Popular Science as a Means of Emotional Engagement with the Scientific Community

Yıl 2016, Cilt 4 - Sayı 1, 118 - 125, 26.03.2016

Olga A. Pılkıngton

Öz

This article explores a debate (and its origins) which is taking place around the issue of science popularization. Although the participants are all describing popularization in various ways, the heart is in what makes a good popularization. The notion of this has changed from the 19th century view, which called for a simple and easy-to-understand text, to a more modern view, which suggests a good popularization engages the reader emotionally. This discussion might also be seen in a context of a more profound debate of science experts versus general public and what science and scientific knowledge mean to each group. The exploration of this relationship suggests a shift in the role lay public plays in science.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Science popularization , reader engagement , emotional engagement , knowledge theory

Field : History of Science, Linguistics Type : Research Article

Öz

Kaynakça

• Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a
• revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
• Bensaude-Vincent B (2001). A genealogy of the increasing gap between science and the
• public. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 99-113.
• Bucchi M (1998). Science and the media: Alternative routes in scientific communication.
• London, UK: Routledge.
• Calsamiglia H (2003). Popularization discourse. Discourse Studies, 5(2): 139-146.
• Caracciolo M (2013). Phenomenological metaphors in readers’ engagement with characters:
• the case of Ian McEwan’s Saturday. Language and Literature, 22(1): 60–76.
• de Jong T, Ferguson-Hessler MGM (1996). Types and qualities of knowledge. Educational
• Psychologist, 31(2): 105-113.
• Hyland K (2009). Corpus informed discourse analysis: The case of academic engagement. In
• M. Charles (Ed.), D. Pecorari (Ed.), S. Hunston (Ed.), Academic writing:at the interface of
• corpus and discourse (pp. 110-128). London, UK: Continuum.
• Hyland K (2010). Constructing proximity: relating to readers in popular and Professional
• science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9: 116-127.
• Keene M (2014). Familiar Science in nineteenth-century Britain. History of Science, 52(1):
• -71.
• Krathwohl DR (2002). A revision of Bloom's taxonomy: an overview. Theory into Practice,
• (4): 212-264.
• Laslo E, Baram-Tsabari A, Lewenstein BV (2011). A growth medium for the message: online
• science journalism affordances for exploring public discourse of science and ethics.
• Journalism, 12(7): 847–870.
• Lightman B (2000). Marketing knowledge for the general reader: Victorian popularizers of
• science. Endeavour, 24(3): 100-106.
• Luzón MJ (2013). Public communication of science in blogs: recontextualizing scientific
• discourse for a diversified audience. Written Communication, 30(4): 428–457.
• Moirand S (2003). Communicative and cognitive dimensions of discourse on science in the
• French mass media. Discourse Studies, 5(2): 175-206.
• Myers G (1990). Writing biology: texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge.
• Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
• Myers G (2003). Discourse studies of scientific popularization: questioning the boundaries.
• Discourse Studies, 5(2): 265-279.
• Myers G (2010). Discourse of blogs and wikis. London, UK: Continuum International
• Publishing.
• Supper A (2014). Sublime frequencies: the construction of sublime listening experiences in
• the sonification of scientific data. Social Studies of Science, 44(1): 34-58.
• Thompson G (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader.
• Applied Linguistics, 22(1): 58-78.
• Thompson G (2012). Intersubjectivity in newspaper editorials: constructing the reader-in-thetext.
• English Text Construction, 5(1): 77-100.
• Topham JR (2000). Scientific publishing and the reading of science in nineteenth-century
• Britain: a historiographical survey and guide to sources. Studies in History and Philosophy of
• Science, 31(4): 559-612.
• Turney J (2004). The abstract sublime: Life as information waiting to be rewritten. Science as
• Culture, 13(1), 89-103.
• Yang B (2003). Toward a holistic theory of knowledge and adult learning. Human Resource
• Development Review, 2(2), 106-129.