Transcript Scientific Prose Style

VSUE
Lectures on
STYLISTICS OF THE ENGLISH
LANGUAGE
Presented by Tamara Ivanovna
Leontieva
Foreign Languages Center, Department of
Intercultural Communication and
Translation
2008
Scientific Prose Style
(SPS)
Literary and Linguostylistic
Characteristics
Typology of Scientific Texts
Primary
I. Scientific articles:
a) theoretical
b) polemic
c) sharing experience
d) editorials
II. Monographs
III. Textbooks
Secondary
I. Annotations:
a) informative
b) interpreting
c) reviewing
II. Abstracts
III. Reviews:
a) of literature
b) of a primary
scientific publication
What Is a Genre?
A genre of organizational
communication is a typified
communicative act having a socially
defined and recognized
communicative purpose with regard to
its audience.
All the above texts are genres of the
SPS.
Characteristic Features of SPS
1. Rigour and Precision
This feature is achieved with the help of
a) terms [polysemy, atom, linguistic, etc.]
b) general scientific vocabulary
[research, investigate, report, survey,
experiment]
c) everyday vocabulary (used
specifically) [size, weight, take, conduct,
many, high, low, etc.]
Characteristic Features of SPS
II. Impersonality
1) Passive voice:
The reason why so little progress has so far
been made in the field in question is that
syntactic studies have not yet emancipated
themselves: they are still bound hand and
foot, by the conventions and restrictions of
theoretical logic…
Characteristic Features of SPS
2) Impersonal passive constructions:
It must be emphasized…
It can be inferred...
It should be noted…
3) The use of pronouns «we», «you»:
You will have known by now that … We
are all aware of the fact that ...
Characteristic Features of SPS
III. Logical sequence of utterances
A lot of lexical-grammatical means:
a) logical connectives of addition [besides,
furthermore, in addition, etc.]
b)…of causality [accordingly, as a result of,
consequently, hence, therefore, etc.]
Characteristic Features of SPS
c) logical sequence of ideas [then,
afterwards, later, as follows, etc.]
d) opposition or contrast [however, unlike,
yet, nevertheless, otherwise, in contrast to,
etc.]
e) division into logical blocks [firstly,
secondly, finally, lastly, etc.]
Characteristic Features of SPS
IV. Logical connection of sentences and
paragraphs
1. THAT - clauses:
It follows that ...
It has often been stated that …
It is taken for granted that …
2. THERE - sentences:
There can be no doubt that …
There appears to be no reason for assuming that ...
Types of Scientific
Paragraphs
The Beginning of a
Scientific Discourse
Postulatory Paragraph
1) Theoretical assumptions already
known.
2) Scientific facts and data systematized.
Argumentative Paragraph
1. Analysis of different viewpoints.
2. Persuasion by one’s own method or
theory.
3. Illustration of the particular importance
of one’s research.
Formulative Paragraph
1. Explanation why progress has not been
achieved yet.
2. An end to argumentation and analysis
of different views.
Postulatory Paragraph
Received pronunciation (RP) has been
the dialect described and presented, for
over half a century, in a very considerable
corpus of material produced for the
teaching of English as a second or foreign
language… It is important that in the
course of describing and particularly of
teaching this dialect, linguists and textbook
writers have systematized and
standardized it. In that sense it has
become a form of standard English.
Answer the Questions
1. What is put forward in the paragraph
under discussion as a given fact?
2. Does the author explain why RP has
become a form of standard English? On
what information is the author’s
assumption based?
3. Formulate the idea of the paragraph with
the help of: There is every reason to
suppose that… It is common knowledge
that...
Argumentative Paragraph
When we speak about syntax, we must
make it quite clear that by syntax we do not
understand “the syntax of the sentence”.
We are not interested in trying to discover
how many simple, compound, complex, etc.
sentences we use. This, we think, is
completely irrelevant, whereas the division
into paragraphs - the paragraph as a
semiotic device, and the average length of
paragraphs being 7-8 lines - is an important
conclusion to make.
Answer the Questions
1. Does the paragraph present a
discussion, a reasoning?
2. What are the authors against? Why do
they oppose the existing way of studying
a text?
3. What do they offer instead? How do
they support their point of view?
4. Does their point of view sound
persuasive?
5. How will you formulate the main idea of
this paragraph?
Formulate the Main Idea
By way of reasoning the authors
offer... The authors of this discourse are
disinclined to admit… It stands to reason
if … Therefore the authors put forward…
Our objection to this theory is that …The
short review offered by the authors
persuades us that… The authors’
criticism is directed against… Instead,
they suggest a theory according to
which...
Formulative Paragraph
The reason why so little progress has so
far been made in the field in question is that
syntactic studies have not yet emancipated
themselves: they are still bound hand and
foot, by the conventions and restrictions of
theoretical logic, and worse still, by the
emerging tenets (принцип, догма) of
general semiotics. It is therefore difficult to
understand even today where the syntax of
natural languages really comes in.
Answer the Questions
1. What does the paragraph put forward?
Does it explain the reason why progress
has not been made yet?
2. Does it offer any problem?
3. Can such a paragraph give a
definition?
4. How will you word the topic sentence of
such a paragraph?
Give the Topic Sentence
Use the following models for the
beginning:
The major drawback for existing theories
(method, approach, etc.) is that…
The problem presented here is connected
with…
Our working hypothesis claims that…
The problem may be outlined as follows…
LITERATURE
1. Арнольд И.В. Стилистика. Современный
английский язык. - М.: Флинта, 2002. С.335-242.
2. Ивашкин М.П. Практикум… С.67-68.
3. Гальперин И.Р. Stylistics. - Pp.319-324.
4. Proshina Z.G. Theory of Translation.-2002.
- Pp.184-188.