Skip Navigation

Applied Linguistics 1996 17(4):433-454; doi:10.1093/applin/17.4.433
© 1996 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (32)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by HYLAND, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Articles

Writing Without Conviction? Hedging in Science Research Articles

KEN HYLAND

English Department, City University of Hong Kong

Hedging is a well-documented feature of spoken discourse as a result of its role in qualifying categorical commitment and facilitating discussion Its use in academic writing has received less attention, however, and we know little about the functions it serves in different research fields and particular genres Hedging is a significant communicative resource for academics since it both confirms the individual's professional persona and represents a critical element in the rhetorical means of gaining acceptance of claims Hedges allow writers to anticipate possible opposition to claims by expressing statements with precision, caution, and diplomatic deference to the views of colleagues Based on a contextual analysis of 26 articles in molecular biology, this paper argues that hedging in scientific research writing cannot be fully understood in isolation from social and institutional contexts and suggests a pragmatic framework which reflects this interpretive environment


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Discourse StudiesHome page
Y. McLaren-Hankin
`We expect to report on significant progress in our product pipeline in the coming year': hedging forward-looking statements in corporate press releases
Discourse Studies, October 1, 2008; 10(5): 635 - 654.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Management Communication QuarterlyHome page
A. Whittle, F. Mueller, and A. Mangan
In Search of Subtlety: Discursive Devices and Rhetorical Competence
Management Communication Quarterly, August 1, 2008; 22(1): 99 - 122.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Written CommunicationHome page
G. Rundblad
Impersonal, General, and Social: The Use of Metonymy Versus Passive Voice in Medical Discourse
Written Communication, July 1, 2007; 24(3): 250 - 277.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied LinguisticsHome page
M. Charles
The Construction of Stance in Reporting Clauses: A Cross-disciplinary Study of Theses
Applied Linguistics, September 1, 2006; 27(3): 492 - 518.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Discourse StudiesHome page
J. Parkinson and R. Adendorff
Science books for children as a preparation for textbook literacy
Discourse Studies, May 1, 2005; 7(2): 213 - 236.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Theory PsychologyHome page
M. M. Smyth
Fact Making in Psychology: The Voice of the Introductory Textbook
Theory Psychology, October 1, 2001; 11(5): 609 - 636.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Business CommunicationHome page
K. Hyland
Exploring Corporate Rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the CEO's Letter
Journal of Business Communication, April 1, 1998; 35(2): 224 - 244.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.