Cover not available
Article published In:
Language, Context and Text
Vol. 1:2 (2019) ► pp.288–312

Nouns and nominalizations in economics textbooks

| Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
ORCID logo | Guangdong University of Foreign Studies
Grammatical metaphors are indispensable resources that scientists employ to create scientific worlds. Nominalization, as a powerful tool of grammatical metaphor, can shed new light on the nature of economics through reconstruing human experiences in the process of economic activities. This study endeavours to initiate an innovative way to study nominalizations in economics discourses by extracting nouns in a self-built 1-million-word corpus of economics textbooks (CETB). The results show that nouns and nominalizations, accounting respectively for 21% and 10% of the total words in the corpus, have construed the vast theoretical edifice of modern economic knowledge. In addition to transmitting disciplinary knowledge to achieve ideational functions, nominalizations can also situate the participants within the economics discourse community to fulfil interpersonal functions, and facilitate the text to progress as a chain of reasoning to perform textual functions. This investigation of nouns as well as lexical bundles not only provides new insights into nominalization but also provides an important entry point to observe discipline-specific lexis and the typical co-text in which items occur. This study, as a combination of work in economics, corpus linguistics and systemic functional linguistics, has implications for education in economics as well as the study of disciplinary English in other fields.
Keywords: corpus, nouns, nominalizations, grammatical metaphor, economics, disciplinary English, lexical bundles, derivation, zero-derivation, meta-metafunctions
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Related work
    • 2.1Grammatical metaphor
    • 2.2Three successive waves of theoretical energy
    • 2.3Corpus approaches to nominalizations
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1Corpus information
    • 3.2Corpus query and analytical procedures
  • 4.Results and analysis
    • 4.1Nouns in the CETB
    • 4.2Nominalizations in the CETB
      • 4.2.1Derivation
      • 4.2.2Zero-derivation
  • 5.Discussion
    • 5.1Ideational function
    • 5.2Interpersonal function
    • 5.3Textual function
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 22 July 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/langct.00012.hu
References (41)
References
Alejo, Rafael. 2010. Where does the money go? An analysis of the container metaphor in economics: The market and the economy. Journal of Pragmatics 42(4). 1137–1150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baratta, Alexander M. 2010. Nominalization development across an undergraduate academic degree program. Journal of Pragmatics 42 (4). 1017–1036. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Boers, Frank. 2000. Enhancing metaphoric awareness in specialised reading. English for Specific Purposes 19(2). 137–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charles, Maggie. 2003. ‘This mystery…’: 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan. 2000. Metaphor and vocabulary teaching in ESP economics. English for Specific Purposes 19(2). 149–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan & Timothy Ennis. 2001. A comparative study of metaphor in Spanish and English financial reporting. English for Specific Purposes 20(3). 249–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charteris-Black, Jonathan & Andreas Musolff. 2003. ‘Battered hero’ or ‘innocent victim’? A comparative study of metaphors for euro trading in British and German financial reporting. English for Specific Purposes (22). 153–176. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortes, Viviana. 2004. Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes 231. 397–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fukuda, Kosei. 2009. A comparative study of metaphors representing the US and Japanese economies. Journal of Pragmatics 41(9). 1693–1702. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goatly, Andrew. 2007. Washing the brain – metaphor and hidden ideology. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar (2nd edition). London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
1998. Things and relations: regrammaticising experience as technical knowledge. In James R. Martin & Robert Veel (eds.), Reading science, critical and functional perspectives on discourses of science, 185–235. London: Routledge. Reprinted in Michael A. K. Halliday, 2004. The language of science, volume 5 in the collected works of M. A. K. Halliday. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2004. The language of science, volume 5 in the collected works of M.A.K. Halliday. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & James R. Martin. 1993. Writing science, literary and discourse power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 1999. Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London & New York: Cassell.Google Scholar
. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hansen, Barbara, Claus Hansen, Abrecht Heubert & Manfred Schentke. 1982. Englische lexikologie: Einfhrung Wortbildungund Lexicakalische Semantik. Leipzig: Enzyklopädie.Google Scholar
He, Qingshun & Bingun Yang. 2018. A corpus-based study of the correlation between text technicality and ideational metaphor in English. Lingua, 51–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henderson, Willie. 1994. Metaphor and economics. In Roger E. Backhouse (ed.), New directions in economic methodology, 343–367. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2000. Metaphor, economics and ESP: Some comments. English for Specific Purposes 19 (2). 161–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes 271. 4–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krugman, Paul R., Maurice Obstfeld & Marcj Melitz. 2012. International economics: Theory & policy (9th edition). Boston: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Laurence, Anthony. 2018. AntConc (version 3.5.7) [Computer software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from [URL]
Mahlberg, Michaela. 2013. Corpus stylistics and Dickens’s fiction. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mankiw, N. Gregory. 2012. Principles of economics (6th edition). South-Western: Cengage.Google Scholar
Marchand, Hans. 1969 [1960]. The categories and types of present-day English word-formation: A synchronic-diachronic approach (2nd edition). München: C. Beck.Google Scholar
McCloskey, Deirdre N. 1985. The rhetoric of economics. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
1995. Metaphors economists live by. Social Research 62(2). 215–237.Google Scholar
Mutari, Ellen. 2017. Metaphors, social practices, and economic life: ASE presidential address. Review of Social Economy 1–17. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Reeves, Carol. 2005. The language of science. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Resche, Catherine. 2012. Towards a better understanding of metaphorical networks in the language of economics: The importance of theory-constitutive metaphors. In Honesto Herrera-Soler & Michael White (eds.), Metaphor and mills: Figurative language in business and economics, 77–102. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. Economic terms and beyond: Capitalising on the wealth of notions. Bern: Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samuels, Warren J. (ed.). 1990. Economics as discourse: An analysis of the language of economists. Boston: Kluwer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. & William D. Nordhaus. 2010. Economics (19th edition). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans J. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to cognition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Smith, Geoff P. 1995. How high can a dead cat bounce?: Metaphor and the Hong Kong Stock Market. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching (18). 43–57.Google Scholar
Wang, Lifei. 2016. Studies on nominalization in business discourse. University of International Business and Economics Press.Google Scholar
White, Michael. 2003. Metaphor and economics: The case of growth. English for Specific Purposes 22(2). 131–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lücking, Andy, Sebastian Brückner, Giuseppe Abrami, Tolga Uslu & Alexander Mehler
2021. Computational Linguistic Assessment of Textbooks and Online Texts by Means of Threshold Concepts in Economics. Frontiers in Education 5 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 july 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.