PASAA
Publication Date
2013-07-01
Abstract
This corpus-based study investigates cross-disciplinary differences in the use of politeness strategies in research articles (RAs). The corpus consists of thirty-six RAs from applied linguistics, educational technology, and economics journals published in the year 2009. The data were statistically analyzed. Findings indicate that in academic/ research writing, writers employed both positive and negative politeness strategies when expressing opinions but the negative politeness strategies, especially impersonality devices and hedges, were the most frequently used by writers of RAs in the three disciplines. The use of impersonality and the use of hedging devices play a vital part in RAs especially in the Introduction, Results, and Discussion sections where writers mitigate the imposition and reduce their commitment to the truth of their claims. With regard to cross-disciplinary differences, differences were found only in the use of positive politeness strategies. The first strategy "claiming common grounds" was used most often in Economics and least often in Technology. With reference to the second strategy "the use of the inclusive pronoun "we" and its related cases", significant differences were found across the three disciplines. The use of this strategy was more frequent in Applied Linguistics than in Economics or Technology.
DOI
10.58837/CHULA.PASAA.46.1.3
First Page
47
Last Page
74
Recommended Citation
Getkham, Kunyarut
(2013)
"Politeness Strategies in Research Articles: A Cross-disciplinary Study,"
PASAA: Vol. 46:
Iss.
1, Article 3.
DOI: 10.58837/CHULA.PASAA.46.1.3
Available at:
https://digital.car.chula.ac.th/pasaa/vol46/iss1/3