![an acceptable persona and a tenor consistent with the norms of
the community.
The important interactional norms in research writing involve
‘establishing a judicious, discipline-defined balance
of tentativeness and assertion, and a suitable relationship to
one’s data, arguments and audience’ (Hyland, 2005, p. 54),
but not all academic writing is the same. Any text is part of a
register which spans a range of purposes, audiences and
* Tel.: !852 2859 2009.
E-mail address: [email protected]
1475-1585/$ - see front matter ! 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003
Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127
www.elsevier.com/locate/jeap
mailto:[email protected]
contexts from undergraduate essays to Nobel speeches. In other
words, the work of the academy is interpreted using
language for different audiences: for experts, for students, for
industry, and for practitioners, and in each case, this
recontextualization of material offers different ways of
understanding academic practices. By extending our interest
beyond the mainstream discourses of the academy we access
very different scientific discourses and gain insights into
how relations between science and society are mediated and the
cultural authority of science is promoted. More
centrally for this paper, we also learn something of how
interpersonality is negotiated with different audiences. We
discover the ways writers display who they are and construct a
convincing argument drawing on different discoursal](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/developingyourpersonalcareerplandeliverables-221113032102-d80a8b80/85/DEVELOPING-YOURPERSONAL-CAREER-PLANDeliverables-docx-19-320.jpg)
DEVELOPING YOURPERSONAL CAREER PLANDeliverables.docx
- 1. DEVELOPING YOUR PERSONAL CAREER PLAN Deliverables: 1. Complete the Personal Career Plan Tools in the Appendix at the end of the document. You should copy and paste the tools into a separate word document. Name the document YourlastnameCareerPlanTools.doc. You will upload this document to the Assignments area in Blackboard. 2. Create a personal resume. Name the document YourlastnameResume.doc. You will upload this document to the Assignments area in Blackboard. 3. Write a 3-5 page reflection paper (12 point font, double spaced) addressing your personal experience in Career Planning. Address each component from the Six-stage Career Development model included in this packet. (See page 2.) What did you learn from this exercise? You may need think about activities you would like to do for Steps 5 and 6 to include in this assignment. This paper is based on your thoughts and supportive documentation is not required. Objectives of the Personal Career Strategy Assignment 1. Identify characteristics/attributes in support of your personal career brand. 2. Explore personal and University of Louisville institutional assets that will enhance your education and job search process. 3. Package past activity and build clear future goals. Developing Your Personal Career Strategy
- 2. Successful organizations create strategic plans to provide a long-term vision of what they aim to become. They also specify goals and related objectives and then strategic plans that will take them incrementally toward the realization of the vision. This process parallels as a useful paradigm for successful career management. This document can help you develop a personal career management strategy and plan. It gives an overview of the career development process and brief description of each stage and introduces exercises culminating in your own plan. The 6 Stages of Career Development The model below depicts the six stages of the career development cycle. In progressing through the stages, you will develop goals and strategies for pursuing a satisfying career. Over time, you will cycle through the process again as you evolve. Career decisions are not one-time events, but steps in a life-long career development process. Research indicates that, on average, people change jobs seven times and careers three times in a life-time. This information is presented as an educational experience rather than a simple map to help you get a job. Self-Exploration is an opportunity to reflect on your skills, interests, passions, values and whether/how you’ve integrated these into your past assignments. Market Research involves investigating industries, companies and functions of interest. Focus is the intersection of the first two stages, overlapping your interests with what is happening in the market and setting a goal for your internship search.
- 3. Planning is creating your marketing materials to reflect your personal brand. Implementation is the stage at which you venture out in career fairs, networking, applying and interviewing for jobs and then successfully negotiating for the best offer. Career Management covers the transition into your new role as well as periodic evaluations of your career and the flow back into the next reiteration of the job cycle. This Personal Career Plan document contains exercises for the first four stages of the process to get you started. Data generated will later be used to develop your key marketing materials (resume, cover letter and interview responses). This is an important project as you undertake in your professional development, so it is worth investing the time up front in order to ultimately achieve your end goals. Stage One: Self– Exploration Self-Assessment Self-assessment is essential for career planning and ongoing professional development. Conducting a regular inventory produces self-awareness that includes identifying knowledge, talents, strengths and skills, which can be leveraged in pursuit of your goals. Beyond that, knowing yourself is foundational for success in leading others. It can also help identify performance and skills gaps that could potentially undermine your professional development. While assessments can be very useful, valid data is also derived by simply reflecting on your past experiences and performance. As you deconstruct past accomplishments, pay particular
- 4. attention to clues regarding your interests, values, strengths and skills. This information will be helpful later, in forming your career decisions and planning. Focus on interests not only where you excel, but also that you enjoy! By identifying careers whose demands and requirements map directly to your core interests, you increase the likelihood of enjoying your work and being motivated to do it well. Please complete Appendix A: Career History. Assessing Personality In addition to interests, values, and strengths, other aspects of your personality are important to consider in your career choices and planning. You may have an intuitive sense of who you are and with a little self-reflection or input from people close to you, be able to identify certain aspects of your personality that are important to consider with regard to your career trajectory. Certain characteristics are likely to be very important to a potential employer and in later promotional decisions. Having this self-knowledge will be critical in promoting these assets. In an employment decision, these traits may also differentiate you from other candidates. Please complete Appendix A: Personality Profile. Stage Two: Market Research People and published sources are two general categories of resources for gathering market information. People are an excellent resource for industry and especially company information.They simultaneously canbecome the
- 5. foundation for a growing professional network on which to rely not only in job searches, but also throughout your career. Did you know 65-70% of people get their jobs through networking? Sessions in orientation will cover how to find contacts, then reach out to request and conduct informational interviews. Your market research goals will be focused on gathering information about business functions, industries and/or organizations to inform your career choices. Ask about: · Duties/Tasks: typical projects, needed knowledge, skills and abilities · Roles: leader, manager, supervisor, contributor · Responsibilities: level of accountability for various functions · Rewards: compensation, job security, prestige, challenge, etc. · Culture: values regarding norms, behaviors and organizational processes · Resources: publications or professional associations you could read/join Published resources (including books, web-sites, professional associations, and on-line business databases) are valuable for gathering basic field, industry, and company information. LinkedIn is the world’s largest networking site. I strongly suggest you build a profile now. Getting familiar with LinkedIn and its benefits (job postings, company information and networking groups) will aid your job search and networking power tremendously. Professional Associations provide resources to understand the scope and purpose of a particular industry or function. Membership can include access to a membership directory, which is often useful in identifying potential networking contacts with whom to conduct informational interviews. Some association web sites (Society for Human Resource Management) even contain information on student scholarships,
- 6. internship and permanent job opportunities or executive search firms. Do a Google search for “professional associations” and other key words e.g. training, to find them. Stage Three: FOCUS FIT As you develop insight into yourself and your occupational options, you will begin to eliminate options that previously appeared to be appropriate, in favor of better choices. The goal is to identify a functional role whose duties, tasks, role and responsibilities are a good “fit” with your interests, skills, knowledge and experience, while also defining an organizational context (industry and company) whose culture is compatible with your personality and provides rewards that will satisfy your value system. A good fit increases the likelihood that you will enjoy your work and enhances the probability that you will perform at an exceptional level. This level of focus enables you to strategically segment the employment market and create a marketing campaign that specifically targets an audience that is inclined to place high value on what you have to offer, when you can articulate how you meet their needs. As you assess your "fit" with various occupational options, consider the following: · Which of your key interests, skills and abilities are consistent with typical duties and tasks of the position? · Which key interests map to the industry and company products or services? · Which values are likely to be satisfied within the culture and reward system? · Which personality traits are consistent with the culture of the organization? · What of your knowledge and/or experience maps to the function, industry, company, product, or service?
- 7. As you assess the match between information gathered in your market assessment and the results of your self-assessment, you will direct your search toward a particular functional focus, industry preference, and preferred organizational context/culture. These choices are the central factors in a personally-relevant career plan and strategy. SWOT Analysis A SWOT analysis reveals Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats in you and the employment market. It enables you to analyze the realism of your vision and plan accordingly. Additionally, it could help you specify goals and objectives to mitigate gaps (weakness and threats that separate you from where you would like to be) while also strategically leveraging personal strengths and market opportunities. For individuals planning a shift into a new function or industry, an early and ongoing SWOT analysis is vital. This is particularly true if your aim is to break into brand management, management consulting, or investment banking because these are highly competitive fields. You must understand your personal barriers to entry and be able to express to a potential employer why you are capable of such a transition. S.W.O.T. Chart Internal Strengths Weaknesses YOU Where do you excel? What skills, knowledge, abilities, personality traits and experience can you offer an employer? E.g. Skills and experience in the industry and/or function, new
- 8. contact has taken a particular interest in your potential In what areas are you not comfortable or proficient? E.g. No professional network in the industry and/or function, poor interviewing skills External Opportunities Threats THE MARKET What market situations exist that will help you get a job in a particular function or industry you are targeting? E.g. High demand for people with your skills, a recent merger results in a demand for your offerings What market scenarios exist that pose a risk to your goals? E.g. Weak economy, target industry hit particularly hard by economy Please complete Appendix B: S.W.O.T. Analysis. Stage Four: Planning In this stage you will integrate what you learned in the previous exercises into a strategic development plan that includes a five- year vision for where you want to go, as well as mid-term objectives to achieve along the way. While you may not know exactly what you will be doing in five years, you can take the
- 9. information you currently have and create an image of your ideal future career. Writing down the vision will facilitate your creation of goals and plans to help you get there. A strategic plan is a living document so you can update it periodically as you and your environment change. Mid-term steps are useful when conditions preclude your ability to directly achieve your goals, or if personal weaknesses or external threats make your plan unrealistic in the short-term. For example, a competitive job market, along with insufficient functional or industry experience, may necessitate seeking an intermediate-level job to obtain the experience, which later enables you to pursue your larger goal. In addition, your SWOT analysis may indicate that you may need to pursue an alternative step for other developmental experiences (e.g. training or skill development.) Over time, your realistic and well-informed intermediate steps will take you closer to your vision. Please complete Appendix C: Career Development Plan. Personal Career Plan Tools Name: APPENDIX A: Career History Objective: To identify your prior learning and critical experiences. Identify transferable skills to highlight in resume &/or interviews. Focus on past 3-5 years for this exercise &
- 10. explore the rest on your own if applicable. Company/ Organization Position Held Achievements Skills Used Life Lessons Learned What are the three most significant events in my career? Why? APPENDIX A: Personality and Work Styles The list below contains words that describe various personality
- 11. styles. As you read through the list, bold those items that reflect aspects of your personality. Be honest and realistic in your choices. This is an inventory of who you actually are, not who you would like to be or how you would like others to perceive you. (As a useful point of comparison, consider asking a recent co-worker to complete a duplicate form and identify your top five descriptors from his perspective.) Accommodating Cautious Determined Instinctive Patient Self-Confident Accurate Charismatic Dignified Introvert Perceptive Selfless Action-oriented Cheerful Diligent Intuitive Perfectionist Self-motivated Active Clever Diplomatic Inventive Persevering Self-reliant Adaptable Collaborative Discreet
- 14. Observant Reserved Tolerant Calm Deliberate Influential Open-minded Resilient Trustworthy Candid Dependable Innovative Optimistic Resourceful Versatile Caring Dependent Inquisitive Outgoing Retiring APPENDIX B: S.W.O.T. Analysis Fill in the boxes with your responses. Internal Strengths Weaknesses YOU Where do you excel? What skills, knowledge, abilities, personality traits and experience can you offer an employer? E.g. Skills and experience in the industry and/or function, new
- 15. contact has taken a particular interest in your potential In what areas are you not comfortable or proficient? E.g. No professional network in the industry and/or function, poor interviewing skills External Opportunities Threats THE MARKET What market situations exist that will help you get a job in a particular function or industry you are targeting? E.g. High demand for people with your skills, a recent merger results in a demand for your offerings What market scenarios exist which pose a risk to your goals?
- 16. E.g. Weak economy, target industry hit particularly hard by economy APPENDIX C - Career Development Plan Use what you have learned about yourself and market opportunities to formulate a vision and the associated goals that are personally meaningful and motivating for you. Where do I want to be in two years? e.g. job function, industry/ies, geographic location etc. What are the key skills that I need to develop to get there? Where do I want to be in five years? What are the additional skills that I need to develop to get there? How does that fit in with where the job market is headed?
- 17. What else should I consider? Action Plan What are your next steps? Congratulations on investing time in planning your career- it will pay off! 11 Page | Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science Ken Hyland* Centre for Applied English Studies, Room 709, KK Leung Building, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulham Road, Hong Kong, China Abstract The view of academic discourse as a rhetorical activity involving interactions between writers and readers is now central to most perspectives on EAP, but these interactions are conducted differently in different disciplinary and generic contexts. In this paper I
- 18. use the term proximity to refer to a writer’s control of those rhetorical features which display both authority as an expert and a personal position towards issues in an unfolding text. Examining a corpus of texts in two very different genres, research papers and popular science articles, I attempt to highlight some of the ways writers manage their display of expertise and interactions with readers through rhetorical choices which textually construct both the writer and the reader as people with similar understandings and goals. ! 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: popular science; research articles; academic writing; interaction 1. Interpersonality and proximity The view that academic writing is interpersonal is no longer news. Over the last twenty years analyses of academic texts have shown us that while they may be more lexically dense, cautious and nominalised than many other kinds of writing, they aren’t as completely ‘author evacuated’ as we had once supposed (e.g. Hyland, 2004; Swales, 2004). Instead, they are actually comprised of careful evaluations and interactions. Research papers, we have discovered, are sites where academics don’t just offer a view of the world, but negotiate a credible account of themselves and their work by claiming solidarity with readers, appraising ideas and acknowledging alternative views. Interpersonality, then, concerns the ways that writers use language to negotiate social relationships by telling their readers what they see as important, how they believe they should select and present material for them, and how they feel about what they write about. It concerns the explicit system of meanings which link the participants in a text as interactants, adopting
- 19. an acceptable persona and a tenor consistent with the norms of the community. The important interactional norms in research writing involve ‘establishing a judicious, discipline-defined balance of tentativeness and assertion, and a suitable relationship to one’s data, arguments and audience’ (Hyland, 2005, p. 54), but not all academic writing is the same. Any text is part of a register which spans a range of purposes, audiences and * Tel.: !852 2859 2009. E-mail address: [email protected] 1475-1585/$ - see front matter ! 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003 Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 www.elsevier.com/locate/jeap mailto:[email protected] contexts from undergraduate essays to Nobel speeches. In other words, the work of the academy is interpreted using language for different audiences: for experts, for students, for industry, and for practitioners, and in each case, this recontextualization of material offers different ways of understanding academic practices. By extending our interest beyond the mainstream discourses of the academy we access very different scientific discourses and gain insights into how relations between science and society are mediated and the cultural authority of science is promoted. More centrally for this paper, we also learn something of how interpersonality is negotiated with different audiences. We discover the ways writers display who they are and construct a convincing argument drawing on different discoursal
- 20. conventions to establish proximity with readers. I use the term proximity here to refer to a writer’s control of rhetorical features which display both authority as an expert and a personal position towards issues in an unfolding text. It involves responding to the context of the text, particularly the readers who form part of that context, textually constructing both the writer and the reader as people with similar understandings and goals. While it embraces the notion of interpersonality, proximity is a slightly wider idea as it not only includes how writers manage themselves and their interactions with others, but also the ways ideational material, what the text is ‘about’, is presented for a particular audience. It is concerned with how writers represent not only themselves and their readers, but also their material, in ways which are most likely to meet their readers’ expectations. So proximity captures 2 key aspects of acting interpersonally. The first refers to what might be called the proximity of membership: How academic writers demonstrate their authority to colleagues through use of disciplinary conventions. What does the writer do to position him or herself as a disciplinary expert and competent colleague? The second concerns the proximity of commitment, or how the writer takes a personal position towards issues in an unfolding text. That is, what does the writer do to locate him or herself in relation to the material presented? One points to how we position ourselves in relation to our communities, and the other to how we position ourselves in relation to our text. These are, of course, difficult to separate in practice as we can’t express a stance towards the things we talk about without using the language of our social groups. But the concept does allow us to say something about how writers take their readers’ likely objections, background knowledge, rhetorical expectations and reading purposes into
- 21. account. Proximity emphasizes a reader-oriented view of writing and is closely related to Sacks, Schlegloff and Jefferson (1974: p. 272) notion of ‘‘recipient design’’, or how text and talk are shaped to make sense to the current recipient. In writing, as in conversation, we display an orientation and sensitivity to the particular others who are our co- participants through lexical choice, topic selection, conventions of argument, and so on. In academic writing this means that the process of writing involves creating a text that we assume the reader will recognise and expect and the process of reading involves drawing on assumptions about what the writer is trying to do. Hoey (2001) likens this to dancers following each other’s steps, each building sense from a text by anticipating what the other is likely to do. Skilled writers are therefore able to create a mutual frame of reference and anticipate when their purposes will be retrieved by their audiences. The concept of proximity therefore helps us to understand how writers typically position themselves and their work in relation to others, so we can see interpersonality as the rhetorical construction of proximity. In this paper I plan to look at how writers in two very different genres, research papers and popular science articles, create a sense of proximity by textually constructing themselves and readers as having shared interests and understandings. Comparing key features from these contexts, I show how different language choices are employed to negotiate academic claims and construct proximity with two very different audiences. 2. A tale of two genres Despite competition from electronic publishing alternatives such as e-journals and personal websites, the research
- 22. article (RA) remains the pre-eminent genre of the academy. The RA is not only the principal site of disciplinary knowledge-making but, as Montgomery (1996) has it, ‘the master narrative of our time’. One reason for this pre- eminence is the value attached to the processes of peer review as a control mechanism for transforming beliefs into knowledge. Another is the prestige attached to a genre which restructures the processes of thought and research it describes to establish a discourse for scientific fact-creation. In this context language becomes a form of technology, or a resource for controlling an environment, by presenting interpretations and positioning participants in particular ways to establish knowledge. 117K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Several studies have shown the ways that serial drafts and reviewers’ comments guide science writers to rhetor- ically accommodate their laboratory activity to the concerns of the discipline (Berkenkotter & Huckin, 1995; Casanave & Vandrick, 2003). Through reviewers’ recommendations to modify the strength of their claims, provide propositional warrants, and establish a context through citation, writers gradually integrate their new claims into the weave of disciplinary relevance and prior work. This process indicates that new facts are not added piecemeal to the heap of existing knowledge, but are the extension of an ongoing conversation among members, conducted in a shared ‘theory-laden’ language and particular patterns of argumentation. Professional research writing is therefore seen as a tension between originality and deference to the community, and the language authors use to argue their claims
- 23. constructs this proximity with readers. This extract from an article in The Astrophysical Journal Letters, a highly-regarded molecular science periodical, helps to illustrate this: (1) We used Suzaku observations to measure the spatial variation of the Fe Ka line with radius in the Tycho supernova remnant. The Fe line widths show a significant decrease from a FWHM value of 210 eV at the center to 130 eV at the rim. Over the same radial range the line center energy remains nearly constant. These observations are consistent with a scenario in which the shell of Fe-emitting ejecta in Tycho is expanding at speeds of 2800e3350 km s"1. The minimum line width we measure is still a factor of two larger than expected from a single component plasma emission model. If thermal Doppler broadening is the dominant additional source of broadening, we infer an ion temperature of (1e3) # 1010 K. (Astrophysical Journal Letters 693L61) This text is written for a professional audience with a high degree of specialised expertise. Information is presented with considerable exactness, foregrounding procedures and using technical jargon, nominalisations, precise measurements, cautious inferences from data, and acronyms. It is a discourse of exclusivity underpinned by a spe- cialised knowledge of methods and of the meanings which results have for insiders. ‘Popular science’, in contrast, is produced for audiences without a professional need for information about science but who want to keep abreast of developments. In fact, popular science discourses play an enormous role in shaping most people’s views of academic research: informing lay understandings of the interests, methods and knowledge that
- 24. it produces. Their existence underlines that ‘science’ is not a monolithic entity always understood in the same way, but a social construct created by different groups with different interests. Popular science itself also addresses a range of different audiences (Hyland, 2009). While many popular science books are written by scientists for an elite educated audience, the public gets most of its information about science from specialised magazines like New Scientist and Scientific American. Most daily newspapers now have specialized science sections and the number of science articles in the press has been increasing (Pellechia, 1997). These offer interpretations of academic activity recast with an eye for the interests, beliefs and preoccupations of a new readership. But it would be a great oversimplification to dismiss popular science as merely infotainment. This is a discourse related to the academy, its work, and its forms of communication but stripped of its more forbidding rhetorical features. While attempting to wield the authority of science, both scientific facts and the argument forms of professional science are transformed in the process. The different purposes and audiences of the two genres mean that writers negotiate proximity and represent science in very different ways to those employed by professional scientists in research journals. This can easily be seen by comparing example 1) with the same research reported in the popular journal Science Daily: (2) The most crowded collision of galaxy clusters has been identified by combining information from three different telescopes. This result gives scientists a chance to learn what happens when some of the largest objects in the Universe go at each other in a cosmic free-for-all. The researchers found that four separate galaxy clusters are involved in a triple merger, the first time
- 25. such a phenomenon has been documented. Galaxy clusters are the largest objects bound by gravity in the Universe... ‘‘In addition to this enormous pileup, MACSJ0717 is also remarkable because of its temperature,’’ said Cheng-Jiun Ma of the University of Hawaii and lead author of the study. ‘‘Since each of these collisions releases energy in the form of heat, MACS0717 has one of the highest temperatures ever seen in such a system.’’ (Science Daily, Apr. 17, 2009) In contrast to the research report, the popularization places an emphasis on the actors and their interpretations with short sentences, congruent grammar and use of first person quotes. Priority is given to the potential payoffs of the research and results, rather than the means of obtaining them. 118 K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Criticism of this kind of writing as a journalistic dumbing down of science, disseminating simplified and often sensationalised accounts to a passive mass readership, misses the point. Popular science does not just report scientific facts to a less specialist audience but represents phenomena in different ways to achieve different purposes. Most fundamentally, proximity helps science writers transform beliefs into knowledge, producing evidence for claims to persuade specialists of the reliability of their interpretations and the rigour of their methods. Popular science, in contrast, is concerned with establishing the novelty and relevance of a topic to celebrate scientific results, with their validity taken for granted. Popularizers, then, actually transform the products of an academic culture in the process of appropriating them and so influence the nature of elite science
- 26. itself. 3. Facets of proximity There are various ways writers achieve proximity and I want to discuss five in the remainder of this paper. Drawing on two corpora, a collection of 120 research articles from four science and engineering fields and a sample of 120 popular science articles, I explore how writers use Organisation, Argument, Credibility, Stance and Engagement to negotiate proximity with readers. 3.1. Organisation There are several aspects of presentation which distinguish these genres. One is the role of visuals, for example, which play a key role as arguments in the research papers by giving visibility to information and offering a proof for interpretations, and as explanations in the popularizations, where they work mainly to attract the reader and elucidate the text (Miller, 1998). The most striking difference, however, is the way that the genres are organised. Instead of finding the main claim towards the end of the paper as in a research article, it is typically foregrounded at the beginning. Nwogu (1991), for instance, found that journalistic accounts typically open with a background move which contextualizes the research issue as a problem for readers and then follows this with the main outcome, often including reference to the scientists themselves. These examples are typical: (3) New moms beware: If you want to shed those extra pounds you packed on while pregnant, you better get your sleep. A new study shows that women are more likely to lose baby fat if they get over five hours of shut- eye a night. (Scientific American, Nov 2007)
- 27. When we emerge from a supermarket laden down with bags and faced with a sea of vehicles, how do we remember where we’ve parked our car and translate the memory into the correct action to get back there? New research identifies the specific parts of the brain responsible for solving this everyday problem. The results could have implications for understanding the functional significance of a prominent brain abnormality observed in neuropsychiatric diseases such as schizophrenia. (Science Daily, April, 2009) This deductive rhetorical pattern highlights the novelty and importance of the topic to lay readers rather than the methodological steps taken to get there, and while this provides a hook to bait the uninitiated, it can be confusing for scientists. Myers (1990: p. 141), for example, reports how the editor of the New England Journal of Medicine published both an original immunology article and a version rewritten by a Science journalist who gave greater attention to organization, explication and clarity. General physicians subsequently wrote applauding the fact that even difficult topics could be made accessible to non-specialists while immunologists complained that the revised version was harder to read because information wasn’t where they expected to find it. Both groups therefore had different views about the best way to write immunology based on their own needs, background knowledge, discourse expectations, and reading purposes. 3.2. Argument structures Arguments are also structured very differently to shape material for the two audiences, reaching out to dissimilar audiences through distinctive kinds of appeals, focuses, and framings.
- 28. In terms of appeals, both genres are driven by novelty, although this is presented differently for the two audiences. Novelty is clearly a key feature of academic advancement and intellectual change in disciplinary communities, a means by which individuals gain credit for themselves, prestige for their field, and growth for their discipline within 119K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 a shared understanding of what is worth knowing and where to take this. Kaufer and Geisler (1989: p. 286), in fact, refer to academic disciplines as ‘factories of novelty, encouraging members to plod towards their yearly quota of inspirational leaps’. In research papers novelty is negotiated by being the first to synthesize a contribution with the existing weave of community knowledge, situating local research in the broader concerns of the discipline. To be new, work must recognize the knowledge which has already gained consent and against which it makes a claim for change, so innovation is managed by establishing explicit intertextual links to existing disciplinary knowledge. So while claims for novelty are often made (as in 4), they are also backed up by arguments which relate them to the literature: (4) The assays presented herein illustrate two novel approaches to monitor the intracellular dynamics of nuclear proteins. (Bio RA) This paper proposes a new methodology that further develops Taguchi’s method to incorporate multiple
- 29. objectives and constraints in product design. (Mech Eng RA) Novelty thus acknowledges what has gone before and builds on the field’s organizational structures, beliefs and current hot topics. Topics, in fact are more than a research focus: they represent resources of joint attention which coordinate activities and mark co-participation in communities. Selecting a topic and arguing for its novelty and relevance is thus critical in securing colleagues’ interest and in displaying membership credentials. Popular texts, on the other hand, transform the novel into the newsworthy. Journalistic criteria mean that academic claims are changed into scientific breakthroughs and presented in terms of what is of immediate value or potential benefit to readers. Newsworthiness establishes proximity by suggesting a common enthusiasm for science and a technocratic ideology that our lives are constantly improved through scientific progress. There is a celebration of relentless advancement which science is said to produce and which the current case is just one example: (5) Very young brains process memories of fear differently than more mature ones, new research indicates. The work significantly advances scientific understanding of when and how fear is stored and unlearned, and introduces new thinking on the implications of fear experience early in life. (Science Daily, March, 2008) In contrast to women, men are fertile throughout life. But new research at the Sahlgrenska Academy has now shown that a fertilising sperm can get help from the egg to rejuvenate. The result is an important step towards future stem cell therapy. ‘‘We are the first to show that egg cells have the ability to rejuvenate other cells, and this is an important result for future stem cell research’’, says
- 30. Associate Professor Tomas Simonsson, who leads the research group at that has made this discovery. (Science Today March 2009) In both academic and popular contexts, novelty is related to proximity by appealing to what is assumed about readers’ knowledge and interests. Newness is not a property of the ideas themselves, but a relation between ideas and communities as professional writers package material for particular readers. We also find writers managing proximity in the focus of the argument, or what writers chose to concentrate on. Quite simply, we can see that science journalism centres on the objects of study rather than the disciplinary procedures by which they are analysed. Professional papers construct what Myers (1990) calls a ‘narrative of science’ which follows the argument of the scientist by arranging time into a parallel series of events and emphasizing the conceptual structure of the discipline in their syntax and vocabulary. The discourse embodies key assumptions of academic practice: impersonality, cumulative knowledge construction, and empiricism, so that readers can relate a current claim to their understandings of the epistemological beliefs, prior findings, and currently approved methods. This is a typical example: (6) Leukocyte telomere length was positively associated with increasing physical activity level in leisure time (P < .001); this association remained significant after adjustment for age, sex, body mass index, smoking, socioeconomic status, and physical activity at work. The LTLs of the most active subjects were 200 nucleotides longer than those of the least active subjects (7.1 and 6.9 kilobases, respectively; P $ .006). This finding was confirmed in a small group of twin pairs discordant for physical activity level (on average, the LTL of more active
- 31. twins was 88 nucleotides longer than that of less active twins; P$ .03). (Archives of Internal Medicine, Jan 2008) A narrative of science, then, traces what is of interest to the discipline, employing rhetorical and linguistic choices which imply anonymity, precision, induction, comprehensiveness, and specialist knowledge of methods. 120 K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Popular articles, on the other hand, present a ‘narrative of nature’ concentrating on the thing studied. This extract reports the same research in a very different way: (7) Individuals who are physically active during their leisure time appear to be biologically younger than those with sedentary lifestyles, according to a report in the Archives of Internal Medicine. ‘‘Our results show that adults who partake in regular physical activity are biologically younger than sedentary individuals. This conclusion provides a powerful message that could be used by clinicians to promote the potential anti-aging effect of regular exercise.’’ The authors say. (Science Daily Jan 2008) Here the focus is more explicitly concerned with the connection between exercise and aging, which is likely to be of greater interest to lay readers than the precise methodological procedures. Material is assembled to enhance the visibility of information and make the message more convincing through a chronological presentation and high- lighting concerns readers may be expected to have about ageing, youthful appearance, and exercise. These different
- 32. language choices convey meanings which change understandings of both research and of science. Finally, proximity is achieved in argument by the ways writers frame information for their target readers. Framing is achieved by tailoring information to the assumed knowledge base of potential readers, creating proximity for different audiences through language choices which ask readers to recognise something as familiar or accepted. In research papers this is largely accomplished though the use of technical terminology, acronyms, reference to routine craft practices and specialised forms of equipment. This example from physics is typical: (8) The sample used was 80% H2O with 20% D2O as the lock substance. Two dimensional proton NMR experiments were conducted on a Bruker ARX-500 spectrometer with a 5 mm inverse probe and a 10 mm normal broad band probe tuned at 500.13 MHz using the standard J-resolved and COSY pulse sequences. The transmitter offset was located at 162 Hz up (for SECSY) or down (for COSY) field from the resonance of water for both dimensions. In 2D data acquisition 512 points were used and the number of tl-increments was changed. Data matrix for Fourier transformation was 512X512 with zero filling in the t domain only. (Phy RA) Appealing to proximity through this abbreviated, highly specialised reference to shared knowledge is possible in the natural sciences because research is typically characterized by linearity and well-defined and agreed upon problems (Becher & Trowler, 2001). New knowledge is generated from what is known and each new finding inexorably contributes to the eventual solution of the issue under study. Specialism is encouraged by this as research often occupies considerable investments in money,
- 33. training, equipment and expertise, which means individuals are often committed to particular research areas for many years and build their careers through precise contributions to a highly delimited field. Readers are often familiar with prior texts and research, and can see whether procedures and materials have been used appropriately and what results mean, so writers can describe their work economically. Popularisations, on the other hand, can’t assume this degree of shared knowledge and have to make connections to what readers are likely to already know. This involves constantly defining new concepts as they are introduced and making explicit links between entities. They therefore tend to avoid jargon and offer an immediate gloss where this is not possible. Clarifications are often inserted on-the-fly where the writer assumes an unfamiliar usage (9) or where complex processes are related to more familiar everyday events through simile (10): (9) Prozac, the popular antidepressant, blocks the action of a pump that sucks serotonin, a key mood-regulating chemical, out of the gaps between two neurons. (Popular Science, Nov, 2007) (10) To get into the brain they must be shuttled across the bloodebrain barrier by specialized transport proteins. Like passengers trying to board a crowded bus, amino acids compete for rides on these transporters. Not only does tryptophan have paltry representation among the passengers; it also competes with five other amino acids for the same transporter. Aced out by other amino acids, tryptophan thereby has a tough time hitching a ride to the brain. (Scientific American, Nov 2007) The unfamiliar is thus made intelligible by brief definitions and
- 34. explanations which relate complex processes to everyday events, taking the reader’s perspective to present the strange and exotic in the terms of the commonplace and unexceptional. 121K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Non-scientists are also accommodated by the writer’s management of cohesion. Cohesion depends on the semantic structure of a text and therefore on the reader’s expectations and knowledge, particularly knowledge of lexical relations. However, because scientific texts rarely contain replacement or pronouns for cohesion, non- specialists may struggle to see connections across sentences (Myers, 1991). Journalists, however, make these links explicit by using a variety of cohesive devices to serve as the basis for inferences about the meanings of any unfamiliar terms. In this extract, for example, the writer is careful to ensure that the reader is able to recover the links describing the genetic causes of mental retardation. Through the use of repetition, conjunctive phrases such as ‘which means that’, determiners (the, those), and synonyms, connections are specified and the passage becomes transparent: (11) In humans, the disorder stems from a mutation on the X chromosome as a three-base sequence begins to repeat over and over in a section of the fragile X mental retardation 1 gene (FMR1). The portion of the gene where this error multiplies does not code for a protein, which means that several repetitions of the sequence can occur without damaging the fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP). People who have a gene with
- 35. a sequence that is repeated 50 or fewer times are considered normal; those with fewer than 200 repetitions are carriers of the disorder. Individuals with more than 200 triplets, however, have disruptions to the promoter region of FMR1 that block the gene from being transcribed into RNA and forming a protein, thereby prompting onset of the syndrome. (Scientific American Nov 2007) Clearly the ‘na!ıve reader’ is unable to learn the cultural system encoded in the language of science merely through reading scientific texts, but the representation of scientific knowledge in popularizations at least provides a basis for understanding the products of that culture. 3.3. Credibility A third way in which popularizations seek to promote proximity with readers and engage with the incomplete knowledge-base of the non-specialist is to emphasize the credibility of the source of the information they report. In professional articles reliability is largely bestowed on findings by the writer’s display of craft practices and expert handling of recognized research methods. Attributions to other scientists mainly function to align the writer with a particular camp or reward researchers who have conducted relevant prior work. Popularizations, on the other hand, can’t assume this level of knowledge in readers and so bestow credibility on scientists through their position in an institution, only identifying particular scientists when they are directly relevant to the research being reported: (12) Animal scientist William Dozier, formerly with the ARS Poultry Research Unit in Mississippi State, has been working with colleagues at the ARS Swine Odor and Manure Management Research Unit in Ames, Iowa, and Iowa
- 36. State University to find ways to supplement animal diets with glycerin. (Scientific American, April 2009) ‘‘By controlling muscle groups instead of individual muscles, we’re reducing the variables, but we’re not losing efficiency,’’ said Matthew Tresch, assistant professor of biomedical engineering at the McCormick School of Engineering and Applied Science and of physical medicine and rehabilitation at the Feinberg School of Medicine. (Science Daily, April, 2009) Unable to demonstrate the relevance and importance of new work by embedding it in a community generated literature, popularizations import material through the quotes of insiders and give credence to that material by drawing attention to the credibility of its source. Not only is authority given to the research by underlining the status of informants, but scientists are often allowed to tell the story themselves through direct quotes introduced by the verb say. These options are hardly ever found in the article genre where imported material is overwhelmingly rewritten as a summary from a single source or as a generalization combining several different studies. In popularizations, then, science is both made intelligible in the characteristics of conversation and brought to life through the voices of those involved. (13) the two groups compiled drafts of the bovine genome, identifying genes important for fighting disease, digesting food and producing milk. ‘‘It gives you a window into what makes a cow a cow,’’ says Harris Lewin, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. (Science News, April, 2009) 122 K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127
- 37. Not only are quotes rare in the articles, but the reporting verb say to introduce the work of other researchers is a significant rhetorical choice and almost never found in science and engineering papers (Hyland, 2004). Not only does the choice of reporting verb allow writers to convey the kind of activity reported and to express an attitude to that information, but it also represents a key way of achieving proximity with peers because it signals shared rhetorical practices among disciplinary members. Figure 1 shows the most common forms in a larger corpus of 240 RAs in 8 disciplines, indicating the clear demarcations in the structure of subject-area knowledge systems and the fact that different domains use almost completely different verbs. So while all writers draw intertextual links to their disciplines, they do so in ways which reflect disciplinary distinctions. The humanities and social sciences tend to use verbs which refer to Discourse activities (e.g. discuss, hypothesize, suggest, argue, etc.) which involve the expression of arguments and evaluation. Engineers and scientists, in contrast, prefer verbs which point to the research itself (like observe, discover, show, analyse) which represent actions in the real world. Scientists try to suggest that results would be the same whoever conducted the research and so rhetorically distance themselves from their interpretations. Impersonality is used to give objectivity to conclusions through use of passive voice, dummy it subjects, and the attribution of agency to inanimate tables or results. By subordinating their own voice to that of nature, scientists emphasise the methods, procedures and equipment used, and not the researcher. In other words, in direct contrast to the personalising strategies of popularizations, credibility is increased in science articles
- 38. through impersonalization; by writers downplaying their personal role. 3.4. Stance The use of direct quotes, relevant topics, researcher identification and a sense of immediate value all reaffirm the role of personal activity in scientific research reported in popularizations which is usually rhetorically airbrushed in professional academic discourses. In addition, journalistic practices also intrude into popular articles through more emphatic claims about the findings and a fuller expression of personal attitude. In other words, writers also establish proximity with readers by taking a clear stance. Here we draw closer to core notions of interpersonality and the fact that statements don’t just communicate ideas, but also the writer’s attitude to those ideas and to their readers. Modality is a much discussed feature of interpersonality (Hyland, 2004; Martin & White, 2005) and is important in constructing proximity by allowing writers to use language flexibly to adopt positions, express points of view and claim affinity with readers. Hedges and other devices which allow writers to comment on the factual status of propositions are therefore abundant in research genres, indicating the degree of caution or assurance that can be attached to a statement. Writing for a peer audience, academics must carefully handle their claims to avoid overstating their case and risk inviting the rejection of their arguments. By withholding complete commitment to a proposition, hedges imply that a claim is based on the writer’s plausible reasoning rather than certain knowledge while opening a space for readers to dispute interpretations. This example from a research paper is typical of this recognition of alternative voices: (14) An early flowering response to high temperature is
- 39. maintained in pif4 mutants, suggesting that archi- tectural and flowering responses may operate via separate signaling pathways. The role of PIF4 in temperature signaling does not, however, appear to operate through interaction with either phytochrome or DELLA proteins, suggesting the existence of a novel regulatory mechanism. We conclude that PIF4 is a potentially important component of plant high temperature signaling and integrates multiple environmental cues during plant development. (Current Biology, 2009; 19 (5)) Fig 1. Most frequent reporting verbs in articles in 8 disciplines (Hyland, 2004) 123K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 The frequent use of hedges therefore marks out a modest and careful researcher trying to keep interpretations close to the data and unwilling to make overblown claims. But scientists see their work as far more tentative and mediated than journalists, who take a very different view towards facts. The process of transforming research into popular accounts involves removing doubts and upgrading the significance of claims to emphasize their uniqueness, rarity or originality. This can be seen in the way that the same research is reported in a popular science journal, with the tentativeness removed in favour of unmodified or boosted assertions which amplify the certainty of the claims and, in so doing, the impact of the story: (15) Researchers at the universities of Leicester and Oxford have made a discovery about plant growth which
- 40. could have an enormous impact on crop production as global warming increases. Dr Franklin said: ‘‘This study provides the first major advance in understanding how plants regulate growth responses to elevated temper- ature at the molecular level. This discovery will prove fundamental in understanding the effects of global climate change on crop productivity.’’ (Science Today April 2009) For the science journalist, hedges simply reduce the importance and newsworthiness of a story by drawing attention to its uncertain truth value, but in glamorizing material for a wider audience, popular science texts do not help readers to see how scientific facts can be questioned. In addition to using hedges to manipulate proximity to an audience and distance from a text, scientists also reduce their use of explicit attitude. My science RA corpus contains one expression of attitude every 350 words in engineering and one every 200 words in the sciences. This works to increase the objectivity of claims and the persuasiveness of the argument, and where they do occur it is typically to express significance (16) or to comment on results (17): (16) The interaction of light with the scanning tunneling microscope (STM) junction should provide an important tool for the characterization of surfaces. (Phy RA) ATP plays a central role not only in the energy status of the cell, including microorganisms, but also as a regulator of enzyme activity. (EE RA) (17) This result was unexpected as the degree of internal colonization by the mycoparasite was greaer in sclerotia of the latter fungus. (Bio RA)
- 41. There is one important limitation in working with systems of only a few hundred particles. (Phy RA) In contrast, the popularizations are littered with attitude markers, indicating the writer’s affective responses to material, pointing out what is important and encouraging readers to engage with the topic. Unlike their role in research papers, however, these markers do not signal the writer’s affiliation to shared disciplinary attitudes and values. Instead, they help to impart an informal tone and underline the accessibility of the material. In fact, the attitudes are often not the writer’s at all, but those which the interested lay reader might be expected to hold: (18) In May this year astronomers announced the first weather report for an alien world. Although fairly crude, it hints that some pretty wild weather is blowing on a giant Jupiter-like planet. (New Scientist, Sept 2007) Physicists at the University of Toronto have cracked the mystery behind the strange and uncannily well- ordered hexagonal columns found at such popular tourist sites as Northern Ireland’s Giant’s Causeway and California’s Devil’s Postpile. (Science Daily, Dec 2008) After digging their way out and molting into adults, billions of the big, clumsy, red-eyed insects will sing their ear-splitting love songs. (Scientific American, 2004) Proximity with readers is, then, achieved by writers attributing attitudes to them. This is what a lay audience might think and believe on the basis of a community-endorsed common sense. 124 K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9
- 42. (2010) 116e127 3.5. Reader engagement Finally, proximity is negotiated through the ways writers explicitly address their readers. Engagement (Hyland, 2005) is an alignment dimension of interaction where writers acknowledge and connect to others, recognising the presence of their readers, pulling them along with their argument, focusing their attention, acknowledging their uncertainties, including them as discourse participants, and guiding them to interpretations. I only have space to mention two aspects of engagement here, reader pronouns and questions, both of which are far more common in the popular texts. Reader pronouns offer the most explicit ways of achieving proximity by bringing readers into a discourse, and while you and your are actually the clearest way a writer can acknowledge the reader’s presence, these forms are rare in research papers. Instead, inclusive we is prominent. There are several reasons for using this form, but most centrally it identifies the reader as someone who shares a point of view or ways of seeing with the writer. It sends a clear signal of membership by textually constructing both the writer and the reader as participants with similar understanding and goals, as we see here: (19) We would expect that over time, plant genotypes that maximize mycorrhizal benefits would be at a selective advantage. (Bio RA) At the moment we tend to accept that the incident light, or at least most of it, is bounced twice before returning
- 43. and re-emerging outside the eye. (Phy RA) This emphasis on binding writer and reader together through inclusive we is also a feature of popular articles, where it functions less to claim community solidarity than to insinuate a shared, taken-for-granted way of seeing the world. This helps guide readers towards a perceived relevance of the reported research, aligning the reader with the writer, and perhaps against an institutional ‘they’: (20) On the list of things we’re supposed to do but generally don’t, nothing ranks higher than eating well. And no wonder, considering that they keep changing the rules on us. Margarine was once supposed to be better than butter d until it turned out to be worse. Low-fat eating was supposed to be the way to lose weight d until it was low-carb, then back to low-fat again. (Popular Science April, 2009) While this shades into a positioning of the reader, the considerable use of the second person does this more explicitly, directly involving readers in the topic of the article through common experiences or drawing them into a credible, but unknown, world: (21) You’re just about ready to buy a pair of tickets on Ticketmaster, but before you can take the next step, an annoying box with wavy letters and numbers shows up on your screen. You dutifully enter in what you seedand what a robot presumably can’tdin the name of security. But what you may not know is that you also have helped archivists decipher distorted characters in old books and newspapers so that they can be posted on the Web. (Scientific American Aug 2008) One look at the effects of a bomb blast suggests that you’d have
- 44. to be extremely lucky to emerge from one unscathed. If you were not burned by the explosion or blasted by shrapnel, the chances are you’d be hit by the shock wave. Travelling at several hundred metres per second, this causes massive fluctuations in air pressure which can knock you unconscious, rupture air-filled organs such as eardrums, lungs and bowels, and stretch and distort other major organs. (New Scientist, April 2009) A final way that writers build a connection with readers is through the use of questions. These are a key strategy of dialogic involvement in many registers but are almost non- existent in science and engineering research papers. Their role in manufacturing immediacy with readers is viewed with suspicion by professional scientists, although they are common journalistic devices, representing an important way of managing proximity: (22) Solix must struggle for answers before it can sell a thing: Which species of algae will produce the most oil? What’s the best way to grow it? And not least, how do you extract the oil from the algae once it’s grown? (Popular Science, April 2008) 125K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Presenting the researcher’s problems as questions achieves proximity with readers by engaging them in the scientific enterprise, bringing them closer to the concerns of the scientist at the same time as making the science real and intelligible. 4. Conclusions
- 45. Science journalism illustrates the ways proximity (and interpersonality) work as writers set out material for different purposes and readers. Popularizations represent a discourse which establishes the uniqueness, relevance and immediacy of topics which might not seem to warrant lay attention by making information concrete, novel and accessible. Findings are therefore invested with a factual status, related to real life concerns, and presented as germane to readers with little detailed interest in the ways that they were arrived at or in the controversies surrounding them. Readers, in fact, experience the academic world and its discourses as a succession of discoveries in the relentless advance of inductive science. In sum, science journalism works as journalism rather than science. It is written in ways which make the research accessible and allow non-specialists to recover the interpretive voice of the scientist. There are several advantages for EAP practitioners in considering how proximity operates across genres. First it helps us see how different features combine to orchestrate interpersonality. Writers position themselves through rhetorical choices which emphasize a relationship to content and to readers, displaying an audience sensitivity through the way the material is organised argued and attributed as well as choices concerning writer and reader visibility in the text. Simply, both scientists and journalists have to evaluate their audiences as they write, and this means that texts tell us something about how writers see their readers. Understandings of readers’ goals, interests, knowledge and pro- cessing capabilities are indexed in rhetorical choices so that context is constructed in text. Second, genre comparisons suggest that proximity is important not only to analysts of academic writing but also to teachers of it. Clearly, analyses caution us to take care in using
- 46. popular texts as models for scientific writing as differences in constructing proximity mean that they will not help students see how scientific facts can be questioned or modified. Comparisons, however, can have an important consciousness raising function by highlighting features of scientific discourse for learner noticing. Their study, moreover, may help students see something of the importance of audience. In recontextualizing academic research for a lay audience, much popular science portrays research as an immediate encounter of a scientist with nature. Scientists become actors and claims become a discovery event; jargon is evicted or roughly glossed; certainties replace tentativeness, and nouns regain their verbal status. Such a reconfi- guration of discourse reminds us that science is a communicative activity so science once again becomes ideas to be discussed rather than information to be received. Most importantly, the study of proximity in these genres helps us to see how each group appropriates and trans- forms science by presenting the same material for different purposes and readers. In popular science proximity is achieved by making research accessible and allowing non- specialists to recover the voice of the scientist which is absent in professional papers. In research science writers position themselves as competent colleagues by displaying familiarity with methods and a disciplinary literature, presenting research with caution, and supporting claims with evidence. Ultimately the insights into academic writing which these kinds of contrasts reveal makes the study of interpersonal proximity a highly productive and valuable activity for researchers and teachers of academic discourses. References Becher, T., & Trowler, P. (2001). Academic tribes and
- 47. territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: SRHE and Open University Press. Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Casanave, C., & Vandrick, S. (Eds.). (2003). Writing for scholarly publication. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum. Hoey, M. (2001). Textual interaction. London: Routledge. Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 6(2), 173e191. Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse. London: Continuum. Kaufer, D., & Geisler, C. (1989). Novelty in academic writing. Written Communication, 6(3), 286e311. Martin, J., & White, P. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave/MacMillan. Miller, T. (1998). Visual persuasion: a comparison of visuals in academic texts and the popular press. English for Specific Purposes, 17(1), 29e46. Montgomery, S. (1996). The scientific voice. New York: The Guildford Press. Myers, G. (1990). Writing biology: Texts in the social construction of scientific knowledge. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press. 126 K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Myers, G. (1991). Lexical cohesion and specialized knowledge in science and popular science texts. Discourse Processes,
- 48. 14(1), 1e26. Nwogu, K. (1991). Structure of science popularizations: a genre analysis approach to the schema of popularized medical texts. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 111e123. Pellechia, M. (1997). Trends in science coverage: a content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science, 6, 49e68. Sacks, H., Schlegloff, E., & Jefferson, G. (1974). A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking in conversation. Language, 50, 697e735. Swales, J. (2004). Research genres. Cambridge: CUP. Ken Hyland is Professor of Applied Linguistics and director of the Centre for Applied English Studies at the University of Hong Kong. He has published over 130 articles and 14 books on language teaching and academic writing, most recently Academic Discourse with Continuum (2009). He is co-editor of Applied Linguistics. 127K. Hyland / Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2010) 116e127 Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional scienceInterpersonality and proximityA tale of two genresFacets of proximityOrganisationArgument structuresCredibilityStanceReader engagementConclusionsReferences