Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts

<p>The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007 and 2012 in the quarterly issues of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Daniela Cesiri
Format: Article
Language:deu
Published: Università del Salento 2016-01-01
Series:Lingue e Linguaggi
Subjects:
Online Access:http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/linguelinguaggi/article/view/14655
id doaj-d76288b4d7f24587a7296ffb4e03a61f
record_format Article
spelling doaj-d76288b4d7f24587a7296ffb4e03a61f2020-11-24T23:47:48ZdeuUniversità del SalentoLingue e Linguaggi2239-03672239-03592016-01-01009911114645Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology AbstractsDaniela Cesiri<p>The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007 and 2012 in the quarterly issues of three leading journals in the field, i.e. the <em>Journal of Archaeological Research</em>, the <em>Cambridge Archaeological Journal</em> and the <em>Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory</em>, which rank at the first three places in the SCOPUS database for the domain of archaeology. The study investigates the way archaeology abstracts report prior research, including the presence/absence of implicit/explicit evaluation, how archaeology authors structure this evaluation, the linguistic expressions they use, the place occupied by evaluation of prior research in the in the abstract’s rhetorical macrostructure. Results from the present work are analysed against already existing research on other academic disciplines in order to collocate archaeology along the disciplines’ continuum that includes the hard and the soft sciences at its extremes. Data show that abstracts in archaeology, as in other disciplines, tend to avoid open confrontationality, favouring criticism toward abstract entities.</p>http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/linguelinguaggi/article/view/14655The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007
collection DOAJ
language deu
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Daniela Cesiri
spellingShingle Daniela Cesiri
Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
Lingue e Linguaggi
The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007
author_facet Daniela Cesiri
author_sort Daniela Cesiri
title Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
title_short Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
title_full Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
title_fullStr Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
title_full_unstemmed Re-Mediation of Academic Knowledge: Reporting and Evaluating Prior Research in Archaeology Abstracts
title_sort re-mediation of academic knowledge: reporting and evaluating prior research in archaeology abstracts
publisher Università del Salento
series Lingue e Linguaggi
issn 2239-0367
2239-0359
publishDate 2016-01-01
description <p>The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007 and 2012 in the quarterly issues of three leading journals in the field, i.e. the <em>Journal of Archaeological Research</em>, the <em>Cambridge Archaeological Journal</em> and the <em>Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory</em>, which rank at the first three places in the SCOPUS database for the domain of archaeology. The study investigates the way archaeology abstracts report prior research, including the presence/absence of implicit/explicit evaluation, how archaeology authors structure this evaluation, the linguistic expressions they use, the place occupied by evaluation of prior research in the in the abstract’s rhetorical macrostructure. Results from the present work are analysed against already existing research on other academic disciplines in order to collocate archaeology along the disciplines’ continuum that includes the hard and the soft sciences at its extremes. Data show that abstracts in archaeology, as in other disciplines, tend to avoid open confrontationality, favouring criticism toward abstract entities.</p>
topic The aim of the present study is to analyse a corpus of 163 research article abstracts in archaeology, an academic domain which, so far, has encountered little attention by linguists. The abstracts and the accompanying articles were published between 2007
url http://siba-ese.unisalento.it/index.php/linguelinguaggi/article/view/14655
work_keys_str_mv AT danielacesiri remediationofacademicknowledgereportingandevaluatingpriorresearchinarchaeologyabstracts
_version_ 1725488607072878592