Cover not available
Part of
“All families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts
Edited by Isabel Moskowich, Inés Lareo and Gonzalo Camiña
[Not in series 237] 2021
► pp. 169–188

Chapter 9
Persuasion in English scientific writing

Exploring suasive verbs in the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts and Posthumanism English Texts

ORCID logo | University of A Coruña
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Persuasion, stance and suasive verbs in scientific writing
  • 3.Corpus and methodology
    • CELiST
    • CoNFiPET
  • 4.Analysis of data
  • 5.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • Works cited
Published online: 10 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.237.09bar
References

Works cited

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco and Álvarez-Gil, Francisco J.
2019 “Modal verb categories in CHET”. In Moskowich, Isabel; Crespo, Begoña; Puente-Castelo, Luis and Monaco, Leida Maria (eds.), Writing history in Late Modern English: Explorations of the Coruña Corpus, 151–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ansell-Pearson, Keith
1997 Viroid Life: Perspectives on Nietzsche and the Transhuman Condition. London/New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthony, Laurence
2019 AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Retrieved December 12, 2019, from [URL]
Aristotle
1984 “Rhetoric”. In Barnes, John (ed.), The Complete Works of Aristotle. The Revised Oxford Translation. Vol. 2. Princeton University Press: Princeton-New Jersey. 2152–2269.Google Scholar
Barsaglini-Castro, Anabella and Valcarce, Daniel
2020 The Coruña Corpus Tool: Ten Years On. Revista del Procesamiento de Lenguaje Natural (sePLN), 64: 13–19.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas
1995 Dimensions of Register Variation: A Cross-linguistic Comparison. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1988 Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Susan Conrad
2009 Register, Genre and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bostrom, Nick
2013 “Why I Want to be a Posthuman When I Grow Up”. In More, M. and Vita‐More, N. (eds.), The Transhumanist Reader. Wiley Blackwell. 28–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boyle, Robert
1669 Certain physiological essays and other tracts written at distant times, and on several occasions by the honourable Robert Boyle; wherein some of the tracts are enlarged by experiments and the work is increased by the addition of a discourse about the absolute rest in bodies. London: Henry Herringman.Google Scholar
Collier, James H. and Toomey, David M.
1997 Scientific and technical communication: theory, practice, and policy. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.Google Scholar
Crespo, Begoña
2021 “Linguistic indicators of persuasion in female authors in the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts”. In Moskowich, Isabel; Lareo, Inés and Camiña, Gonzalo (eds.), “All families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 147–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crespo, Begoña and Moskowich, Isabel
2010 “CETA in the Context of the Coruña Corpus”. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 25/2: 153–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crespo, Begoña
2015 Women writing science in the eighteenth century: some hints about their language use. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies, 24/2: 103–128.Google Scholar
Doede, Robert
2009 Transhumanism, technology, and the future: Posthumanity emerging or sub-humanity descending? The Appraisal Journal. Vol. 7. 39–54.Google Scholar
Fukuyama, Francis
2002 Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
Hauskeller, Michael
2009 Prometheus unbound: Transhumanist arguments from (human) nature. Ethical Perspectives. 16. 3–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken
2002 Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34: 1091–1112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London/New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Kirby, Vicki
1999 Human Nature. Australian Feminist Studies, 14:29, 19-29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Klichowski, Michał
2015 “Transhumanism and the idea of education in the world of cyborgs”. In Krauze-Sikorska, H. and Klichowski, M. (eds.), The Educational and Social World of a Child. Discourses of Communication, Subjectivity and Cyborgization. Poznan: Adam Mickiewicz University Press. 431–438.Google Scholar
Lareo, Inés; Monaco, Leida Maria; Esteve-Ramos, María José and Moskowich, Isabel
(comps.) 2020 The Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts (CELiST). A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Locher, Miriam A. and Jucker, Andreas H.
2017 Pragmatics of Fiction. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mele-Marrero, Margarita
2021 “Engagement in the botanists of the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts: Flourishing female scientific writing”. In Moskowich, Isabel; Lareo, Inés and Camiña, Gonzalo (eds.), “All families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 133–146. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, Isabel and Crespo, Begoña
Forthcoming. “… but be ſure you let it ſettle”: Late Modern authors’ presence in scientific texts.
Moskowich, Isabel
2017 “Pronouns as stance markers in the Coruña Corpus: An analysis of the CETA, CEPhiT and CHET”. In Alonso-Almeida, Francisco (ed.), Stancetaking in Late Modern English Scientific Writing. Evidence from the Coruña Corpus. Colección Scientia [Applied Linguistics]. Valencia: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia. 73–91.Google Scholar
Nurmi, Arja
2002 Does size matter? The Corpus of Early English Correspondence and its sampler. Variation Past and Present: VARIENG Studies on English for Terttu Nevalainen. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, 61: 173–84.Google Scholar
OED
1989 Oxford English Dictionary. Retrieved January 20, 2020, from [URL]
Pollock, John
1990 Philosophy and Artificial Intelligence. Philosophical Perspectives, 4, 461–498. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quirk, Randolph; Greenbaum, Sydney; Leech, Geoffrey N. and Svartvik, Jan
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Toolan, Michael J.
2010 Narrative Progression in the Short Story: A corpus stylistic approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “How does Literary Language Move Us? On Being ‘Immersed’ and Emotionally Engaged by Literary Narratives.” In Penas Ibañez, Beatriz; Muñoz, Micaela and Conejero, Marta (eds.), Con/Texts of Persuasion. Kassel: Reichenberger. 15–25.Google Scholar
Turkle, Sherry
2005 “Personal Computers with Personal Meanings”. In Turkle, S. and Ebrary, Inc. (eds.), The second self: Computers and the human spirit. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. 155–181. DOI logoGoogle Scholar