Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/90437
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Englishen_US
dc.creatorChen, Len_US
dc.creatorHu, Gen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-09T02:26:41Z-
dc.date.available2021-07-09T02:26:41Z-
dc.identifier.issn0024-3841en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/90437-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rights© 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.rights© 2020. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Chen, L., & Hu, G. (2020). Surprise markers in applied linguistics research articles: A diachronic perspective. Lingua, 248, 102992 is available at https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102992.en_US
dc.subjectDiachronic changeen_US
dc.subjectFrame semanticsen_US
dc.subjectKnowledge emotionen_US
dc.subjectResearch articleen_US
dc.subjectSurprise markeren_US
dc.subjectThe emotion of surpriseen_US
dc.titleSurprise markers in applied linguistics research articles : a diachronic perspectiveen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume248en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102992en_US
dcterms.abstractThis paper reports on a corpus-based study of linguistic expressions of surprise (i.e., a type of attitude markers functioning as metadiscourse) in 160 applied linguistics research articles that were published in two periods of time separated by 30 years. Unlike previous research on metadiscourse, this study took a frame semantics perspective on surprise as a knowledge emotion and adopted a fine-grained, frame-based analytical framework to examine diachronic trends in the use of surprise markers and their co-occurrence with other types of metadiscourse (i.e., boosters, hedges, and self-mentions). Binary logistic regressions revealed that compared with research articles published earlier, those published more recently were 2.16 times more likely to express surprises triggered by prior knowledge, 2.37 times more likely to express surprises without providing an explanation, and 2.28 times more likely to indicate surprises without resolving them. These results can be explained in terms of the heuristic nature of surprise and the escalating pressure on academics to promote their research strategically.en_US
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationLingua, Dec. 2020, v. 248, 102992en_US
dcterms.isPartOfLinguaen_US
dcterms.issued2020-12-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85096191136-
dc.identifier.artn102992en_US
dc.description.validate202107 bcvcen_US
dc.description.oaAccepted Manuscripten_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumbera0959-n01-
dc.identifier.SubFormID2208-
dc.description.fundingSourceSelf-fundeden_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Chen_Surprise_Applied_Linguistics.pdfPre-Published version1.17 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Final Accepted Manuscript
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

77
Last Week
2
Last month
Citations as of May 19, 2024

Downloads

59
Citations as of May 19, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

12
Citations as of May 16, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

11
Citations as of May 16, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.