英语论文网

nvestigates them within the framework of generic analysis and creates thewidely-quoted CARS model. Swales analyzes the macro structure of the introductionpart in forty-eight research articles, and then he identified three moves of theinformation flow in introduction part, which are establishing a territory, establishing aniche and occupying the niche. Each move includes several steps. For the wholeresearch articles, Swales (1990) also identifies four moves, named Introduction,Method, Results, Discussion. Following him, many foreign linguists began devotingthemselves to investigations on academic discourse.Bunton (2002) analyzes introduction parts and conclusion parts in 45 doctoraldissertations from different sciences. She proves the CARS model and then putforward her own eleven steps in introduction parts. Besides, she identifies two kindsof conclusions: thesis-oriented and field-oriented. The adoption of differentconclusions shows differences in social and natural sciences. Samraj (2008) makes acontrastive study on the introduction parts of philosophy and biology. He finds outthat the introduction parts of biological dissertations generally take IMRD structure,while the introduction in philosophy dissertations follows the CARS model.Soler-Monreal, Carbonell-Olivares & Gil-Salom (2011) make a contrastive analysison introduction part between the Spanish and English doctoral dissertations. Theresult shows that English doctoral dissertations generally apply the CARS moves butin Spanish doctoral dissertations, move 2 is not an obligatory one. Chinese scholarsZhang (2001), Yang (2003), Ju (2004), Ge (2005) study the corresponding genericfeatures of academic articles, the introduction of both Chinese and English academicarticles, and the abstracts of research articles. According to IMRD model, Deng (2009)analyzes the writing process of English doctoral dissertation written by Chinese nativespeakers. He finds that Chinese dissertations are short of dialog with the reader so thatthe discussion is not corresponding to its introduction.
............

2.2 Taxonomy of Sciences
The classification of sciences into soft science and hard science is one of Becher& Trowler's (1989) main academic achievements. In Becher & Trowler’s opinion, theclassification of soft science and hard science is determined by scholars’ recognitiondegrees to some certain theory system. If the recognition degree is high, thisdiscipline belongs to hard science. If the recognition degree is low, this disciplinebelongs to soft science. Usually, the natural sciences are considered as “hard” whilethe social sciences are described as “soft”. According to Becher & Trowler'staxonomy, chemistry, physical, and materials sciences are often described as hard,with chemistry typically ranking top, while the social sciences such as history, Mediaare often described as soft, with history typically at the top. Therefore, history andmedia are chosen as representatives of soft science and chemistry and materialsscience are chosen as representatives of hard sciences.In addition to Becher and Trowler, French sociologist Latour (1990) proposes thefractional graph area (FGA) method to define the differences between soft science andhard science by describing the hardness of sciences. According to his graphism, thescience owning a FGA value higher than 0.03 is called hard science, and the sciencewhose FGA value is lower than 0.03 is called soft science. Ba本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。