Linguocultural evaluation specifics in German and Russian reviews on sociology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2023.107Abstract
The article raises the issue of linguocultural specifics of evaluation strategies in scientific expert practices of Russia and Germany. The relevance of the work is explained by its inclusion in the modern context of interdisciplinary studies and its focus on linguistic, sociolinguistic and linguoculturological aspects of examination of evaluative linguistic means. It is revealed that the communicative practice of scientific expertise is pivotal for verification and axiomatisation of scientific knowledge. The material for the study are German and Russian corpora of scientific sociology reviews, with the evaluation predication being chosen as the main analysis unit. The analysis of predications is carried out using qualitative and quantitative methods, including both statistical analysis of quantitative corpus data and their interpretation based on context, authorial intention and the type of specific evaluative meanings within the frame-work of real communicative practices. The novelty of the study consists in the identification of sociolinguistic features of rational and emotional evaluation procedures in scientific sociological discourse in Russia and Germany. It is found that German- and Russian-speaking reviewers use different specific evaluation strategies. Whereas in German-language sociological reviews, the focus is on rational evaluation by validity, clarity and completeness criteria for an objectively detached work examination, Russian reviewers widely use emotional evaluation to express their attitude and personal interest. German-language reviews are generally characterised by a significantly higher degree of evaluative saturation, with evaluations roughly equally distributed into the positive and negative groups, in contrast to Russian-language reviews, where negative evaluations are scarcely found.
Keywords:
scientific discourse, scientific expert practice, evaluation, authorial stance, sociology expert reviews
Downloads
References
Литература
Арутюнова 1999 — Арутюнова Н. Д. Язык и мир человека. 2-е изд., испр. М.: Языки русской культуры, 1999.
Косолапов 2003 — Косолапов Н. А. Глоссарий по политической психологии. М.: Рос. ун-т дружбы народов, 2003.
Нефедов 2017 — Нефедов С. Т. Реcтриктивная аргументация: модальные слова сомнения и общезначимости (на материале немецкоязычных лингвистических статей). Вестник Санкт- Петербургского университета. Язык и литература. 2017, 14 (4): 599–610. https://doi. org/10.21638/11701/spbu09.2017.408
Нефедов 2021 — Нефедов С. Т. Варьирование оценки в коммуникативных практиках научного дискурса. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Язык и литература. 2021, 18 (4): 760–778. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.408
Полонский 2015 — Полонский В. М. Критерии и методы оценки качества педагогических и междисциплинарных исследований. Образовательные технологии. 2015, (4): 12–27.
Рахматулина 2019 — Рахматулина Р. Ш. Критерии оценки результатов научных исследований образовательных бюджетных организаций. Экономика. Налоги. Право. 2019, 12 (1): 144–151. https:// doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2019-12-1-144-151
Трофимова 2020 — Трофимова Н. А. Рацио и эмоцио в повседневной коммуникации. В кн.: Манукян Я. А., Мегрелишвили Т. Г., Рязановский Л. М. и др. Ratio at Emotio: Рациональное и эмоциональное в языке и речи. СПб.: Русская христианская гуманитарная академия, 2020. С. 10–31.
Чернявская 2021 — Чернявская В. Е. Текст и социальный контекст: Социолингвистический и дискурсивный анализ смыслопорождения. М.: Ленанд, 2021.
Шаховский 2008 — Шаховский В. И. Лингвистическая теория эмоций. М.: Гнозис, 2008.
Du Bois 2007 — Du Bois J. W. Stancetaking in Discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Pub- lishing Co., 2007.
Conrad, Biber 2000 — Conrad S., Biber D. Adverbial Marking of Stance in Speech and Writing. In: Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Hunston S., Thompson G. (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. P. 56–73. https://dx.doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2013.1028
Grund 2021 — Grund P. J. The Sociopragmatics of Stance. Community, Language, and the Witness Depositionsfrom the Salem Witch Trials. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.329
Hausendorf et al. 2017 — Hausendorf H., Kesselheim W., Kato H., Breitholz M. Textkommunikation. Ein textlinguistischer Neuansatz zur Theorie und Empirie der Kommunikation mit und durch Schrift. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 2017.
Hunston, Thompson 2000 — Hunston S., Thompson G. Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Con- struction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Hyland 2005 — Hyland K. Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies. 2005, 7 (2): 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
Kiesling 2022 — Kiesling Sc. F. Operationalizing Theoretical Constructs in Digital Discourse Analysis. In: Research Methods for Digital Discourse Analysis. Vásquez C. (ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing,2022.
Martin, White 2007 — Martin J. R., White P. R. The Language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Nefedov 2019 — Nefedov S. T. Towards Evaluation in Scientific Reviews (Based on German Linguistics).
Journal of Siberian Federal University — Humanities and Social Sciences. 2019, 12 (10): 1868–1886. https://doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0494
Stein 2011 — Stein St. Kommunikative Praktiken, kommunikative Gattungen und Textsorten. Konzepte und Methoden für die Untersuchung mündlicher und schriftlicher Kommunikation im Vergleich. In: Institutionalisierter Alltag: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit in unterschiedlichen Praxisfeldern. Birkner K., Meer D. (Hrsg.). Mannheim: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung, 2011. S. 8–27.Weinrich 1989 — Weinrich H. Formen der Wissenschaftssprache. In: Jahrbuch 1988 der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1989. S. 119–158.
Weinrich 2006 — Weinrich H. Sprache, das heißt Sprachen. 3. Aufl. Tübingen: Narr, 2006.
Weinrich 2007 — Weinrich H. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. 4., revid. Aufl. Hildesheim; Zürich; New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 2007.
References
Арутюнова 1999 — Arutiunova N. D. Language and world of human. 2nd ed. Мoscow: Iazyki russkoi kul’tury Publ., 1999. (In Russian)
Косолапов 2003 — Kosolapov N. A. Glossary of political psychology. Moscow: Rossiiskii universitet druzhby narodov Publ., 2003. (In Russian)
Нефедов 2017 — Nefedov S. T. Restrictive Argumentation: Modal Words of Doubt and Shared Knowledge in Academic Linguistic Writings. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature. 2017,14 (4): 599–610. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu09.2017.408 (In Russian)
Нефедов 2021 — Nefedov S. T. The variety of evaluation in communicative practices of academic discourse. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature. 2021, 18 (4): 760–778. https://doi. org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.408 (In Russian)
Полонский 2015 — Polonskij V. M. Criteria and methods for assessing the quality of pedagogical and interdisciplinary research. Obrazovatel’nye tekhnologii. 2015, (4): 12–27. (In Russian)
Рахматулина 2019 — Rakhmatulina R. Sh. Criteria for assessing research findings of educational budgetary institutions. Ekonomika. Nalogi. Pravo. 2019, 12 (1): 144–151. https://doi.org/10.26794/1999-849X-2019-12-1-144-151 (In Russian)
Трофимова 2020 — Trofimova N. A. Ratio and emotio in everyday communication. In: Manukian Ia. A., Megrelishvili T. G., Riazanovskii L. M. et al. Ratio at Emotio: Ratsional’noe i emotsional’noe v iazyke i rechi. St Petersburg: Russkaia khristianskaia gumanitarnaia akademiia Publ., 2020. P. 10–31. (In Russian)
Чернявская 2021 — Chernyavskaya V. E. Text and social context: Sociolinguistic and discourse analysis of meaning generation. Moscow: Lenand Publ., 2021. (In Russian)
Шаховский 2008 — Shahovskij V. I. Linguistic theory of emotions. Moscow: Gnozis Publ., 2008. (In Russian) Du Bois 2007 — Du Bois J. W. Stancetaking in Discourse. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co., 2007.
Conrad, Biber 2000 — Conrad S., Biber D. Adverbial Marking of Stance in Speech and Writing. In: Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Hunston S., Thompson G. (eds). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000. P. 56–73. https://dx.doi.org/10.4995/rlyla.2013.1028
Grund 2021 — Grund P. J. The Sociopragmatics of Stance. Community, Language, and the Witness Depositions from the Salem Witch Trials. Amsterdam; Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.329
Hausendorf et al. 2017 — Hausendorf H., Kesselheim W., Kato H., Breitholz M. Textkommunikation. Ein textlinguistischer Neuansatz zur Theorie und Empirie der Kommunikation mit und durch Schrift. Berlin; New York: De Gruyter, 2017.
Hunston, Thompson 2000 — Hunston S., Thompson G. Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Hyland 2005 — Hyland K. Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies. 2005, 7 (2): 173–191. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
Kiesling 2022 — Kiesling Sc. F. Operationalizing Theoretical Constructs in Digital Discourse Analysis. Research Methods for Digital Discourse Analysis. Vásquez C. (ed.). London: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2022.
Martin, White 2007 — Martin J. R., White P. R. The Language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Nefedov 2019 — Nefedov S. T. Towards Evaluation in Scientific Reviews (Based on German Linguistics).
Journal of Siberian Federal University — Humanities and Social Sciences. 2019, 12 (10): 1868–1886. https://doi.org/10.17516/1997–1370–0494
Stein 2011 — Stein St. Kommunikative Praktiken, kommunikative Gattungen und Textsorten. Konzepte und Methoden für die Untersuchung mündlicher und schriftlicher Kommunikation im Vergleich. In: Institutionalisierter Alltag: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit in unterschiedlichen Praxisfeldern. Birk- ner K., Meer D. (Hrsg.). Mannheim: Verlag für Gesprächsforschung, 2011. S. 8–27.
Weinrich 1989 — Weinrich H. Formen der Wissenschaftssprache. In: Jahrbuch 1988 der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Berlin: De Gruyter, 1989. S. 119–158.
Weinrich 2006 — Weinrich H. Sprache, das heißt Sprachen. 3. Aufl. Tübingen: Narr, 2006.
Weinrich 2007 — Weinrich H. Textgrammatik der deutschen Sprache. 4., revid. Aufl. Hildesheim; Zürich; New York: Georg Olms Verlag, 2007.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Articles of "Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature" are open access distributed under the terms of the License Agreement with Saint Petersburg State University, which permits to the authors unrestricted distribution and self-archiving free of charge.
