- Volume 9 Number 6 (Dec. 2023)
- Volume 9 Number 5 (Oct. 2023)
- Volume 9 Number 4 (Aug. 2023)
- Volume 9 Number 3 (Jun. 2023)
- Volume 9 Number 2 (Apr. 2023)
- Volume 9 Number 1 (Feb. 2023)
- Volume 8 Number 4 (Dec. 2022)
- Volume 8 Number 3 (Sep. 2022)
- Volume 8 Number 2 (Jun. 2022)
- Volume 8 Number 1 (Mar. 2022)
- Volume 7 Number 4 (Dec. 2021)
- Volume 7 Number 3 (Sep. 2021)
- Volume 7 Number 2 (Jun. 2021)
- Volume 7 Number 1 (Mar. 2021)
- Volume 6 Number 4 (Dec. 2020)
- Volume 6 Number 3 (Sep. 2020)
- Volume 6 Number 2 (Jun. 2020)
- Volume 6 Number 1 (Mar. 2020)
- Volume 5 Number 4 (Dec. 2019)
- Volume 5 Number 3 (Sep. 2019)
- Volume 5 Number 2 (Jun. 2019)
- Volume 5 Number 1 (Mar. 2019)
- Volume 4 Number 4 (Dec. 2018)
- Volume 4 Number 3 (Sep. 2018)
- Volume 4 Number 2 (Jun. 2018)
- Volume 4 Number 1 (Mar. 2018)
- Volume 3 Number 4 (Dec. 2017)
- Volume 3 Number 3 (Sep. 2017)
- Volume 3 Number 2 (Jun. 2017)
- Volume 3 Number 1 (Mar. 2017)
- Volume 2 Number 4 (Dec. 2016)
- Volume 2 Number 3 (Sep. 2016)
- Volume 2 Number 2 (Jun. 2016)
- Volume 2 Number 1 (Mar. 2016)
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
- ISSN: 2382-6282 (Print); 2972-3108 (Online)
- Abbreviated Title: Int. J. Lang. Lit. Linguist.
- Frequency: Bimonthly
- DOI: 10.18178/IJLLL
- Editor-in-Chief: Dr. Jason Miin-Hwa Lim
- Managing Editor: Jennifer X. Zeng
- Indexed by: CNKI, Google Scholar, Crossref,
- E-mail: ijlll_Editor@126.com
IJLLL 2022 Vol.8(4): 264-268 ISSN: 2382-6282
DOI: 10.18178/IJLLL.2022.8.4.360
DOI: 10.18178/IJLLL.2022.8.4.360
An Interdisciplinary Study of Different Pragmatic “We” in Academic Discourse: A Case Study of Linguistics and Economics
Zhou Yaru and Zhang Yi
Abstract—Based on Systematic Functional Grammar and
Hyland’s pragmatic classification of “we”, with the help of
AntConc and Log-likelihood and Chi-square Calculator 1.0, the
present study combines qualitative and quantitative research
designs to compare and analyze the similarities and differences
of different pragmatic functions of “we” in Linguistic and
Economic academic discourse. The result shows that there are
significant differences in the use of “we” between the academic
discourse of the two disciplines (P < 0.001). In addition to the
most frequently used pragmatic function of “we,” the other four
functions are more frequently used in the academic discourse of
Linguistics. The study suggests that this result may be affected
by the stylistic characteristics of the discipline, and hopes to
provide some enlightenment for the understanding and writing
of academic discourse in Linguistics and Economics.
Index Terms—Personal pronoun we, linguistics academic discourse, economics academic discourse, pragmatic function.
Zhou Yaru and Zhang Yi are with the School of Foreign Studies, Northwestern Polytechnical University (NPU), Xi'an, CO 710129 China (email: 2021204284@mail.nwpu.edu.cn, yizhang@nwpu.edu.cn).
Index Terms—Personal pronoun we, linguistics academic discourse, economics academic discourse, pragmatic function.
Zhou Yaru and Zhang Yi are with the School of Foreign Studies, Northwestern Polytechnical University (NPU), Xi'an, CO 710129 China (email: 2021204284@mail.nwpu.edu.cn, yizhang@nwpu.edu.cn).
Cite:Zhou Yaru and Zhang Yi, "An Interdisciplinary Study of Different Pragmatic “We” in Academic Discourse: A Case Study of Linguistics and Economics," International Journal of Languages, Literature and Linguistics vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 264-268, 2022.