Article published in:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 21:4 (2016) ► pp. 499–526

Was late Modern English scientific writing impersonal?

Comparing Philosophy and Life Sciences texts from the Coruña Corpus

| University of A Coruña
This paper focuses on the use of certain linguistic features conveying impersonal style in late Modern English scientific prose (1700–1900). Samples are taken from two subcorpora of the Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing, one from the humanities (Philosophy) and the other from natural sciences (Life Sciences). The methodology applied is based on Biber’s (1988) Multidimensional Analysis, consisting of a study of register variation as manifested through sets of co-occurring linguistic features with a shared discursive function. The aim of the present study is to detect variation across scientific disciplines, genres, and subject matter. Findings are compared to those found in both diachronic and contemporary reference corpora.
Keywords: Scientific register, Multidimensional Analysis, change, variation, late Modern English
Published online: 06 December 2016
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.21.4.03mon
References
Atkinson, D
(1999) Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context. The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C
(1984) Modern evolution of the experimental report in physics: Spectroscopic articles in Physical Review, 1893-1980. Social Studies of Science, 14(2). 163–196. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Beal, J
(2004) English in Modern Times: 1700-1945. London: Hodder Arnold.Google Scholar
(2012) Late Modern English in its historical context. In I. Moskowich & B. Crespo (Eds.), Astronomy ‘Playne and Simple’: The Writing of Science between 1700 and 1900 (pp. 1–14). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D
(1988) Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2001) Dimensions of variation among eighteenth-century speech-based and written registers. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 200–214). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S
(2001) Introduction: Multi-dimensional analysis and the study of register variation. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 3–12). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R
(1998) Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E
(1989) Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language, 65(3), 487–517. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1997) Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In T. Nevalainen & L. Kahlas Tarkka (Eds.), To Explain the Present: Studies in the Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen (pp. 253–275). Helsinki: Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki.Google Scholar
(2001a) Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 66–83). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
(2001b) Intra-textual variation within medical research articles. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 108–123). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Biber, D., Finegan, E., & Atkinson, D
(1994) ARCHER and its challenges: Compiling and exploring a Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers. In U. Fries, P. Schneider & G. Tottie (Eds.), Creating and Using English Language Corpora. Papers from the 14th International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora, Zurich 1993 (pp. 1–13). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Gray, B
(2013) Being specific about historical change: The influence of sub-register. Journal of English Linguistics, 41(2), 104–134. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Camiña, G
(2012) Accounting for observations of the heavens in the 18th century: New nouns to explain old phenomena. In I. Moskowich & B. Crespo (Eds.), Astronomy ‘Playne and Simple’: The Writing of Science between 1700 and 1900 (pp. 93–121). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Noun Formation in the Scientific Register of Late Modern English: A Corpus-Based Approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of A Coruña, A Coruña.Google Scholar
Camiña, G., & Lareo, I
(2016) Editorial policy in the Corpus of English Philosophy Texts . In I. Moskowich, G. Camiña, I. Lareo & B. Crespo (Eds.), ‘The Conditioned and the Unconditioned’: Late Modern English Texts on Philosophy (pp. 45–60). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carkin, S
(2001) Pedagogic Language in Introductory Classes: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Textbooks and Lectures in Biology and Macroeconomics (Unpublished doctoral Dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar
Chafe, W., & Danielewicz, J
(1987) Properties of spoken and written language. In R. Horowitz & S.J. Samuels (Eds.), Comprehending Oral and Written Language (pp. 83–113). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Conrad, S
(1996) Academic Discourse in Two Disciplines: Professional Writing and Student Development in Biology and History (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar
(2001) Variation among disciplinary texts: A comparison of textbooks and journal articles in biology and history. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.). Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 94–107). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Crespo, B
(2011) Persuasion markers and ideology in eighteenth century philosophy texts. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 171, 199–228.Google Scholar
(2016) Genre categorisation in CEPhiT. In I. Moskowich, G. Camiña, I. Lareo & B. Crespo (Eds.), ‘The Conditioned and the Unconditioned’: Late Modern English Texts on Philosophy (pp. 25–44). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Csomay, E
(2000) Academic lectures: An interface of an oral and literate continuum. Novelty, 7(3), 30–46.Google Scholar
De Smet, H
(2006) The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended Version). Department of Linguistics, University of Leuven.Google Scholar
Görlach, M
(2004) Text Types and the History of English. New York, NY : Walter de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gorsuch, R.L
(1983) Factor Analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gotti, M
(2001) The experimental essay in Early Modern English. European Journal of English Studies, 5(2), 221–239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) Specialized Discourse: Linguistic Features and Changing Conventions. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2005) Investigating Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Granger, S
(1997) On identifying the syntactic and discourse features of participle clauses in Academic English: Native and non-native writers compared. In J. Aarts, I. de Mönnink & H. Wekker (Eds.), Studies in English Language and Teaching (pp. 185–198). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Gray, B
(2011) Exploring Academic Writing Through Corpus Linguistics: When Discipline Tells Only Part of the Story (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar
Greenbaum, S
(1988) Syntactic devices for compression in English. In J. Klegraf & D. Nehls (Eds.), Essays on the English Language and Applied Linguistics on the Occasion of Gerhard Nickel’s 60th Birthday (pp. 3–10). Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.Google Scholar
Hyland, K
(1995) The author in the text: Hedging scientific writing. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 181, 33–42.Google Scholar
(1998) Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, S
(Ed.) (1982) Computer Corpora in English Language Research. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.Google Scholar
Johansson, S., Leech, G., & Goodluck, H
(1978) Manual of Information to Accompany the Lancaster-Oslo/Bergen Corpus of British English, for Use with Digital Computers. Oslo: Department of English, University of Oslo.Google Scholar
Lareo, I
(2009) El Coruña Corpus. Proceso de compilación y utilidades del Corpus of English Texts on Astronomy (CETA). Resultados preliminares sobre el uso de los predicados complejos en CETA. In P. Cantos Gómez & A. Sánchez Pérez (Eds.), A Survey on Corpus-based Research (pp. 267–280). Murcia: Asociación Española de Lingüística de Corpus.Google Scholar
Lareo, I., & Esteve-Ramos, M.J
(2008) 18th century scientific writing. A study of make complex predicates in the Coruña Corpus. ICAME, 321, 69–96.Google Scholar
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A
(1996) Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Monaco, L.M
(2016) Abstractness as diachronic variation in CEPhiT: Biber’s Dimension 5 applied. In I. Moskowich, G. Camiña, I. Lareo & B. Crespo (Eds.), ‘The Conditioned and the Unconditioned’: Late Modern English Texts on Philosophy (pp. 99–121). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, I
(2011) “The golden rule of divine philosophy” exemplified in the Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 171, 167–197.Google Scholar
(2012a) CETA as a tool for the study of Modern Astronomy in English. In I. Moskowich & B. Crespo (Eds.), Astronomy ‘Playne and Simple’: The Writing of Science between 1700 and 1900 (pp. 35–56). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012b) “A smooth homogeneous globe” in CETA: Compiling late Modern Astronomy texts in English. In N. Vázquez (Ed.), Creation and Use of Historical English Corpora in Spain (pp. 21–37). Newcastle Upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholar Publishing.Google Scholar
(2013) Eighteenth century female authors: Women and science in the Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 33(4), 467–487. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2016) Philosophers and scientists from the Modern Age: Compiling the Corpus of English Philosophy Texts. In I. Moskowich, G. Camiña, I. Lareo & B. Crespo (Eds.), ‘The Conditioned and the Unconditioned’: Late Modern English Texts on Philosophy (pp. 1–23). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, I., Camiña, G., Lareo, I., & Crespo, B
(Eds.) (2016) ‘The Conditioned and the Unconditioned’: Late Modern English Texts on Philosophy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, I., & Crespo, B
(2007) Presenting the Coruña Corpus: A collection of samples for the historical study of English scientific writing. In J. Pérez Guerra, D. González-Álvarez, J.L. Bueno-Alonso & E. Rama-Martínez (Eds.), Of Varying Language and Opposing Creed: New Insights into Late Modern English (pp. 341–357). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(Eds.) (2012) Astronomy ‘Playne and Simple’: The Writing of Science between 1700 and 1900. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, I., & Monaco, L.M
(2014) Abstraction as a means of expressing reality: Women writing science in late Modern English. In M. Gotti & D.S. Giannoni (Eds.), Corpus Analysis for Descriptive and Pedagogical Purposes (pp. 203–224). Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Moskowich, I., & Parapar, J
(2008) Writing sciences, compiling science: The Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing. In M.J. Lorenzo Modia (Ed.), Proceedings from the 31st AEDEAN Conference (pp. 531–544). A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña.Google Scholar
Ochs, E
(1979) Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givón (Ed.), Discourse and Syntax (pp. 51–80). New York, NY: Academic Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary Online
(3rd. ed.) (1989) Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://​dictionary​.oed​.com/ (last accessed December 2012).Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J
(1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Reppen, R
(2001) Register variation in student and adult speech. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-Dimensional Studies (pp. 187–199). Essex: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Rissanen, M., Kytö, M., Kahlas-Tarkka, L., Kilpiö, M., Nevanlinna, S., Taavitsainen, I., Nevalainen, T., & Raumolin-Brunberg, H
(1991) The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. Helsinki: Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Smith, N., & Seoane, E
(2013) Categorizing syntactic constructions in a corpus. In M. Krug & J. Schlüter (Eds.), Research Methods in Language Variation and Change, (pp. 212–227). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Svartvik, J., & Quirk, R
(Eds.) (1980) A Corpus of English Conversation. Lund: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Taavitsainen, I., & Pahta, P
(Eds.) (2004) Medical and Scientific Writing in Late Medieval English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(Eds.) (2010) Early Modern English Medical Texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L
(1996) Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.Google Scholar
Thompson, S
(1982) The passive in English: A discourse perspective. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
UNESCO
(1988) Proposed International Standard Nomenclature for Fields of Science and Technology UNESCO/NS/ROU/257. Paris: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.Google Scholar
Weiner, E. & Labov, W
(1983) Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics, 19(1), 29–58. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, R
(2009) Multidimensional analysis and the study of World Englishes. Word Englishes, 28(4), 421–450. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad
2019.  In Register, Genre, and Style, Crossref logo
Degaetano-Ortlieb, Stefania, Katrin Menzel & Elke Teich
2019.  In Writing History in Late Modern English, ► pp. 58 ff. Crossref logo
Deng, Liming, Bagheri Fatemeh & Xiaoping Gao
2021. Exploring the interactive and interactional metadiscourse in doctoral dissertation writing: a diachronic study. Scientometrics 126:8 ► pp. 7223 ff. Crossref logo
Moskowich, Isabel & Begoña Crespo
2019. “Arguments That Could Possibly Be Urged”: Modal Verbs and Tentativeness in the Coruña Corpus. Languages 4:3 ► pp. 57 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 april 2022. 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.