Cover not available
Article published In:
English Text Construction
Vol. 11:2 (2018) ► pp.226–256

“And all this is spoken of the naturall byrth …”

Metadiscourse in The Birth of Mankind and its German source text, Rosengarten

ORCID logo | The University of Nottingham
This paper provides an examination of the use of metadiscourse in the two versions of The Birth of Mankind, the first midwifery manual to be printed in English during the sixteenth century. It is a translation of a Latin text, which itself is a translation of the German Rosengarten. While much has been made of the differences in the use of medical terminology in various versions, little attention has been paid to what differences – if any – exist in the ways the various authors/translators signal text structure or use other overt markers to the reader as to how the text is to be read or understood. Corpus linguistic methods are employed to provide a quantitative angle on the analysis of these texts.
Keywords: metadiscourse, midwifery, The Birth of Mankind , translation
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Historical background to Rosengarten and The Birth of Mankind
  • 3.What is metadiscourse?
  • 4.Methodology and the classification of metadiscourse markers
    • 4.1Attention-guiding markers
    • 4.2Comprehension-guiding markers
    • 4.3Code glosses
    • 4.4Framing markers
    • 4.5Structuring markers
    • 4.6Restricting markers
    • 4.7Intratextual markers
    • 4.8Intertextual markers
    • 4.9Stance markers
  • 5.Results and discussion
  • 6.Concluding remarks
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 19 October 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.00010.whi
References (53)
References
Ädel, Annelie. 2006. Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Arons, Wendy. 1994. Translator’s introduction. In When Midwifery Became the Male Physician’s Province: The Sixteenth Century Handbook The Rose Garden for Pregnant Women and Midwives, Newly Englished, Wendy Arons (trans.). Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 1–25.Google Scholar
Beauvais, Paul J. 1989. A speech act theory of metadiscourse. Written Communication 6 (1): 11–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bednarek, Monika. 2006. Epistemological positioning and evidentiality in English news discourse: A text-driven approach. Text & Talk 26 (6): 635–660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text & Talk 9 (1): 93–124.Google Scholar
Boggel, Sandra. 2008. Metadiscourse in Middle English and Early Modern English Religious Texts: A Corpus-Based Study. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Busse, Ulrich & Axel Hübler (eds). 2012. Investigations into the Meta-Communicative Lexicon of English: A Contribution to Historical Pragmatics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cook, Harold. 2006. Medicine. In The Cambridge History of Science. Vol. 3: Early Modern Science, Katherine Park & Lorraine Daston (eds). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 407–434. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crismore, Avon. 1989. Talking with Readers: Metadiscourse as Rhetorical Act. New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Dorgeloh, Heidrun. 2005a. ‘Form follows function’ in the history of English: The representation of human experience in scientific English. In De Lingua et Litteris: Studia in Honorem Casimiri Andreae Sroka, Danuta Stanulewicz, Roman Kalisz, Wilfried Kürschner & Cäcilia Klaus (eds). Gdańsk: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, 299–308.Google Scholar
. 2005b. Patterns of agentivity and narrativity in early science discourse. In Opening Windows on Texts and Discourses of the Past, Janne Skaffari, Matti Peikola, Ruth Carroll, Risto Hiltunen & Brita Wårvik (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 83–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fissell, Mary E. 2004. Vernacular Bodies: The Politics of Reproduction in Early Modern England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Flügge, Sibylla. 1998. Hebammen und heilkundige Frauen: Recht und Rechtswirklichkeit im 15. und 16. Jahrhundert. Frankfurt: Stroemfeld.Google Scholar
Green, Monica H. 2008. Making Women’s Medicine Masculine: The Rise of Male Authority in Pre-Modern Gynaecology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
2009. The sources of Eucharius Rösslin’s ‘Rosegarden for pregnant women and midwives’ (1513). Medical History 531: 167–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grund, Peter J. 2012. The nature of knowledge: Evidence and evidentiality in the witness depositions from the Salem witch trials. American Speech 87 (1): 7–38. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guy, John R. 1982. The episcopal licensing of physicians, surgeons and midwives. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 56 (4): 528–542.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 3rd ed., revised by Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hatipoğlu, Çiler, Erdem Akbaş & Yasemin Bayyurt (eds). 2017. Metadiscourse in Written Genres: Uncovering Textual and Interactional Aspects of Texts. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hensel, Cornelia. 1988. Mittel metakommunikativer Steuerung. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 41 (1): 91–101.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, James. 1967. A sixteenth century midwife’s license. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 41 (1): 75–76.Google Scholar
Hobby, Elaine. 2009. Introduction. In The Birth of Mankind: Otherwise Named, The Woman’s Book by Thomas Raynalde, Elaine Hobby (ed.). Farnham: Ashgate, xv–xxxix.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London and New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Ifantidou, Elly. 2005. The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 37 (9): 1325–1353. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jonas, Richard. 1540. The byrth of mankynde, newly translated out of Laten into Englysshe. London: T R.Google Scholar
Klein, Gustav. 1910. Eucharius Rösslin’s „Rosengarten“. In Eucharius Rösslin’s „Rosengarten“, gedruckt im Jahre 1513, Gustav Klein (ed.). Munich: Carl Kuhn, iv–xvii.Google Scholar
Kruse, Britta-Juliane. 1994. Neufund einer handschriftlichen Vorstufe von Eucharius Rößlins Hebammenlehrbuch Der schwangeren Frauen und Hebammen Rosengarten und des Frauenbüchleins Ps.-Ortolfs. Sudhoffs Archiv 781: 220–236.Google Scholar
Lindemann, Mary. 2010. Medicine and Society in Early Modern Europe. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony & Andrew Hardie. 2012. Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McIntosh, Tania. 2012. A Social History of Maternity and Childbirth: Key Themes in Maternity Care. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moessner, Lilo. 2008. Variation and change in the writings of 17th century scientists. In English Historical Linguistics 2006: Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006, Vol. II: Lexical and Semantic Change, Richard Dury, Maurizio Gotti & Marena Dossena (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 75–93.Google Scholar
Pahta, Päivi & Irma Taavitsainen. 2010. Scientific discourse. In Historical Pragmatics, Andreas H. Jucker & Irma Taavitsainen (eds). Berlin and New York: de Gruyter, 549–586.Google Scholar
Raynalde, Thomas. 2009 [1545]. The Birth of Mankind: Otherwise Named, the Woman’s Book, Elaine Hobby (ed.). Farnham: Ashgate. (Hobby’s edition based on 1560 edition.)Google Scholar
Richards, Jennifer. 2015. Reading and hearing The Womans Booke in early modern England. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 89 (3): 434–462. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Roelcke, Thorsten. 2010. Fachsprachen. 3rd ed. Berlin: Erich Schmidt.Google Scholar
Rösslin, Eucharius. 1910 [1513]. Der Swangernen frawen vnd Hebammen roszgarten, Gustav Klein (ed.). Munich: Carl Kuhn.Google Scholar
Rösslin, Eucharius (II). 1532. De Partu Hominis. Frankfurt: Egenolphus.Google Scholar
Scott, Mike. 2012. Word Smith Tools Version 6. Liverpool: Lexical Analysis Software.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1984 [1969]. Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Siraisi, Nancy G. 1990. Medieval & Early Renaissance Medicine: An Introduction to Knowledge and Practice. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma. 2000. Metadiscursive practices and the evolution of early English medical writing 1375–1550. In Corpora Galore: Analyses and Techniques in Describing English. Papers from the Nineteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerised Corpora (ICAME 1998), John M. Kirk (ed.). Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, 191–207.Google Scholar
. 2001. Evidentiality and scientific thought-styles: English medical writing in late Middle English and early modern English. In Modality in Specialized Texts: Selected Papers of the 1st CERLIS Conference, Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds.). Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 21–52.Google Scholar
. 2012. Audience guidance and learned medical writing in Late Medieval English. In Advances in Medical Discourse Analysis, Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Françoise Salager-Meyer (eds). Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 431–456.Google Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma & Päivi Pahta. 1998. Vernacularisation of medical writing in English: A corpus-based study of Scholasticism. Early Science and Medicine 3 (2): 157–185. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taavitsainen, Irma & Turo Hiltunen. 2012. Now as a text deictic feature in Late Medieval and Early Modern English medical writing. In Investigations into the Meta-Communicative Lexicon of English: A Contribution to Historical Pragmatics, Ulrich Busse & Axel Hübler (eds). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 179–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vande Kopple, William J. 1985. Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36 (1): 82–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wear, Andrew. 2000. Knowledge & Practice in English Medicine, 1550–1680. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whitt, Richard J. 2016a. Evidentiality in Early Modern English medical treatises (1500–1700). Journal of Historical Sociolinguistics 2 (2): 235–263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016b. The Nottingham Corpus of Early Modern German Midwifery and Women’s Medicine (ca. 1500–1700). Oxford: Oxford Text Archive. <[URL]> (Last accessed on 5 September 2017).
Wiesner, Mary E. 1983. Early Modern midwifery: A case study. International Journal of Women’s Studies 6 (2): 26–43.Google Scholar
Williams, Joseph M. 1981a. Literary style: The personal voice. In Style and Variables in English, Timothy Shopen & Joseph M. Williams (eds). Cambridge, MA: Winthrop, 117–216.Google Scholar
1981b. Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman and Co.Google Scholar
Woolley, Benjamin. 2004. The Herbalist: Nicholas Culpeper and the Fight for Medical Freedom. London: Harper Collins.Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Peikola, Matti & Mari-Liisa Varila
2024. Presenting manuscript tables and diagrams to the Middle English reader. Journal of Historical Pragmatics DOI logo
Whitt, Richard J.
2022. Chapter 8. Language, labour and ideology. In Corpus Pragmatic Studies on the History of Medical Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 330], ► pp. 179 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2021. The Sociopragmatics of Stance [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 329], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.