| Popis: |
This Critical Discourse Analysis examines hedging as a linguistic device at the intersection of scientific discourse and women’s language. Hedging has been identified as a marker of scientific discourse where it is valued for expanding dialogic space for the promulgation of knowledge. It is also a recognised marker of women’s common language, where it is purported to align with discriminatory gender norms that women should not impose their views but could also be construed as a lack of clear thinking, conviction, or confidence. This could be limiting, especially in professional domains, however, the particular value attached to hedging in scientific discourse challenges this hypothesis and provides the focus of this study of gender differences in hedging with modal auxiliary verbs in the context of scientific discourse. The findings confirm hedging as a marker of scientific discourse and reflect modal auxiliaries being used with similar frequency by women and men, although with subtle, but significant differences in the specific modals that were used, and how. This provides a nuanced picture of women hedging in ways that mostly exemplify the standards of scientific discourse while also integrating some of the socially normative hedging practices that are associated with women’s language. |
