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.
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.
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.
Beal, J. (2004). English in Modern Times: 1700-1945. London: Hodder Arnold.
Beal, J. (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.
Biber, D. (1988). Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D. (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.
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.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1989). Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language, 65(3), 487–517.
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (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.
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (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.
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (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.
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.
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2013). Being specific about historical change: The influence of sub-register. Journal of English Linguistics, 41(2), 104–134.
Camiña, G. (2013). Noun Formation in the Scientific Register of Late Modern English: A Corpus-Based Approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of A Coruña, A Coruña.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Conrad, S. (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.
Crespo, B. (2011). Persuasion markers and ideology in eighteenth century philosophy texts. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 171, 199–228.
Crespo, B. (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.
Csomay, E. (2000). Academic lectures: An interface of an oral and literate continuum. Novelty, 7(3), 30–46.
De Smet, H. (2006). The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts (Extended Version). Department of Linguistics, University of Leuven.
Görlach, M. (2004). Text Types and the History of English. New York, NY : Walter de Gruyter.
Gotti, M. (2001). The experimental essay in Early Modern English. European Journal of English Studies, 5(2), 221–239.
Gotti, M. (2003). Specialized Discourse: Linguistic Features and Changing Conventions. Bern: Peter Lang.
Gotti, M. (2005). Investigating Specialized Discourse. Bern: Peter Lang.
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.
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.
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.
Hyland, K. (1995). The author in the text: Hedging scientific writing. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 181, 33–42.
Johansson, S. (Ed.). (1982). Computer Corpora in English Language Research. Bergen: Norwegian Computing Centre for the Humanities.
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.
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.
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.
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (1996). Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
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.
Moskowich, I. (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.
Moskowich, I. (2013). Eighteenth century female authors: Women and science in the Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 33(4), 467–487.
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.
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.
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.
Ochs, E. (1979). Planned and unplanned discourse. In T. Givón (Ed.), Discourse and Syntax (pp. 51–80). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Oxford English Dictionary Online (3rd. ed.) (1989). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from [URL] (last accessed December 2012).
Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
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.
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.
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.
Svartvik, J., & Quirk, R. (Eds.) (1980). A Corpus of English Conversation. Lund: CWK Gleerup.
Taavitsainen, I., & Pahta, P. (Eds.) (2004). Medical and Scientific Writing in Late Medieval English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (1996). Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Thompson, S. (1982). The passive in English: A discourse perspective. Unpublished manuscript.
UNESCO (1988). Proposed International Standard Nomenclature for Fields of Science and Technology UNESCO/NS/ROU/257. Paris: United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Weiner, E. & Labov, W. (1983). Constraints on the agentless passive. Journal of Linguistics, 19(1), 29–58.
Xiao, R. (2009). Multidimensional analysis and the study of World Englishes. Word Englishes, 28(4), 421–450.
Cited by (5)
Cited by five other publications
Doval-Suárez, Susana & Elsa González-Álvarez
2024. “You have done a great job, but I would make some changes.” Concession and politeness in asynchronous online discussion forums. Research in Corpus Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 113 ff.
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.
Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad
2019. Register, Genre, and Style,
Degaetano-Ortlieb, Stefania, Katrin Menzel & Elke Teich
2019. “Arguments That Could Possibly Be Urged”: Modal Verbs and Tentativeness in the Coruña Corpus. Languages 4:3 ► pp. 57 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 19 november 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.