LinkedIn

 آمار

تعداد نشریات20
تعداد شماره‌ها1,226
تعداد مقالات11,182
تعداد مشاهده مقاله77,264,457
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله101,502,734
SHOMOOSSI, FARZANEH, SHOKRPOUR, NASRIN. (1403). Expressing degrees of uncertainty in medical discourse: Hedging revisited. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(3), 211-213. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2024.101282.1919
FARZANEH SHOMOOSSI; NASRIN SHOKRPOUR. "Expressing degrees of uncertainty in medical discourse: Hedging revisited". سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12, 3, 1403, 211-213. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2024.101282.1919
SHOMOOSSI, FARZANEH, SHOKRPOUR, NASRIN. (1403). 'Expressing degrees of uncertainty in medical discourse: Hedging revisited', سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 12(3), pp. 211-213. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2024.101282.1919
SHOMOOSSI, FARZANEH, SHOKRPOUR, NASRIN. Expressing degrees of uncertainty in medical discourse: Hedging revisited. سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی, 1403; 12(3): 211-213. doi: 10.30476/jamp.2024.101282.1919

Expressing degrees of uncertainty in medical discourse: Hedging revisited

Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism
دوره 12، شماره 3، مهر 2024، صفحه 211-213    اصل مقاله (370.6 K)
نوع مقاله: Letter to Editor
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.30476/jamp.2024.101282.1919
نویسندگان
FARZANEH SHOMOOSSI1؛ NASRIN SHOKRPOUR* 2
1Faculty of Science, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
2Department of English, Faculty of Paramedical Sciences, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
چکیده
While the primary preference of peer reviewers for accepting publishable manuscripts is their scientific message to inspire the scholarly audience as well as the novelty of research findings the authors are trying to promote, the quality of writing for publication is also among prominent criteria peer reviewers are concerned with. Generally, the contribution of outstanding articles to the expanding body of knowledge is framed into sophisticated modes of communication, where authors are recommended to use formal, accurate, and intellectual language for expressing the scientific message. Among certain linguistic devices, boosters (used for expressing definite facts) and hedges (used for showing degrees of uncertainty) bear advantageous metadiscoursal functions for scientific writing. Both boosters and hedges are strategies by which authors can adjust the degrees of certainty expressed and avoid absolutism wherever required in a particular context. These can help authors effectively convey their interpretations of research findings.

تازه های تحقیق
کلیدواژه‌ها
Medical؛ Medicine؛ Hedging
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
1.Amiri M, Alami A, Matlabi M, Shomoossi N. Error analysis of nonnative authors’ publications in health-care journals: A descriptive study. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2021;10:107.

2.Hyland K. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies. 2005;7(2):173-92.

  1. Takimoto M. A corpus-based analysis of hedges and boosters in English academic articles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 2015;5(1):95-105.
4.Hyland K. Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics. 1996;17(4):433-54.

  1. Stroud B. Knowledge from a human point of view. In: Crețu AM, Massimi M. (eds) Knowledge from a Human Point of View. Springer, Cham: Synthese Library; 2020. p. 416.
  2. Smith G, Dickinson EJF. Error, reproducibility and uncertainty in experiments for electrochemical energy technologies. Nat Commun. 2022;13:6832.
  3. Nivales MLM. Hedging in college research papers: Implications for language instruction. Asian EFL Journal. 2011;52:35-45.
  4. Li H, Chen Z, Zhu W. Variability: Human nature and its impact on measurement and statistical analysis. J Sport Health Sci. 2019;8(6):527-31.
9.Hyland K. Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writings. Journal of Second Language Writing. 2004;13(2):133-51.

  1. Sarkhosh M, Farokheslamloo N. Frequency and Types of Hedges and Boosters in Academic Medical and Teaching Research Articles. Caspian Journal of Scientometrics. 2020;7(1):7-15.
  2. Csongor A, Rébék-Nagy G. Hedging in popular scientific articles on medicine. Acta Medica Marisiensis. 2013;59(2):97-9.
  3. Koushan M, Pejhan A, Shomoossi N, Shomoossi A. Ethical considerations in publishing medical articles in Iranian journals. Acta Facultatis Medicae Naissensis. 2014;31(2):105–11.
  4. Shomoossi N. Collaboration of translators with medical authors: A qualitative enquiry into writing articles in English. Acta Facultatis Medicae Naissensis. 2013;30(1):45.
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 393
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 284


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. قدرت گرفته از سیناوب