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. 265–288

Chapter 14
A study of coherence relations in the English scientific register

Conjunctions in the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts

ORCID logo | University of the Balearic Islands
| Heidelberg University
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Methodology
    • 2.1Corpus description
    • 2.2Variables and procedure
  • 3.Data analysis
    • 3.1Type of relation
    • 3.2Sex of author
    • 3.3Age of author
    • 3.4Place of education
    • 3.5Genre and level of specialisation
  • 4.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Works cited
  • Appendix
Published online: 10 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.237.14bel
References

Works cited

Allen, Bryce; Qin, Jian and Lancaster, Frederik Wilfrid
1994 Persuasive Communities: A Longitudinal Analysis of References in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1665–1990. Social Studies of Science, 24/2: 279–310.Google Scholar
Anscombre, Jean-Claude, and Oswald Ducrot
1976 L’argumentation dans la langue. Langages, 42: 5–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Asr, Fatemeh Torabi and Demberg, Vera
2012 “Implicitness of Discourse Relations”. In Kay, Martin and Boitet, Christian (eds.), Proceedings of COLING 2012. Mumbai: The COLING 2012 Organizing Committee. 2669–2684.Google Scholar
Bailey, Richard
2010 “Variation and Change in Eighteenth-Century English”. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Eighteenth Century English: Ideology and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 182–199. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barsaglini-Castro, Anabella and Valcarce, Daniel
2020 The Coruña Corpus Tool: Ten Years on. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural, 64: 13–19.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles
1988 Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Bhatia, Vijay
2002 “A Generic View of Academic Discourse”. In Flowerdew, John (ed.), Academic Discourse. London: Pearson Education. 21–39.Google Scholar
Bello, Iria
2016 Cognitive Implications of Nominalizations in the Advancement of Scientific Discourse. International Journal of English Studies, 16/2: 1–23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 “On Cognitive Complexity in Scientific Discourse: A Corpus-Based Study on Additive Coherence Relations”. In Moskowich, Isabel; Crespo, Begoña; Puente-Castelo, Luis and Monaco, Leida Maria (eds.), Writing history in Late Modern English: Explorations of the Coruña Corpus. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 260–276. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blakemore, Diane
1987 Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bolívar, Adriana and Parodi, Giovanni
2015 “Academic and Professional Discourse.” In Lacorte, Manel (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Hispanic Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge. 459–476.Google Scholar
Carston, Robyn
2002 Thoughts and Utterances: The Pragmatics of Explicit Communication. Oxford: Blackwell. 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
Crespo, Begoña, and Moskowich, Isabel
2015 Involved in Writing Science: Nineteenth-Century Women in the Coruña Corpus . International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2/5: 76–88.Google Scholar
Crespo García, Begoña, and Moskowich, Isabel
2010  CETA in the Context of the Coruña Corpus . Literary and Linguistic Computing, 25/2: 153–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Kytö, Merja
2000 “The Conjunction AND in Early Modern English: Frequencies and Uses in Speech-related Writing and other Texts”. In Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo; Denison, David; Hogg, Richard M. and McCully, Christopher B. (eds.), Generative Theory and Corpus Studies: A Dialogue from 10ICEHL, (Topics in English Linguistics, 31). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 299–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Cesare, Anna Maria
2017 “Introduction: on ‘Additivity’ as a Multidisciplinary Research Field”. In De Cesare, Anna Maria and Andorno, Cecilia (eds.), Focus on Additivity. Adverbial Modifiers in Romance, Germanic and Slavic languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ducrot, Oswald
1983 Operateurs argumentatifs et visée argumentative. Cahiers de Linguistique Francaise, 5: 7–36.Google Scholar
Gotti, Maurizio
2013 “The Formation of The Royal Society as a Community of Practice and Discourse”. In Kopaczyk, Joanna and Jucker, Andreas (eds.), Communities of Practice in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 269–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael and Hasan, Ruqaiya
1974 Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken
2000 Disciplinary Discourses. Social Interaction In Academic Writing. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2011 “Academic Discourse”. In Hyland, Ken and Paltridge, Brian (eds.), The Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis. London: Continuum. 171–184.Google Scholar
Kintsch, Walter
1998 Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleijn, Suzanne; Pander Maat, Henk L. and Sanders, Ted J. M.
2019 Comprehension Effects of Connectives Across Texts, Readers, and Coherence Relations. Discourse Processes, 56/5–6: 447–464. DOI logoGoogle 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
Mann, William; Matthiessen, Christian and Thompson, Sandra
1992 “Rhetorical structure theory and text analysis”. In Mann, William and Thompson, Sandra (eds.), Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 39–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mann, William and Thompson, Sandra
1987 Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. ISI/RS Report, 87/1: 2–82.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony and Wilson, Andrew
1996 Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Moessner, Lilo
2009 The Influence of the Royal Society on 17th-Century Scientific Writing. ICAME Journal, 33: 65–87.Google Scholar
Moskowich, Isabel
2012 CETA as a tool for the study of modern astronomy in English. In Moskowich, Isabel and Crespo, Begoña (eds.), Astronomy ‘playne and simple’: the writing of Science between 1700 and 1900. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 35–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Lexical Richness in Modern Women Writers: Evidence from the Corpus of History English Texts. Revista Canaria de Estudies Ingleses, Monographic Issue: Women Scientists, Women Travellers, Women Translators: their Language and their History, 72: 110–128.Google Scholar
2017 Genre and Change in the Corpus of History English Texts. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 16: 84–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2021 “The making of CELiST, a bunch of disciplines”. 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. 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moskowich, Isabel and Crespo García, Begoña
2007 “Presenting the Coruña Corpus: A Collection of Samples for the Historical Study of English Scientific Writing .” In Pérez Guerra, Javier et al. (eds.), ‘Of Varying Language and Opposing Creed’: New Insights into Late Modern English. Bern: Peter Lang. 341–357.Google Scholar
Moskowich, Isabel and Parapar López, José
2008 “Writing Science, Compiling Science. The Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing .” In Lorenzo Modia, María Jesús (ed.), Proceedings from the 31st AEDEAN Conference. A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña, Servizo de Publicacións. 531–544.Google Scholar
Murray, John
1997 Connectives and Narrative Text: The role of Continuity. Memory and Cognition, 25/2: 227–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parapar López, Javier and Moskowich, Isabel
2007 The Coruña Corpus Tool. Revista de Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural, 39: 289–290.Google Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni
2014 Genre Organisation in Specialised Discourse: Disciplinary Variation across University Textbooks. Discourse Studies, 16/1: 65–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015 Variation across University Genres in Seven Disciplines. A Corpus-Based Study on Academic Written Spanish. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20/4: 469–499. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni; Burdiles, Gina; Moreno de León, Tomás and Julio, Cristóbal
2018 Hábitos lectores y géneros del discurso en filosofía y en economía y negocios: del discurso académico al discurso profesional. Revista de lingüística teórica y aplicada, 56/2: 117–152. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Puente-Castelo, Luis and Monaco, Leida María
2016 The might of ‘might’: A Mitigating Strategy in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Female Scientific Discourse. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 72: 143–168.Google Scholar
Rudolph, Elisabeth
1996 Contrast: Adversative and Concessive Relations and their Expressions in English, German, Spanish, Portuguese on Sentence and Text level. New York / Berlin: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted
2005 “Coherence, Causality and Cognitive Complexity in Discourse”. In Aurnague, Michel, Bras, Myriam, Le Draoulec Anne and Vieu, Laure (eds.), Proceedings/Actes SEM-05, First International Symposium on the Exploration and Modelling of Meaning. Toulouse: Université de Toulouse – Le Mirail. 105–114.Google Scholar
Sanders, Ted and Pander Maat, Henk
2006 “Cohesion and Coherence: Linguistic Approaches”. In Brown, Keith (ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (Volume 2). London: Elsevier. 591–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, Ted; Spooren, Wilbert and Noordman, Leo
1992 Toward a Taxonomy of Coherence Relations. Discourse Processes, 15: 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segal, Erwin; Duchan, Judith and Scott, Paula
1991 The Role of Interclausal Connectives in Narrative Structuring: Evidence from Adults’ Interpretations of Simple Stories. Discourse Processes, 14/1: 27–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, John
1990 Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
2004 Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taatvitsainen, Irma
2001 Changing Conventions of Writing: The Dynamics of Genres, Text Types, and Text Traditions. European Journal of English Studies, 5/2: 139–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid
2010 “Eighteenth-Century Women and the Norms of Correctness”. In Hickey, Raymond (ed.), Eighteenth-Century English: Ideology and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 59–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Dijk, Teun and Kintsch, Walter
1983 Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, Suzanne Evans
2012 Age Grading in Sociolinguistic Theory. Language and Linguistics Compass, 6/6: 371–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar