UDC

81ʼ42:[811.161.1+811.111]

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V423

Authors

Oksana N. Chalova
Cand Sci. (Philol.), Assoc. Prof. at the Department of Theory and Practice of the English Language, Francisk Skorina Gomel State University (address: ul. Sovetskaya 104, Gomel, 246027, Republic of Belarus), Doctoral Candidate, Department of Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, Minsk State Linguistic University (address: ul. Zakharova 21, Minsk, 220034, Republic of Belarus).
e-mail: oksana-chalova@mail.ru, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0009-0003-9811-4005

Abstract

The object of this research is scientific dialogue interpreted as a form of communication at the interface of two types of discourse – scientific (as a recipient discourse) and everyday (as a donor discourse, having a significant influence on the initial parameters of scientific discourse). The paper substantiates the idea that in the conditions of dialogue, everyday communication greatly affects the axiological structure of scientific discourse, which is reflected in the following ways: 1) activation of negative evaluative statements and diversification of their functions; 2) use of direct critical comments (expressing disagreement, objection, doubt, etc.); 3) active use of two opposite methods – de-intensification, i.e. softening (through initial approval, admittance of possible wrongness of the criticism, etc.), and intensification (through various techniques or words, e.g. intensifying adverbs amplifying the negative semantics) of negative evaluation; 4) expansion of the object of negative evaluation (by aiming it at external facts and phenomena, which can transform professional evaluation into personal or naïve). The study is based on the material of Russian and English as the main languages of international scientific communication. The author concludes that the two national variants of scientific dialogue have similar tendencies in terms of negative evaluation: activation and direct expression of negative evaluation, as well as its intensified or de-intensified use and expansion of its object. At the same time, a specific nature of verbalization of negative evaluation in the Russian scientific dialogue is emphasized. The results obtained can be applied in teaching scientists and academics the norms of polemical speech, including in an international setting.

Keywords

oral scientific dialogue, Russian scientific discourse, English scientific discourse, explicit negative evaluation, softened negative evaluation, intensified negative evaluation

References

1. Kozhina M.N. O dialogichnosti pis’mennoy nauchnoy rechi [On the Dialogic Nature of Written Scientific Speech]. Perm, 1986. 91 p.
2. Kondratenko A.I. Kategoriya ekspertnoy otsenki v nauchnom diskurse (na materiale nemetskoy i rossiyskoy lingvistiki) [The Category of Expert Assessment in Scientific Discourse (Based on the Material of German and Russian Linguistics): Diss.]. St. Petersburg, 2023. 126 p.
3. Solov’yanova E.V. Agonal’nost’ v akademicheskom diskurse [Agonism in Academic Discourse: Diss.]. Voronezh, 2021. 471 p.
4. Danilevskaya N.V. Nauchnyy tekst kak dinamika otsenochnykh deystviy [Scientific Text as a Dynamics of Evaluative Actions]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Rossiyskaya i zarubezhnaya filologiya, 2009, no. 2, pp. 20–28.
5. Guangwei Hu, Lang Chen. “To Our Great Surprise...”: A Frame-Based Analysis of Surprise Markers in Research Articles. J. Pragmat., 2019, vol. 143, pp. 156–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2019.02.021
6. Tutin A. Surprise Routines in Scientific Writing: A Study of French Social Science Articles. Rev. Cogn. Linguist., 2015, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 415–435. https://doi.org/10.1075/rcl.13.2.06tut
7. Jian-E Peng. Authorial Voice Constructed in Citation in Literature Reviews of Doctoral Theses: Variations Across Training Contexts. J. Engl. Acad. Purp., 2019, vol. 37, pp. 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.001
8. Zadvornaya E.G., Sadovskaya E.Yu. Aksiologicheskaya spetsifika diskursa: voprosy otsenki [Axiological Specifics of Discourse: Assessment Issues]. Biznes. Innovatsii. Ekonomika [Business. Innovation. Economics]. Minsk, 2017, pp. 152–158.
9. Maslova L.N. Vyrazhenie soglasiya/nesoglasiya v ustnoy nauchnoy kommunikatsii: gendernyy aspekt [Expression of Agreement/Disagreement in Oral Scientific Communication: Gender Aspect: Diss.]. Moscow, 2007. 192 p.
10. Solov’eva N.V. Tolerantnost’ v nauchnoy diskussii: lingvostilisticheskiy aspekt: na materiale tekstov nauchnykh diskussiy 1950–2000-kh gg. [Toleration in Scientific Discussion: Linguistic and Stylistic Aspect: Based on the Texts of Scientific Discussions of 1950–2000: Diss.]. Perm, 2007. 244 p.
11. Bruce I. Academic Writing and Genre: A Systematic Analysis. London, 2008. 194 p.
12. Charles M., Pecorari D., Hunston S. Academic Writing: At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse. London, 2009. 303 p.
13. Bazhenova E.A. Struktura novogo znaniya v nauchnom tekste [The Structure of New Knowledge in a Scientific Text]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta, 2020, no. 4, pp. 144–151. https://doi.org/10.23951/1609-624X-2020-4-144-151
14. Savchuk T.V. Semantiko-pragmaticheskie oshibki v nauchnoy argumentatsii (na materiale russkikh i belorusskikh gumanitarnykh tekstov) [Semantic-Pragmatic Fallacies in Scientific Argumentation (on the Material of Russian and Belarusian Texts in Humanities)]. Global’nye i lokal’nye protsessy v slavyanskikh yazykakh, literaturakh, kul’turakh 2 [Global and Local Processes in Slavic Languages, Literatures and Cultures 2]. Riga, 2019, pp. 135–147. https://doi.org/10.22364/ruslat.glp.15
15. Savtchouk T.N. The Tactic of Emotional Amplification of Argumentation in the Written Discourse of the Humanities. Tomsk State Univ. J., 2022, no. 478, рр. 30–43 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17223/15617793/478/4
16. Chernyavskaya V.E. Evaluative Language in Scientific Discourse: Terminological Framework and Methodological Perspectives. Perm Univ. Her. Russ. Foreign Philol., 2022, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 44–55 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17072/2073-6681-2022-3-44-55
17. Arutyunova N.D. Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the World of a Person]. Moscow, 1999. 896 p.
18. Nefedov S. T. The Variety of Evaluation in Communicative Practices of Academic Discourse. Vestn. St. Petersb. Univ. Lang. Lit., 2021, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 760–778 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.408