To "We" or Not to "We": Corpus-Based Research on First-Person Pronoun Use in Abstracts and Conclusions

Autor/inn/en	Wang, Shih-ping; Tseng, Wen-Ta; Johanson, Robert
Titel	To "We" or Not to "We": Corpus-Based Research on First-Person Pronoun Use in Abstracts and Conclusions
Quelle	In: SAGE Open, 11 (2021) 2, (18 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Wang, Shih-ping) ORCID (Tseng, Wen-Ta)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	2158-2440
DOI	10.1177/21582440211008893
Schlagwörter	Computational Linguistics; Form Classes (Languages); Phrase Structure; Authors; Language Usage; Periodicals; Word Frequency; Writing for Publication; Documentation; Electronic Publishing; Morphemes; Teaching Methods; Grammar; Profiles; Discourse Analysis + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Linguistics; Computerlinguistik; Analytischer Sprachbau; Phrasenstruktur; Author; Autor; Autorin; Sprachgebrauch; Periodical; Journal; Zeitschrift; Fachzeitschrift; Periodikum; Word analysis; Frequency; Wortanalyse; Häufigkeit; Dokumentation; Elektronisches Publizieren; Morphem; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Grammatik; Charakterisierung; Profilanalyse; Diskursanalyse
Abstract	A growing trend exists for authors to employ a more informal writing style that uses "we" in academic writing to acknowledge one's stance and engagement. However, few studies have compared the ways in which the first-person pronoun "we" is used in the abstracts and conclusions of empirical papers. To address this lacuna in the literature, this study conducted a systematic corpus analysis of the use of "we" in the abstracts and conclusions of 400 articles collected from eight leading electrical and electronic (EE) engineering journals. The abstracts and conclusions were extracted to form two subcorpora, and an integrated framework was applied to analyze and seek to explain how we-clusters and we-collocations were employed. Results revealed whether authors' use of first-person pronouns partially depends on a journal policy. The trend of using "we" showed that a yearly increase occurred in the frequency of "we" in EE journal papers, as well as the existence of three "we-use" types in the article conclusions and abstracts: "exclusive," "inclusive," and "ambiguous." Other possible "we-use" alternatives such as "I" and "other personal pronouns" were used very rarely--if at all--in either section. These findings also suggest that the present tense was used more in article abstracts, but the present perfect tense was the most preferred tense in article conclusions. Both research and pedagogical implications are proffered and critically discussed. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: http://sagepub.com
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01