A Contrastive Study Of Engagement Resources In English Research Articles Between Chinese And English Writers

Research articles(RAs)play a crucial role in strengthening academic exchange and enhancing scholars' academic influence internationally.In this process,academic voice is prevalent in the present writing field and engagement research has become a trend in different disciplines.The voice is pivotal in journal articles since it is responsible for creating an impression of the writer in the mind of the reader.All texts incorporate multiple voices since the words writers adopt echo the way previous writers use them.Therefore,the words writers choose to express their ideas are not neutral,but echo of previous texts.Different voices inside and outside the text make a dialogue and fight with each other.The engagement system can be taken as an approach for writers to adjust those voices and stances by denying,endorsing or acknowledging the other voices.Theoretically,engagement resources(ERs)should be avoided in RAs that are supposed to be impersonal.However,ERs do not always threaten the objectivity of RAs.They also offer delicate ways of constructing persuasion and argumentation.In addition,writers use fewer ERs in one part than other parts of RAs,but it cannot prove that ERs in this part are not important.The whole RAs are seldom chosen as data sources in previous studies on engagement.Therefore,a study to compare the use of ERs between Chinese writers and native English writers and to explore the reasons for the similarities and differences may be of practical and academic significance.This thesis is a corpus-based study to examine the use of ERs in 24 RAs of international linguistic journals(Applied Linguistics,Journal of Memory and Language,Journal of Second Language Writing,and Modern Language Journal),It has compared the distribution and functions of ERs in the two groups of writers with the methods of quantitative and qualitative analysis.In this empirical study,two corpora have been established,namely Chinese Writers'Engagement Corpus(CWEC)and English Writers' Engagement Corpus(EWEC).This thesis,considering the writers' cultural background,has provided interpretations for the similarities and differences in the utilization of ERs in English RAsThe nature of engagement is a process of negotiation for the authorial voice with the other voices inside or outside the discourse.To be specific,the writers have an impact on the utilization of ERs.Each category of ERs is found in the selected articles but there exists the significant difference in their occurrences.Generally speaking,there are higher distribution frequencies of ERs in EWEC than those in CWEC.Heterogloss resources are used more frequently than monogloss resources for both groups of writers.Compared with dialogic expansion resources,dialogic contraction resources turn out to be a more abundantly used type.In addition,disclaimation resources occupy the highest frequencies and entertain resources the middle.However,a higher frequency in disclaimation and attribution resources is used by Chinese writers.Proclaimation resources occupy the lowest frequencies in CWEC while attribution resources are the least frequently used ERs in EWEC.Focusing on the different sections of RAs,the total distribution and each type of ERs in the Introduction part of English writers' articles are less than the numbers in Chinese writers' articles.Dialogic contraction resources are used more frequently than dialogic expansion resources for English writers while the two types of resources occur with a similar frequency in Chinese writers' articles.In the Methodology part of linguistic RAs,entertain and attribution resources occupy the middle frequencies,and they occur with a similar frequency in the two corpora.Proclaimation resources are used in the least by both groups of writers.In the Discussion part,attribution resources are the least frequently used ERs,and they occur with a similar frequency in the two corpora.Finally,in the Conclusion part of linguistic RAs,dialogic expansion resources are used more frequently than dialogic contraction resources for both groups of writers.Entertain resources occupy the highest frequencies and disclaimation resources the middle.ERs perform the interpersonal function in linguistic RAs.Both Chinese writers and native English writers use ERs to achieve the author-prominent function,multi-cooperation function,and others-prominent function in their writing.Monogloss and dialogic contraction of heterogloss resources are used to perform the author-prominent function because the writers control the absolute power for the discourse.The writers utilize entertain resources to realize the multi-cooperation function for they have a tentative view towards the information that gives others a chance to express different opinions.Finally,the others-prominent function is realized by attribution resources.In this situation,the writers introduce an external voice into their articles.To be specific,this thesis finds different percentages of interpersonal functions achieved through ERs used by the two groups.In brief,the author-prominent and multi-cooperation functions are less prevalent for Chinese writers than for native English writers.However,the case is opposite in the others-prominent function.Native English writers tend to realize it at a lower frequency.The results have shown that Chinese and English writers have their propensities towards using ERs and realizing interpersonal functions in linguistic RAs.The underlying interpretation for these similarities and differences can be regarded as the interplay of a variety of factors,such as language proficiency,cultural and educational backgrounds.This thesis uses two self-established corpora to analyze ERs in linguistic RAs,revealing the similarities and differences between Chinese writers and native English writers.Theoretically,this exploration provides a modified engagement framework and thus deepens the understanding of this system.This attempt would have an impact on the theoretical application in the field of writing.Practically,this study offers some insights into writing.It assists Chinese writers to balance their use of ERs in RAs and thereby improve the quality of academic writing.