MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803769603 · doi:10.5539/ells.v8n2p108

Examining the Application of Grammatical Metaphors in Academic Writing

2018· article· en· W2803769603 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ying Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Language and Literature Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsCohesion (chemistry)Academic writingLinguisticsFormalityComputer scienceCompetence (human resources)PsychologyMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

English academic writing is a challenging task for Chinese EFL learners. For graduate students, they need systematic and explicit guidance to improve their academic writing competence. Grammatical metaphors are important resources for constructing academic discourse, and nominalization in ideational metaphors is regarded as the most powerful tool for achieving formality, objectivity, lexical density and text cohesion typical of academic papers. This article focuses on the role of grammatical metaphors in the production of quality academic written texts. It analyzes the function of grammatical metaphors in academic register and the application of these grammatical metaphors in creating academic meanings. The paper also provides some pedagogical implications for academic writing instruction for advanced EFL learners.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Language and Literature StudiesSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207