40
Since listing conjuncts as a whole clearly prevail in the NNSC, where they
have the average frequency of occurrence 2.11, in comparison with 1.01 in
the NSC (cf. also Table 2-1 above), the following
example illustrates several
tokens of both enumerative (namely
first, second
and three tokens of
finally
)
and additive conjuncts (i.e
. moreover, similarly
) typically applied in non-native
speakers’ academic writing:
(3) NNSC, Text 2A
The length tendencies become even more apparent if we trace the
number of tokens. Here again, we decided to scrutinize the two extremes
of a cline.
First
, we focussed on the number of tokens of the longest
paragraphs (exceeding 10 C). Second, we surveyed the number of single-
C paragraphs. Paragraphs exceeding ten C turned out to be extremely
rare in both the journalism subcorpora (one paragraph in the newspaper
subcorpus out of 345 and six paragraphs in the magazine subcorpus).
They grew in significance in children’s fiction and natural sciences (11
instances each). However, the longest paragraphs turned out to be rather
common in humanities (48 tokens) and in adult fiction (60 instances). …
Finally
, we investigate the average length values. The mean paragraph
length in the overall research corpus corresponds to 4.49 C. Examining
individual style corpora shows some significant tendencies. The academic
corpus typically featured rather long paragraphs (5.70 C per paragraph
on average). It was followed by the fiction corpus with an average 4.39 C.
Finally
, journalism paragraphs tended to be the shortest of all (3.37 C).
Moreover
, we have noticed some striking differences even among the
subcorpora examined. The mean length value of the humanities subcorpus
(6.36 C per paragraph) exceeded its natural sciences counterpart (5.04
C).
Similarly
, the magazine subcorpus displayed on average longer
paragraphs (4.31 C) than its newspaper counterpart (2.42 C).
Finally,
with its 5.29 C to a paragraph, the adult fiction subcorpus prevailed in
length over the children’s fiction counterpart (3.49 C).
Example (3) provides evidence that the semantic category of listing conjuncts
is often used in order to help the reader(s) understand the path through a text full of
mostly quantitative information and thus help them interpret the text as a coherent
piece of discourse. As for
other voices entering the text, it is important to mention
here that the text in the above example has just one author although she uses the
personal pronoun
we
when referring to herself, i.e. to the single author of the text.
Probably this happens under the influence of the author’s mother tongue, since
in the Czech academic tradition it is quite common to
use the authorial plural
pronoun
we
even when the RA is single-authored (cf. Dontcheva-Navratilova
2012).
41
The most frequent listing conjunct of all in the NSC (0.34) and the second
most typical in the NNSC (0.31) – the enumerative conjunct
then
– is illustrated
in Example (4). Although
then
tends to be rather informal, the
author applies it
relatively often, for example when describing editorial procedure. Its common
use is probably connected with a slightly more informal style which usually
characterizes native speakers’ academic writing.
(4) NSC, Text 5
To begin, it may be useful to summarize briefly the whole editing procedure,
insofar as it concerns the English for Specific Purposes Journal. It is as
follows. When a manuscript is received, it is prepared for blind review
by having the name(s) of the author(s) removed, plus occasionally any
references that may give strong clues about the author’s identity. The
editor
then
selects two reviewers, usually members of the editorial board
who have expressed interest in the subject area, but also occasionally
people from outside the board with a particular expertise or interest in
the topic of the manuscript. The ‘blinded’ manuscript is
then
sent out to
the reviewers, who in turn send back their reviews within a specified time
period-usually two to three months. The editor will
then
read through the
manuscript and the reports and write the editorial letter, the main purpose
of which is to convey the editor’s decision about the manuscript and to
provide both a summary of the reviews and suggestions for revision of the
manuscript.
Finally, let me point out that one
token of a listing conjunct, namely the
additive conjunct
in addition
, is shown in Example (2) above. Since its
normalized frequency is slightly higher in the NSC (0.13) than in the NNSC
(0.07), it represents together with
then
those conjuncts
that are slightly more
frequent in the NSC, all the other listing conjuncts being more typically applied
in the NNSC (cf. Tables 2-1a and 2-1b above).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
