IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i1p21582440241229809.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Corpus-Based Study of Metaphor of Modalization in English Academic Writing

Author

Listed:
  • Chunmei Chen
  • Qingshun He

Abstract

Metaphor of modality in the Hallidayan linguistic framework is manifested through a transition from implicit modal expressions to explicit modal expressions, encompassing metaphor of modalization and metaphor of modulation. This article conducts a corpus-based investigation to examine the prevalence of metaphors of modalization in English academic writing. The study, which relies on data from the British National Corpus (BNC), reveals that modal expressions are more frequently used in less technical texts (i.e., in spoken texts rather than in written texts with regard to mode, in fiction texts rather than in academic texts with regard to genre, and in hard science texts rather than in soft science texts with regard to discipline). Furthermore, explicit subjective and explicit objective modal expressions exhibit opposite distribution patterns across modes, genres, and academic disciplines. Based on this general distribution pattern, this study then examines three distinct groups of PhD dissertations. It becomes evident that Chinese English as a Foreign Language (EFL) writers employ significantly fewer subjective projecting clauses compared to proficient native English writers in their academic writing. This difference arises from the rigorous training Chinese EFL learners receive, emphasizing the avoidance of authorial identity in academic writing. This study hereby concludes that while English academic writing may be becoming less formal, author involvement should not be encouraged in relatively more technical academic texts.

Suggested Citation

  • Chunmei Chen & Qingshun He, 2024. "A Corpus-Based Study of Metaphor of Modalization in English Academic Writing," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1), pages 21582440241, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241229809
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241229809
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241229809
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241229809?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:1:p:21582440241229809. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.