Treść książki
Przejdź do opcji czytnikaPrzejdź do nawigacjiPrzejdź do informacjiPrzejdź do stopki
20
1.Academicdiscourseanditsrhetoric
firstgroupofauthorstendtochooselinearargumentation,usemoreadvance
organiserstomakethestructureofthetextandthelineofargumentation
transparent,andattachgreaterimportancetoexplainingkeyconceptsearly
inthetext,whiletextswrittenbyspeakersofGermanaremoreoftenmarked
byextensiveuseofdigressionstoprovideadditionaltheoryorideology,lesser
numberofadvanceorganisers,andpostponementofdefinitions.Similarob-
servationscomefromMauranen)s(1993b:248)analysisofEnglishacademic
textsbyFinnishwriters,whoarepredisposedtodeveloptheirdefinitionsand
claimsthroughoutthediscussionandcontextualisetheminabroadercontext
ofwhatisalreadyknownratherthananchortheminonespecifictextthey
produce.Thesedifferences,asClyne(1987a:238)argues,maybetakentore-
flectspecificattitudestoknowledge,whichintheGermantraditionisideal-
isedandvaluedassuch,regardlessofthewayinwhichitispresented,withthe
resultthatacademictextswrittenbyGermansarenotpurposefullydesigned
tomakeeasyreading.Similarly,theamountoftheoreticalbackground,great-
erinthecaseofGermanandFinnishscholarsthanintextsoriginatinginthe
Anglophonetradition,underscoresthestatusofknowledge,whichinthese
culturesiselitistandthereforenotaccessibletoeverybody,whereasintheAn-
glo-Americanworlditisgivenamoreegalitariantreatment.
Inasimilarvein,Čmejrková(1996)observesthattheCzechscholarlytra-
dition,toalargeextentinfluencedbyGermanthought,toleratesvaguenessand
associativeness,whichstandinasharpcontrasttoclarityandlinearityofEng-
lishacademicstyle.CzechauthorsarealsolesslikelythantheirEnglishcol-
leaguestouseadvanceorganisersandtendtobemoreimplicitinthetreatment
ofdefinitions(ČmejrkováandDaneš,1997).Moreover,theyareoftenfoundto
delaythestatementofthemainpurposeofthetext,whichinEnglishacadem-
icwritingistobepresentedexplicitlyintheintroduction(Čmejrková,1996).
AsimilarobservationisalsomadebyDuszak(1994),whocomparesstrate-
giesinEnglishandPolishresearcharticleintroductions.Herstudyshowsthat
Polishauthors,representativesofascholarlytraditionwhichdevelopedun-
derGermaninfluence,tendtobemorerestrainedandself-effacinginoutlin-
ingtheirpurposesthanEnglishwriters,whoaremoreassertiveandstraight-
forwardinthisrespect.Suchorganisationalandrhetoricaldifferencesreflect
culture-boundattitudesnotonlytoknowledgebutalsotoacademicwriting
itself,whichintheEnglishtraditionisseenaspartofthetheoryofwriting,
taughtandpracticedasaskilltobeacquiredandevaluatedalongsidesubject
matterexpertise.
Anothersourceofvariationintherhetoricalorganisationofacademic
textsistheattitudetowardstheresearcher.Clyne(1987a)arguesthatsome
