Exploring the Interpersonal Functions of Negation in Science Writing Across 35 Years

Researchers’ investment in reader engagement includes the construction of an appealing abstract. While numerous studies have been conducted on abstracts’ rhetorical features, scant empirical attention has been paid to negation use in academic writing. The current study seeks to narrow the research gap from a general and diachronic perspective by adopting an interpersonal model of negation. We found that while not, no, and little tend to be the commonly used negative markers in Science abstracts, little increased diachronically but decreased for not and no. Functionally, writers prefer to use interactive negations and employ relatively more negative markers that function as consequence (interactive dimension) and hedging (interactional dimension) in their abstracts. Finally, we discuss the possible reasons for such results as well as their pedagogical implications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2024-08-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883241263525
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
7.82
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring the Interpersonal Functions of Negation in Science Writing Across 35 Years

Mingxin Yao, Huiyu Wang, Ying Wei
2 citations
Written Communication
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
7.82
article

Exploring the Interpersonal Functions of Negation in Science Writing Across 35 Years

Mingxin Yao, Huiyu Wang, Ying Wei
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Researchers’ investment in reader engagement includes the construction of an appealing abstract. While numerous studies have been conducted on abstracts’ rhetorical features, scant empirical attention has been paid to negation use in academic writing. The current study seeks to narrow the research gap from a general and diachronic perspective by adopting an interpersonal model of negation. We found that while not, no, and little tend to be the commonly used negative markers in Science abstracts, little increased diachronically but decreased for not and no. Functionally, writers prefer to use interactive negations and employ relatively more negative markers that function as consequence (interactive dimension) and hedging (interactional dimension) in their abstracts. Finally, we discuss the possible reasons for such results as well as their pedagogical implications.

Written CommunicationVol. 41(4)
Harbin Institute of Petroleum (CN), Nanjing University (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
7.82
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.