BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

Önlem Alma Yapılarının Gazete Köşe Yazılarındaki İletişimsel İşlevleri

Yıl 2009, Sayı: 17, 56 - 68, 01.01.2009

Öz

Belirsizlik ve olasılık ifade eden önlem alma yapıları, bilimsel ve teknik metinlerin en önemli özelliklerindendir. Bu çalışmada önlem alma yapılarının gazete makalelerinde de kullanıldığı ancak iletişimsel işlevlerinin bilimsel makalelere göre farklılaştığı savı öne sürülmektedir. Bu çalışmanın bütüncesi 20542 sözcükten ve 43 gazete köşe yazısından oluşturulmuştur. Bu yapıların sıklıkları belirlenmiş ve oluşturulan bütüncedeki sözcük sayısına oranlanmıştır. Bu tip yapıların istatistiksel bakımdan incelenmesi sadece araştırmanın nicel özelliklerini karşılar ve yetersiz olabilir. Bu çalışmada nitel ve nicel inceleme birbirini tamamlayıcı şekilde yapılmıştır. Önlem alma yapılarının bilimsel makalelerde belirsizlik göstermek için kullanıldıkları gazete köşe yazılarında ise hem belirsizlik, hem kesinlik ifade etmek için kullanıldıkları gözlenmiştir. Ayrıca bu tür araçlar, bilimsel metinlerde yüz koruma stratejisi olarak, olumsuz kibarlık ifade ederken, gazete makalelerinde kullanılmaktadırlar

Kaynakça

  • BHATIA, V. K., (1993), Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings: Longman, UK.
  • BENDAREK, M.(2006), Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus: Continuum International Publishing Group.
  • BROWN, P. ve S. LEVINSON (1987), Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage: Cambridge, CUP.
  • COHEN, A. (1999), “Generics, Frequency Adverbs and Probability”, Linguistics and Philosophy, 22: 221-253.
  • CROMPTON, P. (1997), “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems”, English For Specific Purposes, IV, 16: 271-287.
  • CRISMORE, A ve FARNSWORTH, R. (1990), “Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse”, W.NASH (ed.). The writing scholar: Sage Publications,118-136.
  • CRYSTAL, D., (1997), The Cambridge Encylopedia of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
  • DAFOUZ-MILNE, E. (2008), “The Pragmatic Role of Textual and Interpersonal Metadiscourse Markers in the Construction and Attainment Of Persuasion: A Cross- Linguistic Study of Newspaper Discourse”, Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 95-113.
  • DARIAN, S. (1982), “The Role of Definitions in Scientific and Technical Writing: Forms, Functions and Properties”, A. Hodet, L. Lundguist, H. Picht ve J. Qvistgaard (ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on LSP: Copenhagen, The LSP Centre.
  • DELAHAYE (ed.), Beads or Bracelet: How Do We Approach LSP, Leuven: Oxford University Press: 172-180.
  • FRASER, B., (1996), Pragmatic Markers, Boston.
  • HYLAND, K. (1996), “Writing without Conviction? Hedging in Research Science Articles”, Applied Linguistics. XVII, 4: OUP.
  • KERSLAKE, C. (1996), “The semantics of possibility in Turkish”, Current Issues In Turkish Linguistics, 84-104, Hitit Yayınevi
  • LAKOFF, G. (1972), “Analysis of a Native Speaker Cloze Test”, Language Testing, II, 3: 130-146.
  • QUIRK et. al (1987), A Comprehensive Grammar of The English Language: Longman
  • SALAGER-MEYER, F. (1994), “Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse”, English for specific purposes, II, 13: 149-170.
  • VARTTALA, T. (1999), “Remarks on the Communicative Functions of Hedging in Popular Scientific and Research Articles on Medicine”, English For Specific Purposes, II, 18: 177-200.
  • ZHANG, Q. (1998), “Fuzziness – Vagueness – Generality – Ambiguity”, Journal of Pragmatics, 29: 13-31.
  • ZUCK, J G., ve ZUCK L. V. (1985), “Hedging in Newswriting” içinde A. M. CORNU, J. VANPARIJS, ve M.

Communicative Functions of Hedging Devices in Turkish Newspaper Articles

Yıl 2009, Sayı: 17, 56 - 68, 01.01.2009

Öz

Hedging, the expression of tentativeness and possibility by means of epistemic devices is one of the most important features of technical and scientific texts. In this study, it is hypothesised that hedging can also be applied frequently in popular texts like newspaper articles. The corpus of this study includes 43 articles from various daily Turkish newspapers. The corpus contains 20542 running words. The number of hedging devices was recorded in each article seperately and the percentage of hedges with respect to the total number of running words was computed. The quantitavive analysis alone might sometimes be insufficent; therefore, both the qualitative and quantitative analysis were complementary in this study. It has been observed that hedging is an indication of textul tool for both imprecision and precision as well as a feature of interpersonal positive politeness in newspaper columns as opposed to scientific articles

Kaynakça

  • BHATIA, V. K., (1993), Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings: Longman, UK.
  • BENDAREK, M.(2006), Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a Newspaper Corpus: Continuum International Publishing Group.
  • BROWN, P. ve S. LEVINSON (1987), Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage: Cambridge, CUP.
  • COHEN, A. (1999), “Generics, Frequency Adverbs and Probability”, Linguistics and Philosophy, 22: 221-253.
  • CROMPTON, P. (1997), “Hedging in Academic Writing: Some Theoretical Problems”, English For Specific Purposes, IV, 16: 271-287.
  • CRISMORE, A ve FARNSWORTH, R. (1990), “Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse”, W.NASH (ed.). The writing scholar: Sage Publications,118-136.
  • CRYSTAL, D., (1997), The Cambridge Encylopedia of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Pres.
  • DAFOUZ-MILNE, E. (2008), “The Pragmatic Role of Textual and Interpersonal Metadiscourse Markers in the Construction and Attainment Of Persuasion: A Cross- Linguistic Study of Newspaper Discourse”, Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 95-113.
  • DARIAN, S. (1982), “The Role of Definitions in Scientific and Technical Writing: Forms, Functions and Properties”, A. Hodet, L. Lundguist, H. Picht ve J. Qvistgaard (ed.), Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium on LSP: Copenhagen, The LSP Centre.
  • DELAHAYE (ed.), Beads or Bracelet: How Do We Approach LSP, Leuven: Oxford University Press: 172-180.
  • FRASER, B., (1996), Pragmatic Markers, Boston.
  • HYLAND, K. (1996), “Writing without Conviction? Hedging in Research Science Articles”, Applied Linguistics. XVII, 4: OUP.
  • KERSLAKE, C. (1996), “The semantics of possibility in Turkish”, Current Issues In Turkish Linguistics, 84-104, Hitit Yayınevi
  • LAKOFF, G. (1972), “Analysis of a Native Speaker Cloze Test”, Language Testing, II, 3: 130-146.
  • QUIRK et. al (1987), A Comprehensive Grammar of The English Language: Longman
  • SALAGER-MEYER, F. (1994), “Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse”, English for specific purposes, II, 13: 149-170.
  • VARTTALA, T. (1999), “Remarks on the Communicative Functions of Hedging in Popular Scientific and Research Articles on Medicine”, English For Specific Purposes, II, 18: 177-200.
  • ZHANG, Q. (1998), “Fuzziness – Vagueness – Generality – Ambiguity”, Journal of Pragmatics, 29: 13-31.
  • ZUCK, J G., ve ZUCK L. V. (1985), “Hedging in Newswriting” içinde A. M. CORNU, J. VANPARIJS, ve M.
Toplam 19 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Araştırma Makaleleri
Yazarlar

Zeynep Doyuran Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 1 Ocak 2009
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2009 Sayı: 17

Kaynak Göster

APA Doyuran, Z. (2009). Önlem Alma Yapılarının Gazete Köşe Yazılarındaki İletişimsel İşlevleri. Türkbilig(17), 56-68.