Exploring nominalization in scientific textbooks: A cross-disciplinary study of hard and soft sciences
Given the importance of disciplinary specificity in terms of the potential differences in the functionality of nominalizations in scientific textbooks and the dearth of studies of this type, the current study explores the extent to which nominalization is realized across two disciplines. To this aim, eight academic textbooks from Physics and Applied Linguistics are analyzed to identify the nominal patterns and expressions and their related types. Findings indicate that, despite the similarity of the first three most prevalent patterns in the sample textbooks, the distribution of these patterns marks disciplinary distinctions. That is, Physics academic writers tend to (a) use a more complex, lexically dense style of writing and package more information into compound nominal phrases by deploying a pattern where nominals are followed by strings of prepositional phrases in comparison to writers in Applied Linguistics; and (b) express particularity using nominals preceded by classifiers more frequently than Applied Linguistics writers. Writers in Applied Linguistics, on the other hand, are found to manifest a greater tendency toward conveying generality by using a pattern where nominals are realized with few pre/post modifiers.
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Banks, D. (2003). The evolution of grammatical metaphor in scientiﬁc writing. In A. Vandenbergen, M. Taverniers & L. Ravelli (Eds.), Grammatical metaphor: Views from systemic functional linguistics (pp. 37–65). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Baratta, M. A. (2010). Nominalization development across an undergraduate academic degree program. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(4), 1017–1036.
Basturkmen, H. (2011). A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in Dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, XXX, 1–11.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (2006). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. Philadelphia, PA / Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., Reppen, R., Byrd, P. & Helt, M. (2002). Speaking and writing in the university: A multidimensional comparison. TESOL Quarterly, 36, 9–48.
Boyd, R. W. (2008). Nonlinear optics. Cambridge: Academic Press.
Briones, S., Fortuny, L. & Pocovi, M. B. (2003). Grammatical metaphor in scientific English. The ESPecialist, 24(2), 131–142.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Teaching by principles: An introductive approach to language pedagogy. London: Pearson ESL.
Charles, M. (2003). A corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(4), 313–326.
Christie, F. & Derewianka, B. (2008). School discourse. Learning to write across the years of schooling. London: Continuum.
Coffin, C., Curry, M., Goodman, S., Hewings, A., Lillis, T. & Swann, J. (2003). Teaching academic writing: A tool kit for higher education. London: Routledge.
Colombi, M. C. (2006). Grammatical metaphor: Academic language development in Latino students in Spanish. In H. Byrnes (Ed.), Advanced language learning: The contribution of Halliday and Vygotsky (pp. 147–163). London: Continuum.
Demtröder, W. (2010). Atoms, molecules and photons: An introduction to atomic-, molecular and quantum-physics. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
Ellis, R. (1999). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Gao, W. (2008). Information packaging in English Medical papers published in a Chinese journal. CELEA Journal, 31(3), 42–47.
Gasiorowicz, S. (1974). Quantum physics. New York, NY: Wiley.
Gerry, C. & Knight, P. (2005). Introductory quantum optics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Glanzel, W. & Schubert, A. (2003). A new classification scheme of science fields and subfields designed for scientometric evaluation purposes. Scientometrics, 56(3), 357–367.
Gotti, M. & Williams, C. (2010). Legal discourse across languages and cultures. Bern: Peter Lang.
Guillén Galve, I. (1998). The textual interplay of grammatical metaphor on the nominalization occurring in written medical English. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(3), 363–385.
Hadidi, Y. & Raghami, A. (2012). A comparative study of ideational grammatical metaphor in business and political texts. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 348–365.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1990). The construction of knowledge and value in the grammar of scientific discourse: With reference to Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species. In C. De Stasio, M. Gotti & R. Bonadei (Eds.), La rappresentazione verbale e iconica: Valori estetici e funzionali, Atti dell’XI Congresso Nazionale dell’A.I.A. Bergamo, 24–25 ottobre 1988 (pp. 57–80). Milan: Guerini Studio.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993a). Toward a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education, 5, 93–116.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1993b). Some grammatical problems in scientific English. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 76–94). London: The Falmer Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1998). Language and knowledge: The ‘unpacking’ of text. In J. J. Webster (Ed.), The Language of Science. Vol 5 in The Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday (pp. 24–48). London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Martin, J. R. (1993). Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. London: The Falmer Press.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1999). Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.
Hartnett, C. G. (2004). What should we teach about the paradoxes of English nominalization? In J. A. Foley (Ed.), Language, education and discourse: Functional approaches (pp. 174–190). New York, NY: Continuum.
Hawes, T. & Thomas, S. (2012). Theme choice in EAP and media language. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 175–183.
Ho, V. (2010). Grammatical metaphor in request e-mail discourse. Applied Language Studies, 14, 1– 24.
Holtz, M. (2009). Nominalization in scientific discourse: A corpus-based study of abstracts and research articles. In M. Mahlberg, V. González-Díaz & C. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the 5th Corpus Linguistics Conference Liverpool, UK. Retrieved September 25, 2015 from http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/cl2009/.
Hyland, K. (2006a). Disciplinary differences: Language variation in academic discourses. In K. Hyland & M. Bondi (Eds.), Academic discourse across disciplines (pp. 17–45). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
Hyland, K. (2006b). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 266–285.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. London: Continuum.
Jalilifar, A., Alipour, M. & Parsa, S. (2014). Comparative study of nominalization in applied linguistics and biology books. RALs, 5(1), 24–43.
Leki, I. (2003). A challenge to second language writing professionals: Is writing overrated? In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the dynamics of second language writing (pp. 315–332). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Leki, I. & Carson, J. (1997). Completely different worlds: EAP and the writing experiences of ESL students in university courses. TESOL Quarterly, 31(1), 231–255.
Liardét, C. L. (2013). An exploration of Chinese EFL learner’s deployment of grammatical metaphor: Learning to make academically valued meanings. Journal of Second Language Writing, 22, 161–178.
Macbeth, K. P. (2006). Diverse, unforeseen, and quaint difficulties: The sensible responses of novices to learning to follow directions in academic writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 41, 108–207.
Martin, J. R. (1993). Genre and literacy: Modelling context in educational linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics: Issues in Teaching and Learning, 13, 141–172.
Martin, J. R., Matthiessen, M. I. M. & Painter, C. (1997). Working with functional grammar. New York, NY: Arnold.
Mẫu, V. T. (2012). Grammatical metaphor in English pharmaceutical discourse. Unpublished MA Thesis, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam.
McGrath, L. & Kuteeva, M. (2012). Stance and engagement in pure mathematics research articles: Linking discourse features to disciplinary practices. English for Specific Purposes, 31, 161–173.
Parodi, G. (2010). The rhetorical organization of the Textbook genre across disciplines: A ‘colony-in-loops’? Discourse Studies, 12(2), 195–222.
Ravelli, L. J. (1999). Metaphor, Mode and Complexity: An exploration of co-varying patterns. Monographs in Systemic Linguistics (Vol. 12). Nottingham: Department of English and Media Studies, Nottingham Trent University.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004a). The language of schooling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schleppegrell, M. J. (2004b). Technical writing in a second language: The role of grammatical metaphor. In L. J. Ravelli & R. A. Ellis (Eds.), Analyzing academic writing: Contextualized frameworks (pp. 172–189). London: Continuum.
Sušinskienė, S. (2009). Textual functions of nominalizations in English scientific discourse. Žmogus ir žodis, 11(3), 58–64.
Sušinskienė, S. (2010). Nominalization as a cohesive device in British newspaper editorials. Filologija, 15, 142–150.
Swales, J. M. & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Tabrizi, F. & Nabifar, N. (2013). A comparative study of ideational grammatical metaphor in health and political texts of English newspapers. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies, 3(1), 32–51.
Taverniers, M. (2004). Grammatical metaphors in English. Modern sprak, 98(1), 17–26.
Taverniers, M. (2006). Grammatical metaphor and lexical metaphor: Different perspectives on semantic variation. Neophilologus, 90(2), 321–332.
Văn, T. T. L. (2011). A study on grammatical metaphor in English business letters. Unpublished MA Thesis, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Wenyan, G. (2012). Nominalization in medical papers: A comparative study. Studies in Literature and Language, 4(1), 86–93.
Widdowson, H. (2004). Text, context, pretext: Critical issues in discourse analysis. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
Williams C. (2004). Pragmatic and cross-cultural considerations in translating verbal constructions in prescriptive legal texts in English and Italian. TEXTUS, XVII(1), 217–246.
The works published in this journal are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Services at the University of Murcia (the publisher) retains the property rights (copyright) of published works, and encourages and enables the reuse of the same under the license specified in item 2.
2. The works are published in the electronic edition of the magazine under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike 4.0.
3.Conditions of self-archiving. Authors are encouraged to disseminate pre-print (draft papers prior to being assessed) and/or post-print versions (those reviewed and accepted for publication) of their papers before publication, because it encourages distribution earlier and thus leads to a possible increase in citations and circulation among the academic community.
RoMEO color: green