LINGUISTIC FEATURES OF AUTHORIAL VOICE IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15454902
Kalit so‘zlar
authorial voice, scientific discourse, cultural influence, rhetorical structure, pedagogyAnnotasiya
This article explores how linguistic features contribute to the construction of authorial voice in scientific discourse. Drawing upon theoretical frameworks and empirical studies, it examines how voice is realized through stance, hedges, self-mention and engagement. The article highlights the challenges faced by second language (L2) writers in projecting voice and proposes pedagogical strategies to support their development. Through a critical review of literature, the study argues that voice is not merely a stylistic choice but a rhetorical and epistemological necessity in scientific communication.
Foydalanilgan adabiyotlar ro‘yhati
Fløttum, K. Dahl T. & Kinn. T. (2006). Academic voices. Across languages and disciplines. John Benjamins.
Hu. G. & Cao F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11). 2795 – 2809.
Hyland. K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8). 1091-1112.
Hyland. K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies. 7(2). 173-192.
Ivanič. R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins.
Matsuda P. K. (2001). Voice in Japanese written discourse: Implications for second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1–2) 35–53.
Stock P. & Eik-Nes. N. L. (2016). Voice features in academic writing: From textual and rhetorical to social and pedagogical. Nordic Journal of English Studies 15(3) 4–36.
Zhao C. G. (2017). Evaluating authorial voice in English academic writing: The case of Chinese students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 28. 10–20.
