/LING
|
Update: February 24, 2023 The new version of Termout.org is now online, so this web site is now obsolete and will soon be dismantled. |
Lista de candidatos sometidos a examen:
1) reader (*)
(*) Términos presentes en el nuestro glosario de lingüística
1) Candidate: reader
Is in goldstandard
1
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines252 - : Based on the same criterion, Hammerich and Harrison (2002) differentiates between explicit links, i.e., obvious to the user, or implicit links, i.e., built in as part of the structure of the hypertext design model. However, she points out that the underlying basic feature of all systems is the difference between strongly authored links -manually made- and weakly authored links-built through computational models. To put it in other words, this means that in the processes of developing web sites professional writers may decide to design a link exclusively written for his/her particular hypertext or may create one between his/her hypertext and another page that contains related information. In order to make decisions, writers and designers on the web "imagine the audience and draw on their internal representation of the possible reader as a guide to writing and designing" (Dotto, 2006:3 ).
2
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines296 - : Self-help books are a discourse genre in proliferation in the contemporary world, and titles target children with counselling, suggestion for activities and behaviour; informative texts can also fit in it. Among these books are works addressing separately boys and girls, such as 'O Maravilhoso Livro das Meninas' and 'O Livro Perigoso para Garotos'. Although these works have similar structures, they differ in relation to the cultural representations of the intended reader: boys or girls . In this respect, this study aims at contrasting these works by identifying distinctive marks in them that gender, as a sex-related social category, affects this particular discourse genre. Studies of social gender and studies of discourse genres ground the analysis. It follows that there is a dichotomy of themes as far as how-to teaching in informative text themes is concerned as well as in recommendations of books and films.
3
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines313 - : Business e-mails were approached in an earlier study (Mada, 2004) from various perspectives: the oral-literate continuum and the reduced cue context that is specific to e-mails, the "framing devices" (Herring, 1996: 84) which assist the reader in understanding e‑mail messages, and the role of the "participation framework" (Schiffrin, 1987: 27 ) in dividing e-mail messages into 'public', 'private' and 'overhearing'. In the present study, we have emphasised the new discourse patterns which have emerged in Romanian business communication via electronic mail: jokes, announcements, invitations, and programmes.
4
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines395 - : Ädel (2006) define metadiscurso como el texto acerca del texto en evolución, o el comentario explícito del escritor sobre su propio discurso mientras éste se despliega, lo cual deja en evidencia una consciencia sobre el texto actual o el uso del lenguaje per se y del escritor y lector actual en sus respectivos roles discursivos. Este concepto abarca dos dimensiones: el ‘metatexto’ y la ‘interacción escritor-lector. El primero alude a “reflexive linguistic expressions referring to the evolving text per se or its linguistic form” y el segundo a “references to the writer persona and the imagined reader qua writer and reader of the current text” (Ädel, 2005: 154 ).
5
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines406 - : Van den Broek et al. (2002) use the term ‘standards of coherence’ to designate a kind of metacognitive knowledge/activity involved in reading comprehension. ‘Standards of coherence’ refers to a readers’ idea of what good comprehension is (a kind of declarative knowledge) and what it necessitates (a kind of procedural and perhaps also conditional knowledge) for a specific reading task. For example, a reader holding a low standard of coherence for a specific reading task may think that good comprehension involves understanding a few keywords in a document’s title .
6
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines565 - : ^6Cita completa: “Intersubjectivity is the explicit expression of the SP/ W’s [speaker/writer] attention to the ‘self ’ of the addressee/ reader in both an epistemic sense (paying attention to their presumed attitudes to the content of what is said), and in a more social sense (paying attention to their ‘face’ or ‘image needs’ associated with social stance and identity)” (^[189]Traugott, 2003: 18, citado en ^[190]De Cock 2013: 14 ).
7
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines596 - : “reflexive linguistic expressions referring to the evolving text per se or its linguistic form, including references to the writer persona and the imagined reader qua reader and the reader of the current text” (^[59]Ädel, 2005: 154 ).
8
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines596 - : “Thus, both interactive metadiscourse features (intended to organise and shape the material in the light of the readers' likely needs and expectations) and interactional metadiscourse features (aimed at portraying the scholars as authors and at binding writer and reader together) are a response to the interpersonal component of writing” (^[65]Mur-Dueñas, 2011: 3069 ).
9
paper corpusSignosTxtLongLines599 - : According to ^[71]Peacock (2006), expressing accepted truth is similar to conveying evidential or implicit truth. Modals (e.g. ‘will’ or ‘must’) or certain phrases (e.g. ‘of course’, ‘clearly’ or ‘obviously’) are often used to express accepted truth, that is, when a claim made is already widely accepted in a particular discipline. Even though the author’s viewpoint is not meant to be involved in such cases, the boosters mentioned “mark involvement and solidarity with an audience, stressing shared information, group membership, and direct engagement with readers” (^[72]Hyland, 1998a: 350 ). The term “solidarity boosters”, introduced by ^[73]Vassileva (2001: 97), reflects more specifically the inclusion of the reader in a scientific or discourse community and his knowledge of the field (^[74]Myers, 1989; ^[75]Harwood, 2005). The examples mentioned previously could also be considered as solidarity boosters depending on the context in which they have been used. Peacock (^[76]2006: 65
Evaluando al candidato reader:
2) discourse: 5 (*)
3) linguistic: 4 (*)
5) writer: 4 (*)
7) attention: 3
8) boosters: 3
9) solidarity: 3 (*)
10) Ädel: 3
11) reading: 3 (*)
14) texto: 3 (*)
15) hypertext: 3 (*)
19) coherence: 3 (*)
reader
Lengua: eng
Frec: 102
Docs: 59
Nombre propio: / 102 = 0%
Coocurrencias con glosario: 8
Puntaje: 8.813 = (8 + (1+5.24792751344359) / (1+6.68650052718322)));
Candidato aceptado
Referencias bibliográficas encontradas sobre cada término
(Que existan referencias dedicadas a un término es también indicio de terminologicidad.)| reader |
: 2. the ‘guide’ or the person who “shows the reader through the essay (…) draws the reader’s attention to points which are plainly visible or obvious within the essay” (^[112]Tang & John, 1999: 27). : Biber, D. (2008). Representativeness in corpus design. En T. Fontenelle (Ed.), Practical lexicography. A reader (pp. 63-87). Oxford: Oxford University Press. : Brown, A. (1982). Learning how to learn from reading. En J. A. Langer & M. T. Smith-Burke (Eds.), Reader meets author: Bridging the gap (pp. 26-54). Newark, DE: International Reading Association. : Cameron, D. (1998). Performing gender identity.Language and gender: a reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell. : Cummins, J. (2001). An introductory reader to the writings of Jim Cummins. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. : Dai, D. Y. & Wang, X. (2007). The role of need for cognition and reader beliefs in text comprehension and interest development. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 32, 332-347. : Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. En S. Davis (Ed.), Pragmatics: A reader (pp. 305-315). Nueva York: Oxford University Press. : Hall, S. (2000).Who needs identity? En P. Du Gay, J. Evans & P. Redman (Eds.), Identity: A reader (pp. 15-30). Londres: Sage Publications and the Open University. : Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader. Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication, 18(4), 549-574. : Kristeva, J. (1986). Word, dialogue, and the novel. En T. Moi (Ed.), The Kristeva Reader (pp. 35-61). Nueva York: Columbia University Press. : Magliano, J. P., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Millis, K. K., Muñoz, B. D., & McNamara, D. S. (2002). Using latent semantic analysis to assess reader strategies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 34,181-188. : Martin, J. (1984). Language, register and genre. En C. Frances (Ed.), Children writing: Reader (pp. 21-30). Geelong, Vic.: Deaking University Press. : Martin, J. R. (2001). Language, register and genre. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing English in a global context: A reader (pp. 149-166). London: Routlege/Macquarie University/The Open University. : Martin, J.R. (1984). Language, register and genre. En F. Christie (Ed.), Children writing: Reader (pp. 21-29). Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press. : Montero-Fleta, B., Montesinos, A., Pérez, C. & Turney, E. (2004). The reader and the writer in technical texts in English, Spanish and Catalan. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 16, 155-164. : Mueller-Vollmer, K. (Ed.) (1986). The hermeneutics reader. Texts of the German tradition from the enlightenment to the present. Oxford: Blackwell. : Painter, C. (2001). Understanding genre and register: Implications for language teaching. In A. Burns & C. Coffin (Eds.), Analysing English in a global context: A reader (pp. 167-180). London: Routlege/Macquarie University/The Open University. : Paris, S. C., Lipton, M. Y. & Wixson, K. K. (1983). Becoming a strategic reader. Contemporary Educational Psycholog y, 8, 293-316. : Paris, S., Lipson, M. & Wixson, K. (1994). Becoming a strategic reader. En H. Singer & B. Rudell (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (pp. 778-862). Newark, Delaware: IRA & Erlbaum. : Paris, S., M. Lipson y K. Wixson. 1994. Becoming a strategic reader, en R. Ruddell, M. : Pollatsek, A., Reichle, E. D. & Rayner, K. (2006). Tests of the E-Z Reader Model: Exploring the interface between cognition and eye movement control. Cognitive Psychology, 52, 1-56. : Ramsay, C. & Sperling, R. (2010). Designating reader perspective to increase comprehension and interest. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 35(3), 215-227. : Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A. & Reichle, E. (2004). The effects of frequency and predictability on eye fixations in reading: Implications for the E-Z Reader Model. Journal of Experimental Psychology & Human Perception Performance, 30(4), 720-32. : Rayner, K., Li, X. & Pollatsek, A. (2007). Extending the E-Z Reader Model of Eye Movement Control to chinese readers. Cognitive Science, 31, 1021-1033. : Reichenbach, H. (2005). The tenses of verbs. En I. Mani, J. Pustejovsky & R. Gaizauskas (Eds.), The language of time: A reader (pp. 71-78). Oxford: Oxford University Press. : Reichle, E. & Drieghe, D. (2015). Using E-Z Reader to examine the consequences of fixation-location measurement error. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 262-270. : Reichle, E., Rayner, K & Pollatsek, A. (2012). Using E-Z Reader to simulate eye movements in nonreading tasks: A unified framework for understanding the eye-mind link. Psychological Review, 119, 155-185. : Scharw, G. & Dennison, R. (1994). The effect of reader purpose on interest and recall. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26, 1-18. : Schraw, G. (2000). Reader beliefs and meaning construction in narrative text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 96-106. : Swales, J. (1993). The paradox of value: Six treatments in search of the reader. En W. Henderson, T. Dudley-Evans & R. Backhouse (Eds.), Economics and language (pp. 223-239). Londres: Routledge. : Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22, 5878. : Wade, S. E., Schraw, G., Buxton, W. M. & Hayes, M. T. (1993). Seduction of the strategic reader: Effects of interest on strategies and recall. Reading Research Quarterly, 28, 3-24. |