Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Medical writings are generally standardized in language and concentrated on highly technical terms, but it can be difficult to understand due to its many forms and complexity as well. This paper adopts Hallidayan Functional Grammar to analyze nominalization in EMP (English for Medical Purpose) and the role played by it. With a corpus of Discussion Sections of 10 authentic medical papers by native English writers and 10 by Chinese academic writers drawn from very influential medical journals, the author has carried out a formal comparative analysis of three aspects: frequency of nominalization, lexical density. Firstly, what the author has attempted in this paper is to convince the readers that nominalization is a most powerful device in English by touching upon the relevant aspects with regard to nominalization: its wide range of morphological types as well as its typical functions in constructing EMP. Nominalization makes the whole text a solid block of information. Hence, the messages transferred by EMP allow little doubt or argument. It is shown that the roles played by nominalization are in accordance with the special requirements of EMP. Secondly, by identifying, analyzing and interpreting the nominalization in medical papers written by native English writers and Chinese writers from three aspects: the frequency of nominalization, lexical density and thematic progression, it has been found that nominalization accounts for the higher percentage for native writers, which serve to organize texts and might be the reason for their fluency and coherence. This paper suggests that nominalization plays a crucial role in building the logical structure of medical English papers and improving its formality. The results of the analysis show that Chinese writers have significantly insufficient use of nominalization in their medical papers. Accordingly, in teaching English academic writing to Chinese, attention should be paid to the application of nominalization. The author hopes that this paper will yield some insights and contribute to the studies of grammatical metaphor and the teaching of writing medical papers in China. Key words : Grammatical metaphor; Nominalization; English for Medical Purpose
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle