Maxim V. Prasko

Postgraduate Student of the Department of Modern Russian Language and Methods of its Teaching

Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University

(Novosibirsk, Russia)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22405/2712-8407-2024-1-195-203

Abstract. The article discusses the specifics of the semantic category of evaluation in abstracts to scientific articles. The material for the analysis was 105 Russian-language abstracts to linguistic articles published in 2020 – 2023 in ‘Speech Genres’ journal. The research used methods of discursive and linguopragmatic analysis, component analysis of lexemes and utterances, as well as elements of the statistical method. The paper reveals that the subject of evaluation in the abstracts to scientific articles is its author, and the object of evaluation is the propositional content of the epistemic situation components presented in the source material. The main object of evaluation in abstracts is new knowledge, because the old knowledge component is practically absent in the genre due to its content area. The analysis demonstrates that rational evaluation prevails in the annotations. It is expressed mainly with the help of various words containing evaluative semes in the structure of meaning (qualitative adjectives, adverbs, and nouns). There are no examples with the expression of irrational evaluation in the analyzed materials, as the abstracts actualize the researcher's objectified position and the text does not include an emotional-value component. Positive rational evaluation prevails in abstracts, as they present an objective and substantive formulation of scientific results obtained by the researcher independently and to which the author cannot express a negative attitude. The few identified examples of negative rational evaluation express an evaluation of old knowledge. Ultimately, the specificity of the evaluation in the abstracts allows the authors-researchers to most successfully achieve their communicative goal: to depict the problem, to present new scientific results objectively and to outline plan for the development of the scientific article text.
Keywords: abstract, scientific text, scientific discourse, rational evaluation, positive evaluation, negative evaluation, new knowledge, old knowledge, intensifier, evaluation variability.

Full text of the article (PDF)

For citation: Prasko, MV 2024, ‘Features of the Evaluative Category in Scientific Discourse (based on the Material of Abstracts to Scientific Articles)’, Tula Scientific Bulletin. History. Linguistics, issue 1 (17), pp. 195–203, http://doi.org/10.22405/2712-8407-2024-1-195-203 (in Russ.)

References

1. Bazhenova, EA 2018, ʽAntinomiya novogo i starogo znaniya v nauchnom teksteʼ (Antinomy of new and old knowledge in a scientific text), Aktualʼnyye problemy stilistiki, no. 4, pp. 41–46. (In Russ.)
2. Baklanova, II 2022, ʽLichnostʼ avtora nauchnogo teksta s pozitsiy otpravitelya i poluchatelya tekstaʼ (The identity of the author of a scientific text from the perspective of the sender and recipient), RGGU Bulletin: “Literary Teory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”, Series, no. 8, part 2, pp. 253–265. (In Russ.)
3. Wolf, EM 2002, Funktsionalʼnaya semantika otsenki (Functional semantics of evaluation), Yeditorial URSS publ, Moscow. (In Russ.)
4. Grichin, SV 2020, Avtoriztscionnaya modelʼ nauchnogo teksta (Authorization model of a scientific text), Izd-vo Novosib. gos. tekhn. un-ta publ, Novosibirsk. (In Russ.)
5. Danilevskaya, NV 2018, ʽIntellektualʼnaya ekspressiya nauchnogo izlozheniya: psikholingvisticheskiy aspektʼ (Intellectual expression of scientific discourse: a psycholinguistic aspect), Socio Psycho Linguistic Research, no. 6, pp. 83–89. (In Russ.)
6. Danilevskaya, NV 2013, ʽOb osobom statuse otsenki v nauchnom teksteʼ (On specific status of evaluation in scientific text), Perm University Herald. Russian and Foreign Philology, no. 2 (22), pp. 37–43. (In Russ.)
7. Kotyurova, MP 1996, ʽO nekotorykh osobennostyakh smyslovoy struktury teoreticheskogo tekstaʼ (On some features of the semantic structure of the theoretical text), in Ocherki istorii nauchnogo stilya russkogo literaturnogo yazyka XVIII – XX vv. (Essays on the history of the scientific style of the Russian literary language of the 18th – 20th centuries), ed. M.N. Kozhina, vol. 2, part 1, Izd-vo Perm. un-ta publ, Perm, pp. 235–262. (In Russ.)
8. Kotyurova, MP & Bazhenova, EA 2018, Kulʼtura nauchnoy rechi. Tekst i ego redaktirovaniye (Culture of scientific speech. Text and its editing), Flinta publ, Nauka publ, Moscow. (In Russ.)
9. Nefyodov, ST 2021, ʽVaryirovaniye otsenki v kommunikativnykh praktikakh nauchnogo diskursaʼ (The variety of evaluation in communicative practices of academic discourse), Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 760–778. (In Russ.)
10. Nefyodov, ST 2021, ʽLingvokulʼturnaya spetsifika otsenki v nemetsko- i russkoyazychnykh annotatsiyakh k lingvisticheskim statʼyamʼ (Linguocultural specifics of evaluation in German- and Russian-language abstracts to linguistic articles), Nemetskaya filologiya v SanktPeterburgskom gosudarstvennom universitete, vol. 11, Izd-vo SPbGU publ, St. Petersburg, pp. 184–207. (In Russ.)
11. Nefyodov, ST 2022, ʽYazyk otsenok: chto govoryat otsenki ob otsenivayushchem subyekteʼ (The language of evaluation: what the evaluation says about the evaluator), Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 821–838. (In Russ.)
12. Steksova, TI 2013, ʽObyekty kommentariyev v interaktivnoy gazetnoy statyeʼ (The objects of comments in the interactive newspaper article), Vestnik NSU. Series: History and Philology, vol. 12, no. 10, pp. 91–95. (In Russ.)
13. Steksova, TI & Kovrigina, MA 2009, ʽKriticheskiye zamechaniya v nauchnom diskurse L. S. Vygotskogo nauchnom diskurse L. S. Vygotskogoʼ (Critical remarks in the scientific discourse of L. S. Vygotsky), Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, no. 2 (6), pp. 5–10. (In Russ.)
14. Khutyz, IP & Petrenko, YuA 2021, ʽDiskursivnyye kategorii otsenki i dialogichnosti v akademicheskom diskurseʼ (Discursive categories of evaluation and dialogicity in academic discourse), I. Yakovlev Chuvash State Pedagogical University Bulletin, no. 3 (112), pp. 120–129. (In. Russ.)
15. Cherkunova, MV 2019, ʽAnnotatsiya kak vid maloformatnogo tekstaʼ (Abstract as a type of small-format text), Maloformatnyye teksty v razlichnykh tipakh angloyazychnogo diskursa, SAMARAMA publ, Samara, pp. 149–159. (In Russ.)