Chapter 10
How intimate was the tone of female History writing in the Modern period?
Evidence from the Corpus of History English Texts
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Authorial presence in scientific discourse: Identity and interaction
- 3.Materials and methodology
- 4.Analysis and discussion
- 4.1The time variable
- 4.2The communicative format variable
- 4.3Detailed analysis of the most frequent involvement features
- 5.Concluding remarks
-
Acknowledgements
-
References
References (35)
References
Argamon, Shlomo, Moshe Koppel, Jonathan Fine & Anat Rachel Shimoni. (2003). Gender, Genre, and Writing Style in Formal Written Texts. Text, 23 (3), 321–346. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Atkinson, Dwight. (1999). Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context: The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bennett, Karen. (2009). English academic style manuals: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(1), 43–54. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Besnier, Niko. (1994). Involvement in linguistic practice: An Ethnographic Appraisal. Journal of Pragmatics, 22, 279–299. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, Douglas. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, Douglas & Jená Burges. (2000). Historical change in the language use of women and men: Gender differences in dramatic dialogue. Journal of English Linguistics, 28, 21–37. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. (1997). Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In Terttu Nevalainen & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka (Eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen (253–275). Helsinki: Societe Neophilologique. (Reprinted in Conrad & Biber (Eds.) (2001), 66–83.)![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cook, Albert. (1988). History/Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dontcheva-Navrátilová, Olga. (2013). Authorial presence in academic discourse: functions of author-reference pronouns. Linguistica Pragensia, 23(1), 9–30.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood. (1988). On the Language of Physical Science. In Mohsen Ghadessy (Ed.), Registers of Written English: Situational Factors and Linguistic Features (162–178). London: Pinter.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Halliday, Michael Alexander Kirkwood & Christian Matthiessen. (2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Arnold.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Harwood, Nigel. (2005). We Do Not Seem to Have a Theory … The Theory I Present Here Attempts to Fill This Gap: Inclusive and Exclusive Pronouns in Academic Writing. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 343–3. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Holmes, Janet. (2001). An introduction to Sociolinguistics. Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hyland, Ken. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1091–1112. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hyland, Ken. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 4–21. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Knight, David (Ed.) (1986). The Age of Science. The Scientific World-View in the Nineteenth Century. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kroch, Anthony, Beatrice Santorini & Ariel Diertani. (2016). The Penn Parsed Corpus of Modern British English (PPCMBE2). Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. CD-ROM, second edition, release 1. Accessed [21/03/2018] from [URL]
Kuo, Chih-Hua. (1999). The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 121–138. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lakoff, Robin T. (1990). Talking power: The politics of language in our lives. New York: Basic Books.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Mischke, Gertruda E. (2005). Analysing ‘involvement’ in Distance Education Study Guides: An Appraisal-based Approach. The University of South Africa.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Monaco, Leida Maria. (2017). A Multidimensional analysis of Late Modern English Scientific Texts from the Coruña Corpus. Unpublished PhD Diss. Universidade da Coruña.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moskowich, Isabel. (2017). “Pronouns as stance markers in the Coruña Corpus: An analysis of the CETA, CEPhiT and CHET”. In Francisco Alonso-Almeida (Ed.), Stancetaking in Late Modern English Scientific Writing. Evidence from the Coruña Corpus (73–91). Colección Scientia [Applied Linguistics]. Valencia: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Moskowich, Isabel & Begoña Crespo. (2016). “Classifying communicative formats in CHET, CECHeT and others”. EPiC Series in Language and Linguistics, 1, 308–320. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pagliawan, Dominador L. (2017). Feature Style for Academic and Scholarly Writing. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 6(2), 35–41. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Porter, Theodore & Dorothy Ross (Eds.) (2003). The Cambridge History of Science. Vol. 7. The Modern Social Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Prelli, Lawrence J. (1989). A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Puente-Castelo, Luis. (2017). On Conditionality: A Corpus-based study of conditional structures in Late Modern English Scientific Texts. Unpublished PhD Diss. Universidade da Coruña.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, & Jan Svartvik. (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Simó, Judit. (2012). Involvement and Subjectivity in the Linguistic Description of Counterfactual Scenarios in Chess Commentaries, 2012. Selected Papers from UK-CLA Meetings, Vol 1, 78–93. Accessed [21/03/2018] from [URL]
Stromberg, Roland N. (1951). History in the Eighteenth Century. Journal of the History of Ideas, 12(2), 295–304. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Tang, Ramona & Suganthi John. (1999). The ‘I’ identity: Exploring Writer Identity in Student Academic Writing Through the First-Person Pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 23–39. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Thompson, Geoff. (2001). Interaction in Academic Writing: Learning to Argue with the Reader. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 58–78. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Yang, Xinzhang. (2017). Linguistics Features of Knowledge Construction in Chemistry Textbooks. In Jonathan J. Webster & Xuanwei Peng (Eds.), Applying Systemic Functional Linguistics: The State of the Art in China Today (337–350). London: Bloomsbury Publishing.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Cited by (3)
Cited by three other publications
Montoya Reyes, Ana & Anabella Barsaglini-Castro
2024.
A semantic approach for the analysis of verbs in life sciences texts.
Studia Neophilologica ► pp. 1 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
Crespo, Begoña
2022.
Analysing the Coruña Corpus: Subjectivity and Intersubjectivity Markers.
Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 57:1
► pp. 199 ff.
![DOI logo](//benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.