw counts for target variables across early career and late career periods

Linguist Cohort Analytical units Statements Commands General evaluation
Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career
Bonfante <1920 75 42 69 40 3 1 27 19
Dyen <1920 58 70 57 58 1 12 13 17
Eliason <1920 47 86 43 83 4 3 19 30
Emeneau <1920 105 100 103 96 2 4 24 26
Fowkes <1920 94 90 93 86 1 1 28 29
Garvin <1920 89 149 84 138 5 9 10 23
Granville <1920 126 110 119 97 7 10 19 27
Joos <1920 93 209 88 206 5 0 12 17
Lehmann <1920 188 122 184 114 4 7 25 32
Swadesh <1920 161 125 158 122 2 1 20 44
Trager <1920 130 191 129 182 1 9 10 8
Abbott <1940 378 161 359 155 14 6 97 36
Chafe <1940 141 154 139 152 2 2 17 26
Chomsky <1940 231 179 202 174 27 2 81 63
Dik <1940 231 155 202 132 27 15 36 25
Fillmore <1940 105 157 100 145 5 3 8 27
Fries <1940 184 194 176 194 7 0 26 23
Gregory <1940 135 195 122 182 13 10 23 26
Halliday <1940 475 270 444 257 21 2 79 32
Hymes <1940 337 363 321 355 11 5 106 74
Lakoff <1940 489 511 471 491 14 12 131 34
Aikhenvald <1960 245 212 233 208 5 2 19 4
Biber <1960 258 317 253 311 4 0 15 69
Cheshire <1960 249 250 243 246 6 1 61 40
Dubois <1960 196 299 189 265 5 23 26 43
Foley <1960 262 214 251 207 10 7 43 26
Givon <1960 136 87 124 86 10 1 14 12
Goldberg <1960 304 240 293 225 10 5 48 29
Martin <1960 270 228 259 214 3 9 24 28
Matthiessen <1960 319 364 312 335 5 20 40 32
Verschueren <1960 260 237 239 219 21 7 34 33
Linguist Cohort Modality Comment assessment Positive lexis Negative lexis
Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career
Bonfante <1920 8 7 11 8 5 2 4 0
Dyen <1920 2 5 7 5 1 3 1 2
Eliason <1920 6 11 5 4 3 7 2 9
Emeneau <1920 15 8 6 12 0 4 4 2
Fowkes <1920 12 9 12 13 2 2 2 3
Garvin <1920 5 12 4 7 0 0 1 3
Granville <1920 11 15 4 8 2 2 0 3
Joos <1920 6 3 5 11 1 2 1 1
Lehmann <1920 17 15 7 8 1 4 0 5
Swadesh <1920 9 23 8 10 1 4 3 5
Trager <1920 11 4 2 2 1 2 0 0
Abbott <1940 43 17 27 8 17 7 9 3
Chafe <1940 12 11 6 8 0 2 0 4
Chomsky <1940 21 27 26 9 14 18 18 10
Dik <1940 10 13 12 8 3 8 8 1
Fillmore <1940 7 20 1 8 0 1 0 0
Fries <1940 24 8 4 8 4 3 2 3
Gregory <1940 11 6 9 10 1 8 3 1
Halliday <1940 32 18 20 10 11 4 13 1
Hymes <1940 62 37 18 19 19 9 8 9
Lakoff <1940 83 10 15 7 20 14 10 0
Aikhenvald <1960 10 3 3 0 4 1 4 0
Biber <1960 2 18 7 16 2 30 3 6
Cheshire <1960 22 30 19 7 14 3 4 1
Dubois <1960 10 16 10 15 3 7 1 1
Foley <1960 19 4 15 17 6 4 1 0
Givon <1960 10 7 4 1 1 3 1 1
Goldberg <1960 17 24 17 6 6 2 4 0
Martin <1960 7 13 9 9 5 5 2 1
Matthiessen <1960 8 9 21 10 5 9 2 0
Verschueren <1960 12 10 7 8 7 7 5 2

Appendix 2: Counts for target variables across early career and late career periods normalized to 100 analytical units

Linguist Cohort Statements Commands General evaluation Modality
Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career
Bonfante <1920 92 95.2 4 2.38 39.1 47.5 11.5 17.5
Dyen <1920 98.2 82.8 1.72 17.14 22.8 29.3 3.5 8.6
Eliason <1920 91.4 96.5 8.51 3.48 44.1 36.1 13.9 13.2
Emeneau <1920 98 96 1.9 4 23.3 27 14.5 8.3
Fowkes <1920 98.9 95.5 1.06 1.11 30.1 33.7 12.9 10.4
Garvin <1920 94.3 92.6 5.61 6.04 11.9 16.6 5.9 8.6
Granville <1920 94.4 88.1 5.55 9.09 15.9 27.8 9.2 15.4
Joos <1920 94.6 98.5 5.37 0 13.6 8.2 6.8 1.4
Lehmann <1920 97.8 93.4 2.12 5.73 13.5 28 9.2 13.1
Swadesh <1920 98.1 97.6 1.24 0.8 12.6 36 5.6 18.8
Trager <1920 99.2 95.2 0.76 4.71 7.7 4.3 8.5 2.1
Abbott <1940 94.9 96.2 3.7 3.72 27 23.2 11.9 10.9
Chafe <1940 98.5 98.7 1.41 1.29 12.2 17.1 8.6 7.2
Chomsky <1940 87.4 97.2 11.68 1.11 40 36.2 10.3 15.5
Dik <1940 87.4 85.1 11.68 9.67 17.8 18.9 4.9 9.8
Fillmore <1940 95.2 92.3 4.76 1.91 8 18.6 7 13.7
Fries <1940 95.6 100 3.8 0 14.7 11.8 13.6 4.1
Gregory <1940 90.3 93.3 9.62 5.12 18.8 14.2 9 3.2
Halliday <1940 93.4 95.1 4.42 0.74 17.7 12.4 7.2 7
Hymes <1940 95.2 97.7 3.26 1.37 33 20.8 19.3 10.4
Lakoff <1940 96.3 96 2.86 2.34 27.8 6.9 17.6 2
Aikhenvald <1960 95.1 98.1 2.04 0.94 8.1 1.9 4.2 1.4
Biber <1960 98 98.1 1.55 0 5.9 22.1 0.7 5.7
Cheshire <1960 97.5 98.4 2.4 0.4 25.1 16.2 9 12.1
Dubois <1960 96.4 88.6 2.55 7.69 13.7 16.2 5.2 6
Foley <1960 95.8 96.7 3.81 3.27 17.1 12.5 7.5 1.9
Givon <1960 91.1 98.8 7.35 1.14 11.2 13.9 8 8.1
Goldberg <1960 96.3 93.7 3.28 2.08 16.3 12.8 5.8 10.6
Martin <1960 95.9 93.8 1.11 3.94 9.2 13 2.7 6
Matthiessen <1960 97.8 92 1.56 5.49 12.8 9.5 2.5 2.6
Verschueren <1960 91.9 92.4 8.07 2.95 14.2 15 5 4.5
Linguist Cohort Comment assessment Positive lexis Negative lexis
Early career Late career Early career Late career Early career Late career
Bonfante <1920 15.9 20 7.2 5 5.7 0
Dyen <1920 12.2 8.6 1.7 5.1 1.7 3.4
Eliason <1920 11.6 4.8 6.9 8.4 4.6 10.8
Emeneau <1920 5.8 12.5 0 4.1 3.8 2
Fowkes <1920 12.9 15.1 2.1 2.3 2.1 3.4
Garvin <1920 4.7 5 0 0 1.1 2.1
Granville <1920 3.3 8.2 1.6 2 0 3
Joos <1920 5.6 5.3 1.1 0.9 1.1 0.4
Lehmann <1920 3.8 7 0.5 3.5 0 4.3
Swadesh <1920 5 8.1 0.6 3.2 1.8 4
Trager <1920 1.5 1 0.7 1 0 0
Abbott <1940 7.5 5.1 4.7 4.5 2.5 1.9
Chafe <1940 4.3 5.2 0 1.3 0 2.6
Chomsky <1940 12.8 5.1 6.9 10.3 8.9 5.7
Dik <1940 5.9 6 1.4 6 3.9 0.7
Fillmore <1940 1 5.5 0 0.6 0 0
Fries <1940 2.2 4.1 2.2 1.5 1.1 1.5
Gregory <1940 7.3 5.4 0.8 4.3 2.4 0.5
Halliday <1940 4.5 3.8 2.4 1.5 2.9 0.3
Hymes <1940 5.6 5.3 5.9 2.5 2.4 2.5
Lakoff <1940 3.1 1.4 4.2 2.8 2.1 0
Aikhenvald <1960 1.2 0 1.7 0.4 1.7 0
Biber <1960 2.7 5.1 0.7 9.6 1.1 1.9
Cheshire <1960 7.8 2.8 5.7 1.2 1.6 0.4
Dubois <1960 5.2 5.6 1.5 2.6 0.5 0.3
Foley <1960 5.9 8.2 2.3 1.9 0.3 0
Givon <1960 3.2 1.1 0.8 3.4 0.8 1.1
Goldberg <1960 5.8 2.6 2 0.8 1.3 0
Martin <1960 3.4 4.2 1.9 2.3 0.7 0.4
Matthiessen <1960 6.7 2.9 1.6 2.6 0.6 0
Verschueren <1960 2.9 3.6 2.9 3.1 2 0.9

Appendix 3: Early and late career papers per linguist in the TCL corpus

Cohort Scholar Early career Late career
1 Bonfante On reconstruction and the linguistic method (1945) Keltic and Indoeropean (1977)
1 Dyen Malay Tiga “Three” (1946) Reconstruction, the Comparative Method, and the Proto-Language Uniformity Assumption (1969)
1 Eliason On Syllable division in phonemics (1942) The Story of Geat and Mæðhild in “Deor” (1965)
1 Emeneau The Dravidian Verbs ‘Come’ and ‘Give’ (1945) The South Dravidian Languages (1967)
1 Fowkes The Phonology of Gaulish (1940) Eastern echoes in the Wessobrunner Gebet (1962)
1 Garvin Pure-Relational Suffixes and Postpositions in Hungarian (1945) The Automation of Discovery Procedure in Linguistics (1967)
1 Granville ‘Mr. Howard Amuses Easy’ (1943) Reprise in Disguise (1961)
1 Trager The Days of the Week in the Language of Taos Pueblo, New Mexico (1940) Taos IV: Morphemics, Syntax, Semology in Nouns and in Pronominal Reference (1961)
1 Lehmann Notes on the Hildebrandslied (1947) The Proto-Germanic Words Inherited from Protoindo-European Which Reflect the Social and Economic Status of the Speakers (1968)
1 Swadesh On the Analysis of English Syllabics (1947) Linguistic Relations across Bering Strait (1962)
2 Chafe Symbolization. Meaning and the structure of language (1970). Ground rules. Thought based linguistics (2018).
2 Chomsky Explanatory models in linguistics (1966) Three factors in language design (2005)
2 Dik Morphological transformation in transformational generative grammar (1967). The Theory of Functional Grammar: The structure of the clause (1997)
2 Fillmore The Position of Embedding Transformations in a

Grammar (1963)		 Double-Decker Definitions: The Role of Frames in Meaning Explanations (2003)
2 Fries On Double Function in Tagmemic Analysis (1970). The flow of information in an English written text (1992)
2 Gregory Aspects of varieties differentiation. Relations and functions within and around language: the systemic functional tradition.
2 Halliday General Linguistics and its Application to Language Teaching (1960) Literacy and Linguistics: A Functional Perspective (1996)
2 Hymes Notes toward a history of linguistic anthropology (1963) When is oral narrative poetry? Generative form and its pragmatic conditions (1998)
2 Lakoff Instrumental adverbs and the concept of deep structure. Metaphors of terror (2001)
3 Abbott Some arguments for a mental semantics without sentences (1991) Out of control. The semantics of some infinitival VP complements (2013)
3 Aikhenvald Classifiers in Tariana (1994) The essence of mirativity (2012)
3 Biber A typology of English texts (1989) Register as a predictor of linguistic variation (2012)
3 Cheshire A Survey of Dialect Grammar in British English (1987) Grammaticalisation in social context: The emergence of a new English pronoun (2013)
3 Dubois The discourse basis of ergativity (1987) Co-opting intersubjectivity (2011)
3 Foley The Papuan languages of New Guinea. Introduction (1986) Structural and semantic dependencies in word class (2017)
3 Givon On Ordered Rules and the Modified Base of ChiBemba Verbs (1970) Grammatical relations: an introduction (1997)
3 Goldberg The inherent semantics of argument structure: The case of the English ditransitive construction (1991) Verbs, constructions and semantic frames (2010)
3 Martin Genre and literacy-modeling context in educational Linguistics (1993) Meaning beyond the clause: Co-textual relations (2015)
3 Matthiessen Language on language: The grammar of semiosis (1991) Extending the description of process type within the system of transitivity in delicacy based on Levinian verb classes (2014)
3 Verschueren The study of language on language: Methodological problems and theoretical implications (1988) Humanities and the public sphere

A pragmatic perspective (2016)

References

Anthonissen, Lynn. 2021. Individuality in language change. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110725841Suche in Google Scholar

Anthonissen, Lynn & Peter Petré. 2019. Grammaticalization and the linguistic individual: New avenues in lifespan research. Linguistics Vanguard 5(s2). 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2018-0037.Suche in Google Scholar

Beaman, Karen V. & Isabelle Buchstaller (eds.). 2021. Language variation and language change across the lifespan: Theoretical and empirical perspectives from Panel studies. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780429030314Suche in Google Scholar

Belcher, Diane & Ulla Connor (eds.). 2001. Reflections on multiliterate lives. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters Ltd.10.21832/9781853597046Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 1986. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas. 2006. Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5(2). 97–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001.Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989a. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9(1). 93–124. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93.Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989b. Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language 65(3). 487–517. https://doi.org/10.2307/415220.Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Bethany Gray. 2016. Grammatical complexity in academic English: Linguistic change in writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511920776Suche in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas & Meixiu Zhang. 2018. Expressing evaluation without grammatical stance: Informational persuasion on the web. Corpora 13(1). 97–123. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2018.0137.Suche in Google Scholar

Bourdieu, Pierre. 1986. Forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education, 15–29. Westport: Greenwood Pres.Suche in Google Scholar

Bronson, Matthew Clay D. 2004. Writing passage: Academic literacy socialization among ESL graduate students. A multiple case study. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Davis, CA: University of California, Davis.Suche in Google Scholar

Brook, Marisa, Bridget Jankowski, Lex Konnelly & Sali Tagliamonte. 2018. ‘I don’t come off as timid anymore’: Real‐time change in early adulthood against the backdrop of the community. Journal of Sociolinguistics 22(4). 351–374. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12310.Suche in Google Scholar

Bucholtz, Mary & Kira Hall. 2005. Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies 7(4–5). 585–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407.Suche in Google Scholar

Burgess, Amy & Roz Ivanič. 2010. Writing and being written: Issues of identity across timescales. Written Communication 27(2). 228–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088310363447.Suche in Google Scholar

Casanave, Christine Pears & Stephanie Vandrick (eds.). 2003. Writing for scholarly publication: Behind the scenes in language education. Mahwah: Erlbaum.10.4324/9781410609137Suche in Google Scholar

Cheng, Fei-Wen & Len Unsworth. 2016. Stance-taking as negotiating academic conflict in applied linguistics research article discussion sections. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 24. 43–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.09.001.Suche in Google Scholar

Chih-Hua, Kou. 1999. The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 18. 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00058-6.Suche in Google Scholar

Christie, Frances & Karl Maton (eds.). 2011. Disciplinarity: Functional linguistic and sociological perspectives. London & New York: Continuum.Suche in Google Scholar

Coffin, Caroline. 2006. Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London & New York: Continuum.Suche in Google Scholar

Dreyfus, Shoshana, Salyy Humphrey, Almar Mahboob & James R. Martin. 2016. Genre Pedagogy in higher education. The SLATE project. London: Palgrave McMillan.Suche in Google Scholar

Duff, Patricia A. 2010. Language socialization into academic discourse communities. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 30. 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000048.Suche in Google Scholar

Field, Andy. 2009. Discovering statistics using SPSS, 2nd edn. New York: SAGE.Suche in Google Scholar

Flowerdew, John & Simon Ho Wang. 2015. Identity in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35. 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026719051400021X.Suche in Google Scholar

Fruehwald, Josef. 2017. Generations, lifespans, and the zeitgeist. Language Variation and Change 29. 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394517000060.Suche in Google Scholar

Gilbert, Geoffrey Nigel & Michael Mulkay. 1984. Opening Pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientific discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar

Gotti, Maurizio (ed.). 2009. Commonality and individuality in academic discourse. Berlin: Peter Lang.Suche in Google Scholar

Guerra-Lyons, Jesús David. 2021. Scholarly writing development: Complexity and evaluation in twentieth century linguists’ semiotic trajectories. Ph.D. Thesis. The Hong Kong Polytechnic University.Suche in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Suche in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. 1985. An introduction to functional grammar. Oxfordshire: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood & Christian Matthias Ingemar Martin Matthiessen. 2014 [1985]. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar, 4th edn. Oxfordshire: Routledge.10.4324/9780203783771Suche in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan & James, R. Martin. 2005. Invoking attitude: The play of graduation in appraising discourse. Revista Signos 38(58). 195–220.10.4067/S0718-09342005000200004Suche in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan. 2010. Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230274662Suche in Google Scholar

Hu, Guangwei & Fend Cao. 2011. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics 43(11). 2795–2809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007.Suche in Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan & Geoffrey Thompson (eds.). 2000. Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2002. Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal 56(4). 351–358. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/56.4.351.Suche in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7. 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365.Suche in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & Feng Jiang. 2016. Change of attitude? A diachronic study of stance. Written Communication 33(3). 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316650399.Suche in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & Feng Jiang. 2018. ‘We believe that’: Changes in an academic stance marker. Australian Journal of Linguistics 38(2). 139–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2018.1400498.Suche in Google Scholar

Ivanič, Roz. 1998. Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.10.1075/swll.5Suche in Google Scholar

Ivanič, Roz & David Camps. 2001. I am how I sound: Voice as self-representation in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 10(1–2). 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1060-3743(01)00034-0.Suche in Google Scholar

Kemper, Susan, Lydia Greiner, Janet Marquis, Katherine Prenovost & Tracy Mitzner. 2001. Language decline across the lifespan. Findings from the Nun study. Psychology and Aging 16(2). 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.16.2.227.Suche in Google Scholar

Larsson, Tove. 2017. The importance of, it is important that or importantly? The use of morphologically related stance markers in learner and expert writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 22(1). 57–84. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.1.03lar.Suche in Google Scholar

Leech, Geoffrey, Marianne Hundt, Christian Mair & Nicholas Smith. 2009. Change in contemporary English. A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511642210Suche in Google Scholar

Lemke, Jay L. 1995. Textual politics: Discourse and social dynamics. London & Bristol, P.A.: Taylor and Francis.Suche in Google Scholar

Lemke, Jay L. 2003. Language development and identity: Multiple timescales in the social ecology of learning. In Alan Miller, Shannon Taylor & Arthur Bedeian (eds.), Language acquisition and language socialization, 68–87. London & New York: Continuum.Suche in Google Scholar

Liu, Yeu-Ting, Hossein, Nassaj & Wen-Ta, Tseng. 2021. Effects of internal and external attentional manipulations and working memory on second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211030130.Suche in Google Scholar

Martin, James R. & Peter White. 2005. The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave.Suche in Google Scholar

Matsuda, Paul Kei. 2015. Identity in written discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35. 140–159. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190514000178.Suche in Google Scholar

Noguchi, Kimihiro, Yulia Gel, Edgar Brunner & Konietschke Frank. 2012. nparLD: An R software package for the nonparametric analysis of longitudinal data in factorial experiments. Journal of Statistical Software 50(12). 1–22. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v050.i12.Suche in Google Scholar

Petré, Peter, Hubert, Cuyckens & Frauke, D’Hoedt (eds.). 2018. Sociocultural dimensions of Lexis and text in the history of English. In Current Issues in Linguistic Theory, vol. 343, 1–12. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cilt.343Suche in Google Scholar

Petré, Peter, Anthonissen Lynn, Sara Budts, Enrique Manjavacas, Emma-Louise Silva, William Standing & Odile A. O. Strik. 2019. Early modern multiloquent authors (EMMA), release 1.0. University of Antwerp, Linguistics Department. Available at: https://www.uantwerpen.be/en/projects/mind-bending-grammars/emma-corpus/.Suche in Google Scholar

Schaie, Klaus Werner, Giela Labouvie & Barbara Buech. 1975. Generational and cohort specific differences in adult cognitive functioning. A fourteen year study of independent samples. Developmental Psychology 9(2). 151–166. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0035093.Suche in Google Scholar

Schaie, Klaus Warner & Grace I. L. Caskie. 2005. Methodological issues in aging research. In Douglas M. Teti (ed.), Handbook of research methods in developmental science, 21–29. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.10.1002/9780470756676.ch2Suche in Google Scholar

Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2021. How the entrenchment-and-conventionalization model might enrich diachronic construction grammar. The case of (the) thing is (that). Belgian Journal in Linguistics 34. 312–326. https://doi.org/10.1075/bjl.00055.sch.Suche in Google Scholar

Seuren, Pieter A. M. 1998. Western linguistics: An historical introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9781444307467Suche in Google Scholar

Swales, John Malcolm. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge Applied Linguistics.Suche in Google Scholar

Tannen, Deborah. 1982. Oral and literate strategies in spoken and written narratives. Language 58(1). 1–21. https://doi.org/10.2307/413530.Suche in Google Scholar

Teichler, Ulrich, Akira Arimoto & William K. Cummings. 2013. The changing academic profession: Major findings of a comparative survey. Amsterdam: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-6155-1Suche in Google Scholar

Thetela, Puleng. 1997. Evaluated entities and parameters of value in academic research articles. English for Specific Purposes 16(2 SPEC. ISS.). 101–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(96)00022-1.Suche in Google Scholar

Thompson, Geoff. 2001. Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58.Suche in Google Scholar

White, Peter Robert Rupert. 2003. Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text – Special Edition on Appraisal. 259–284. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011.Suche in Google Scholar

Wortham, Stanton. 2003. Curriculum as a resource for the development of social identity. Sociology of Education 76. 229–247. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011.Suche in Google Scholar
Received: 2022-09-25
Accepted: 2023-07-19
Published Online: 2024-04-10

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Articles
  3. Flipping the script? Native-speaker linguists and colonial orthographies in nineteenth-century Senegal
  4. ‘My dearest Clara … my dear friend’ – Personal Names and direct address in Mary Hamilton’s private correspondence
  5. Finnish reported speech and Swedish intratextual translations in 17th-century court records
  6. Academic writing and identity: evaluative discourse in academic papers across cohorts of 20th century linguists
  7. Developing a standard in lower-class Scottish writing: pauper petitions as a source for nineteenth-century lower-class Scottish language
  8. Book Reviews
  9. Lenore A. Grenoble & Jessica Kantarovich: Reconstructing Non-Standard Languages: A socially-anchored approach (IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society 52)
  10. Karen Bennett & Angelo Cattaneo: Language Dynamics in the Early Modern Period (Multilingualism, Lingua Franca and Translation in the Early Modern Period)
  11. Joshua R. Brown: The Verticalization Model of Language Shift: The Great Change in American Communities
  12. Markus Schiegg: Flexible Schreiber in der Sprachgeschichte. Intraindividuelle Variation in Patientenbriefen (1850–1936) (Germanistische Bibliothek 75)
https://doi.org/10.1515/jhsl-2022-0034
Schlagwörter für diesen Artikel
evaluation; cohort sequential design; identity; multiple timescales

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Articles
  3. Flipping the script? Native-speaker linguists and colonial orthographies in nineteenth-century Senegal
  4. ‘My dearest Clara … my dear friend’ – Personal Names and direct address in Mary Hamilton’s private correspondence
  5. Finnish reported speech and Swedish intratextual translations in 17th-century court records
  6. Academic writing and identity: evaluative discourse in academic papers across cohorts of 20th century linguists
  7. Developing a standard in lower-class Scottish writing: pauper petitions as a source for nineteenth-century lower-class Scottish language
  8. Book Reviews
  9. Lenore A. Grenoble & Jessica Kantarovich: Reconstructing Non-Standard Languages: A socially-anchored approach (IMPACT: Studies in Language, Culture and Society 52)
  10. Karen Bennett & Angelo Cattaneo: Language Dynamics in the Early Modern Period (Multilingualism, Lingua Franca and Translation in the Early Modern Period)
  11. Joshua R. Brown: The Verticalization Model of Language Shift: The Great Change in American Communities
  12. Markus Schiegg: Flexible Schreiber in der Sprachgeschichte. Intraindividuelle Variation in Patientenbriefen (1850–1936) (Germanistische Bibliothek 75)
Jetzt anmelden und 20% sparen
Institutioneller Zugang
Wie funktioniert Authentifizierung?
Haben Sie eine Idee, wie wir unsere Website verbessern können?
Bitte schreiben Sie uns.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Heruntergeladen am 15.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/jhsl-2022-0034/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen