Academic Writing in the Baltic States
Introducing the Bwrite Project
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24834/educare.2021.1.3Keywords:
Contrastive Rhetoric, Discourse Analysis, Academic Writing, Writing Traditions, Baltic States, Corpus AnalysisAbstract
In the project Bwrite (Academic Writing in the Baltic States: Rhetorical Structures through Cultures and Languages), we aim to address the lack of an empirically grounded holistic understanding of non-Anglophone writing traditions by mapping the academic writing traditions in the national languages of the Baltic States: Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian. We aim to achieve this by using machine learning and other computational methods (both quantitative and qualitative) for capturing writing tradition features at scale. By identifying and studying those features, we will not only create a body of knowledge on writing tradition(s) of the Baltic States, but the project will also provide a methodological basis for studying writing traditions elsewhere.
References
Ädel, A. (2008). Metadiscourse across three varieties of English. Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric, 45. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.169.06ade
Almaden, D. O. (2008). An Analysis of the Topical Structure of Paragraphs Written by Filipino Students. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 15(2), 127–153. https://doi.org/10.3860/taper.v15i2.84
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. (2007a). Discourse on the Move. Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. (2007b). Identifying and analyzing rhetorical moves in philanthropic discourse. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure, 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28
Biber, D., Csomay, E., Jones, K., & Keck, C. (2007). Introduction to the identification and analysis of vocabulary-based discourse units. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 28, 155–173. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28.09cso
Charteris-Black, J., & Ennis, T. (2001). A comparative study of metaphor in Spanish and English financial reporting. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 249–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00009-0
Connor, U., Nagelhout, E., & Rozycki, W. V. (Eds.). (2008). Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric. John Benjamins Pub. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.169
Connor, U. & others. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524599
Connor, U., Upton, T. A., & Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Introduction to move analysis. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure, 2342. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28.04kan
Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.002
Cotos, E., Huffman, S., & Link, S. (2017). A move/step model for methods sections: Demonstrating Rigour and Credibility. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.01.001
Cotos, E., Link, S., & Huffman, S. (2016). Studying disciplinary corpora to teach the craft of Discussion. Writing & Pedagogy, 8(1), 33–64. https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.v8i1.27661
Dubova, A. (2019). Zinātnes valoda: Konferences materiāli. Zinātnes valoda : konferences materiāli, 65. 9789934569661
Dubova, A., Leitāne, M., & Lele-Rozentāle, D. (2009). Zinātniskā komunikācija starpkultūru kontekstā. Ventspil Augstskola.
Fetzer, A. (Ed.). (2013). The Pragmatics of Political Discourse: Explorations across cultures. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.228
Galtung, J. (1981). Structure, culture, and intellectual style: An essay comparing saxonic, teutonic, gallic and nipponic approaches. Social Science Information, 20(6), 817–856. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901848102000601
Geisler, C. (2016). Current and Emerging Methods in the Rhetorical Analysis of Texts Opening: Toward an Integrated Approach. Journal of Writing Research, 7(3), 417–424. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.07.03.05
Groom, N., & Grieve, J. (2019). The evolution of a legal genre: Rhetorical moves in British patent specifications, 1711 to 1860. Corpus-Based Research on Variation in English Legal Discourse, 201–234. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.91.09gro
Gudavičienė, E. (2019). Socialinių ir technologijos mokslų bakalauro darbų kalbos ypatybės. Žmogus ir žodis, 20(1), 4–13. https://doi.org/10.15823/zz.2018.9
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure, 73–119. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28.06kan
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter-cultural education. 1980, 399–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Kerge, K., Pajupuu, H., Alp, P., Põlda, H., & Uusen, A. (2014). Towards sophisticated writing. Proceedings of the Tallinn University Institute of Estonian Language and Culture: Studies in Language Acquisition, Learning, and Corpora, 16, 103–115.
Kubota, R. (1997). A Reevaluation of the Uniqueness of Japanese Written Discourse: Implications for Contrastive Rhetoric. Written Communication, 14(4), 460–480. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088397014004002
Laiveniece, D. (2014). Zinātniskās rakstīšanas skola. LiePA.
Lejeune, C. (2011). From Normal Business to Financial Crisis... And Back Again. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 12(1), 19.
Lemke, M., Niekler, A., Schaal, G. S., & Wiedemann, G. (2015). Content Analysis between Quality and Quantity: Fulfilling Blended-Reading Requirements for the Social Sciences with a Scalable Text Mining Infrastructure. Datenbank-Spektrum, 15(1), 7–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13222-014-0174-x
Lin, L., & Evans, S. (2012). Structural patterns in empirical research articles: A cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes, 31(3), 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.10.002
Linkevičienė, N., & Šinkūnienė, J. (2012). Asmeniniai įvardžiai mokslo kalboje. Kalbotyra, 64, 78–102.
Martín, P., & León Pérez, I. K. (2014). Convincing peers of the value of one’s research: A genre analysis of rhetorical promotion in academic texts. English for Specific Purposes, 34, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.09.002
Martı́n, P. M. (2003). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 22(1), 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00033-3
Meier, H. (2002). Olulisi aspekte tekstitüübivõrdluses.- Reet Kasik (toim.), Tekstid ja taustad. Artikleid Tekstianalüüsist. Tartu Ülikooli Eesti Keele Õppetooli Toimetised, 23, 101–114.
Moreno, A. I., & Swales, J. M. (2018). Strengthening move analysis methodology towards bridging the function-form gap. English for Specific Purposes, 50, 40–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.006
Mur-Dueñas, P., & Šinkūnienė, J. (2016). Self-reference in research articles across Europe and Asia: A review of studies. Brno Studies in English, 1, [71]-92. https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2016-1-4
Omizo, R., & Hart-Davidson, W. (2016). Finding genre signals in academic writing. Journal of Writing Research, 7(3), 485–509. https://doi.org/10.17239/jowr-2016.07.03.08
Orta, I. V. (2010). A contrastive analysis of the use of modal verbs in the expression of epistemic stance in Business Management research articles in English and Spanish. Ibérica, Revista de La Asociación Europea de Lenguas Para Fines Específicos, 19, 77–95.
Reinsalu, R. (2017). Osutamine iseendale teadustekstis. Keel Ja Kirjandus, 11, 829−845.
Schiffrin, D., Deborah, T., & Hamilton, H. (2001). E. 2001: Introduction. Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen & Heidi E. Hamilton (Toim.) The Hand Book of Discourse Analysis, 1–11.
Severino, C. (1993). The ‘Doodles’ in Context: Qualifying Claims about Contrastive Rhetoric. The Writing Center Journal, 14, 44–62.
Siepmann, D. (2006). Academic Writing and Culture: An Overview of Differences between English, French and German. Meta, 51(1), 131–150. https://doi.org/10.7202/012998ar
Simpson, J. M. (2000). Topical Structure Analysis of Academic Paragraphs in English and Spanish. Journal of Second Language Writing, 9(3), 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(00)00029-1
Šinkūnienė, J. (2014). Lietuviškojo humanitarinių ir socialinių mokslų diskurso ypatybės. Podoktorantūros (Post Doc) Stažuočių Įgyvendinimas Lietuvoje: Mokslinių Straipsnių Rinkinys. Vilnius: Baltijos Kopija, 2014.
Šinkūnienė, J. (2017). Citations in research writing. Cross-Linguistic Correspondences: From Lexis to Genre, 191, 253.
Šinkūnienė, J. (2018). The power of english: I and we in lithuanian, lithuanian english and british english research writing. In Intercultural perspectives on research writing/edited by Pilar Mur-Dueñas and Jolanta
Šinkūnienė (pp. 59–79). John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Šinkūnienė, J., & Olmen, D. V. (2012). Modal Verbs Of Necessity In Academic English, Dutch And Lithuanian. Darbai Ir Dienos, 58, 153–181.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2006). ‘So what is the problem this book addresses?’: Interactions in academic book reviews. Text & Talk, 26(6), 767–790. https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2006.031
Volungevičienė, S. (2018). HUMANITARINIŲ IR TECHNOLOGIJOS MOKSLŲ STUDENTŲ DARBŲ FRAZIŠKUMAS. 16.
Wiedemann, G. (2013). Computergestützte Analyse qualitativer Daten: Wie sich die qualitative Sozialforschung für Massentextanalysen öffnetOpening Up to Big Data : Computer-Assisted Analysis of Textual Data in Social Sciences. Historical Social Research Vol. 38, No. 4, Volumes per year: 1. https://doi.org/10.12759/HSR.38.2013.4.332-358
Wolfe, M. L. (2008). Different cultures – Different discourses? Rhetorical patterns of business letters by English and Russian speakers. Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric, 169, 87. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.169.08wol
Yakhontova, T. (2002). Selling’or ‘telling’? The issue of cultural variation in research genres. Academic Discourse, 10(1), 216–232.
Yakhontova, T. (2006). Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 153–167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Anni Jürine, Djuddah Leijen, Diāna Laiveniece, Jolanta Sinkuniene, Christer Johansson, Nicholas Groom
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
