Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributorFacultad de Filosofia y Letrasen_US
dc.contributor.authorMoreno Fernández, Ana Isabel 
dc.contributor.authorSuárez, Lorena
dc.contributor.otherFilologia Inglesaen_US
dc.date2011-08-23
dc.date.accessioned2011-09-27T15:36:46Z
dc.date.available2011-09-27T15:36:46Z
dc.date.issued2011-09-27
dc.identifier.citationCrossed Words: Criticism in the Academy / Françoise Salager-Meyer and Beverly A. Lewin (eds).en_US
dc.identifier.isbn978-3-0343-0049en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10612/1114
dc.description345 p.en_US
dc.description.abstractOne important academic writing skill is the ability of writers to construe an appropriate representation of themselves and their work through their textual voice. One way in which writers achieve this is by intruding into their text in order to explicitly signal or conceal their personal responsibility for the ideas referenced in it. However, writers’ decisions in this respect have shown to be highly problematic in English for Academic Purposes (EAP), especially for non-native English speakers. Our paper hypothesizes that a part of this problem might be related to differing crosscultural notions of good face, partly reflected in the ways and the extent to which writers typically intrude into their texts by means of writers’ visibility and invisibility strategies. We explore this hypothesis by comparing the actual practices followed by writers from two different writing cultures to express one specific type of claim (a critical comment on a book under review) in one specific genre (an academic book review) and one disciplinary field (literature). Our comparison is based on two corpora consisting of 20 texts in British & American English and 20 in Castilian Spanish. The results show that reviewers from these two writing cultures differ greatly in their preferences for reaffirming or suppressing their personal identity when expressing critical comments on a book under review. This indicates that the notion of good face is culturally determined in this respect. We discuss our results in the light of information obtained through a pilot e-mail interview with relevant informants.en_US
dc.languageengen_US
dc.publisherBern, Switzerldand: Peter Lang, 2011en_US
dc.subjectLengua españolaen_US
dc.subjectLengua inglesaen_US
dc.subjectLingüísticaen_US
dc.subjectLiteraturaen_US
dc.subjectLiteratura españolaen_US
dc.subjectLiteratura inglesaen_US
dc.subject.otherEnglish for academic purposesen_US
dc.subject.otherSpanish for academic purposesen_US
dc.subject.otherCrosscultural studiesen_US
dc.subject.otherIntercultural rhetoricen_US
dc.subject.otherAcademic Book Reviewsen_US
dc.subject.otherAuthor's voiceen_US
dc.subject.otherExpression of criticismen_US
dc.subject.otherCritical commentsen_US
dc.titleAcademic book reviews of literature in English and Spanish: writers’ visibility and invisibility strategies for expressing critical commentsen_US
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bookPartes_ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/bookParten_US
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesses_ES


Ficheros en el ítem

Thumbnail

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem