Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T21:13:39.941Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975: A sociohistorical discourse analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2009

Dwight Atkinson
Dwight Atkinson
Affiliation:
Department of English, Auburn UniversityAL 36849-5203
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study traces the evolution of scientific research writing in English from 1675 to 1975. Two separate methods of discourse analysis – rhetorical analysis focusing on broad genre characteristics, and sociolinguistic register analysis – are applied to a large corpus of articles from the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. The two sets of results are then interpreted vis-à-vis the Royal Society's social history to yield an integrated description. Findings indicate that: (a) research writing in the 17th – 18th centuries was substantially influenced by communicative norms of author-centered genteel conduct; (b) greater attention to methodology and precision in the interest of scientific specialization brought about pronounced textual changes in the 19th century, although gentlemanly norms were still in evidence; and (c) by the late 20th century, expanded theoretical description/discussions appear to have replaced experiments and methods as the rhetorical centerpiece of the research article. (Discourse analysis, rhetorical analysis, register, social studies of science, scientific writing, corpus linguistics)

Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , September 1996 , pp. 333 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Andrade, E. N. da C. (1965). The birth and early days of the Philosophical Transactions. Notes & Records of the Royal Society of London 20: 9–27.Google Scholar
Atkinson, Dwight (1992). The evolution of medical research writing from 1735 to 1985: The case of the Edinburgh Medical Journal. Applied Linguistics 13: 337–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Atkinson, Dwight (1993). A historical discourse analysis of scientific research writing from 1675 to 1975: The case of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Los Angeles: University of Southern California dissertation.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles (1984). Modern evolution of the experimental report in physics: Spectroscopic articles in Physical Review, 1893–1980. Social Studies of Science 15: 163–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, Charles (1988). Shaping written knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Bazerman, Charles (1994). Constructing experience. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Berkenkotter, Carol, & Huckin, Thomas (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, & Finegan, Edward (1988). Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse Processes 11: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas,& Finegan, Edward (1989). Drift and the evolution of English style: A history of three genres. Language 65: 487–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas,& Finegan, Edward, (1992). The linguistic evolution of five written and speech-based English genres from the 17th to the 20th centuries. In Rissanen, Matti et al. (eds.), History of Englishes, 688–704. Amsterdam: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, & Hared, Mohammed (1991). Literacy in Somalia: Linguistic consequences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 12: 260–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, & Hared, Mohammed, (1994). Linguistic correlates of the transition to literacy in Somalia: Language adaptation in six press registers. In Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward (eds.), Sociolinguistic perspectives on register 186–216. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bitzer, Lloyd (1968). The rhetorical situation. Philosophy and Rhetoric 1: 1–15.Google Scholar
Dear, Peter (1985). Totius in verba: Rhetoric and authority in the early Royal Society. Isis 76: 154–61.Google Scholar
Garfield, Eugene (1976). Significant journals of science. Nature 264: 609–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Garfield, Eugene (1977a). Citations-to divided by items-published gives journal impact factor: ISI lists the top fifty high-impact journals of science. In his Essays of an information scientist, 1: 270–77. Philadelphia: ISI.Google Scholar
Garfield, Eugene (1977b). Journal citations studies X: Geology and geophysics. In his Essays of an information scientist, 2: 102–06. Philadelphia: ISI.Google Scholar
Garfield, Eugene (1983). Journal citation studies 38. Earth sciences journals: What they cite and what cites them. In his Essays of an information scientist, 5: 791–97. Philadelphia: ISI.Google Scholar
Giddens, Anthony (1979). Central problems in social theory: Actions, structure and contradiction in social analysis. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorsuch, Richard L. (1983). Factor analysis. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Herschel, John F. W. (1830). A preliminary discourse on the study of natural philosophy. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Klein, Lawrence (1994). “Politeness” as linguistic ideology in late 17th- and 18th-century England. In Stein, Dieter & van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon (eds.), Towards a standard English, 1600–1800, 31–50. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Knorr-Cetina, Karin D. (1981). The manufacture of knowledge: An essay on the constructivist and contextual nature of science. Oxford: Pergamon.Google Scholar
Kronick, David A. (1988). Anonymity and identity: Editorial policy in the early scientific journal. Library Quarterly 58: 221–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labov, William (1971). Methodology. In Dingwall, William Orr (ed.), A survey of linguistic science, 413–91. College Park: University of Maryland, Linguistics Program.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno (1987). Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Latour, Bruno, & Woolgar, Steve (1986). Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Locke, David (1992). Science as writing. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McIntosh, Carey (1986). Common and courtly language: The stylistics of social class in 18th-century English literature. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medawar, Peter (1964). Is the scientific paper fraudulent? Saturday Review, August 1: 42–43.Google Scholar
Myers, Greg (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10: 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ochs, Elinor (1990). Indexicality and socialization. In Stiegler, James W. et al. (eds.), Cultural psychology, 287–308. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paradis, James (1987). Montaigne, Boyle, and the essay of experience. In Levine, George (ed.), One culture: Essays in science and literature, 51–91. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Shapin, Steven (1984). Pump and circumstance: Robert Boyle's literary technology. Social Studies of Science 15: 481–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven (1988). The house of experiment in seventeenth-century England. Isis 79: 373–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven (1991). “A scholar and a gentleman”: The problematic identity of the scientific practitioner in early modern England. History of Science 29: 279–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven (1994). A social history of truth: Civility and science in seventeenth-century England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swales, John (1981). Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham, UK: University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.Google Scholar
Swales, John (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tarone, Elaine; Dwyer, Sharon; Gillette, Susan; & Icke, Vincent (1981). On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers. ESP Journal 1: 123–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Valle, Ellen (1996). A scientific community and its texts: A historical discourse study. In Gunnarsson, Britt-Louise (ed.), The construction of professional discourse. London: Longman, to appear.Google Scholar
Vande Kopple, William J. (1994). Some characteristics and functions of grammatical subjects in scientific discourse. Written Communication 11: 534–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walters, Franklin D. (1991). The problem of knowledge in 17th-century prose. De Kalb: Northern Illinois University dissertation.Google Scholar
Wells, Rulon (1960). Nominal and verbal style. In Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.), Style in language, 213–20. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Yeo, Richard (1981). Scientific method and the image of science, 1831–1891. In MacLeod, Roy & Collins, P. (eds.), The parliament of science, 65–88. Northwood, IL: Science Reviews.Google Scholar