Nominalizations: from Features to Applications in Abstracts of Linguistics Academic Papers

α
Lei Yue
Lei Yue
σ
Yi Zhang
Yi Zhang

Send Message

To: Author

Nominalizations: from Features to Applications in Abstracts of  Linguistics Academic Papers

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

7P043

Nominalizations: from Features to Applications in Abstracts of  Linguistics Academic Papers Banner

AI TAKEAWAY

Connecting with the Eternal Ground
  • English
  • Afrikaans
  • Albanian
  • Amharic
  • Arabic
  • Armenian
  • Azerbaijani
  • Basque
  • Belarusian
  • Bengali
  • Bosnian
  • Bulgarian
  • Catalan
  • Cebuano
  • Chichewa
  • Chinese (Simplified)
  • Chinese (Traditional)
  • Corsican
  • Croatian
  • Czech
  • Danish
  • Dutch
  • Esperanto
  • Estonian
  • Filipino
  • Finnish
  • French
  • Frisian
  • Galician
  • Georgian
  • German
  • Greek
  • Gujarati
  • Haitian Creole
  • Hausa
  • Hawaiian
  • Hebrew
  • Hindi
  • Hmong
  • Hungarian
  • Icelandic
  • Igbo
  • Indonesian
  • Irish
  • Italian
  • Japanese
  • Javanese
  • Kannada
  • Kazakh
  • Khmer
  • Korean
  • Kurdish (Kurmanji)
  • Kyrgyz
  • Lao
  • Latin
  • Latvian
  • Lithuanian
  • Luxembourgish
  • Macedonian
  • Malagasy
  • Malay
  • Malayalam
  • Maltese
  • Maori
  • Marathi
  • Mongolian
  • Myanmar (Burmese)
  • Nepali
  • Norwegian
  • Pashto
  • Persian
  • Polish
  • Portuguese
  • Punjabi
  • Romanian
  • Russian
  • Samoan
  • Scots Gaelic
  • Serbian
  • Sesotho
  • Shona
  • Sindhi
  • Sinhala
  • Slovak
  • Slovenian
  • Somali
  • Spanish
  • Sundanese
  • Swahili
  • Swedish
  • Tajik
  • Tamil
  • Telugu
  • Thai
  • Turkish
  • Ukrainian
  • Urdu
  • Uzbek
  • Vietnamese
  • Welsh
  • Xhosa
  • Yiddish
  • Yoruba
  • Zulu

Abstract

This article analyzes several features and applications of five types of nominalizations in abstracts from linguistics academic papers under the guidance of grammatical metaphor raised by Halliday. By adopting a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods, frequencies of each type of nominalization were calculated and features of these nominalizations were discussed. Results revealed that process nominalization occupied 84.8% and quality nominalization accounted for 13.4%. However, circumstance nominalization and relator nominalization only accounted for 0.2% and 1.1%, respectively. Furthermore, the author only found 6 instances of zero nominalization. Additionally, it is found that process nominalization can condense information, increase the level of abstraction of abstracts and form fixed collocation patterns in abstracts. Quality nominalization can achieve impersonalization, but meanwhile increase the distance between readers and writers. Circumstance, relator and zero nominalization are rarely used in abstracts, because they increase the complexity of abstracts, weaken the logical link and add some unnecessary information. On the basis of the findings, practical implications are discussed.

References

16 Cites in Article
  1. Chang Chenguang (2004). Grammatical metaphor and experience reconstruction.
  2. R Day (1998). How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper.
  3. S Eggins (1994). An Introduction to Systemic -Functional Linguistics.
  4. M Halliday (1985). Language as a Social Semiotic: An Introduction to Functional Grammar.
  5. M A K Halliday (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar(2nd edition).
  6. M Halliday (1996). Things and Relations: Regrammatizing Experience as Technical Knowledge.
  7. Hu Zhuanglin (1996). Grammatical Metaphor.
  8. Zhu Hu Zhuanglin,Zhang Yongsheng,Delu (1989). Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar.
  9. Liu Guohui,Lu Jianru (2004). Studies on nominalization by major linguistic schools abroad and st home.
  10. J Martin (1992). English Text.
  11. R Quirk,D Crystal (1985). A Comprehensive grammar of the English language.
  12. John Swales (1990). 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, selected 45–47, 52–60.
  13. Teun Van Dijk (2008). Critical discourse analysis and nominalization: problem or pseudo-problem?.
  14. Wang Zhenhua (2016). Putting technology in its place: ICT in Modern Foreign Language teaching.
  15. Zhang Delu,Dong Juan (2014). Grammatical Metaphor: A Givónian Interpretation.
  16. Zhu Yongsheng (2006). On nominalization, verbalization and grammatical metaphor.

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Lei Yue. 2018. \u201cNominalizations: from Features to Applications in Abstracts of Linguistics Academic Papers\u201d. Global Journal of Human-Social Science - G: Linguistics & Education GJHSS-G Volume 18 (GJHSS Volume 18 Issue G4): .

Download Citation

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/GJHSS

Print ISSN 0975-587X

e-ISSN 2249-460X

Keywords
Classification
GJHSS-G Classification: FOR Code: 380299
Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

May 2, 2018

Language
en
Experiance in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

Article Matrices
Total Views: 3319
Total Downloads: 1556
2026 Trends
Related Research

Published Article

This article analyzes several features and applications of five types of nominalizations in abstracts from linguistics academic papers under the guidance of grammatical metaphor raised by Halliday. By adopting a mixture of qualitative and quantitative methods, frequencies of each type of nominalization were calculated and features of these nominalizations were discussed. Results revealed that process nominalization occupied 84.8% and quality nominalization accounted for 13.4%. However, circumstance nominalization and relator nominalization only accounted for 0.2% and 1.1%, respectively. Furthermore, the author only found 6 instances of zero nominalization. Additionally, it is found that process nominalization can condense information, increase the level of abstraction of abstracts and form fixed collocation patterns in abstracts. Quality nominalization can achieve impersonalization, but meanwhile increase the distance between readers and writers. Circumstance, relator and zero nominalization are rarely used in abstracts, because they increase the complexity of abstracts, weaken the logical link and add some unnecessary information. On the basis of the findings, practical implications are discussed.

Our website is actively being updated, and changes may occur frequently. Please clear your browser cache if needed. For feedback or error reporting, please email [email protected]

Request Access

Please fill out the form below to request access to this research paper. Your request will be reviewed by the editorial or author team.
X

Quote and Order Details

Contact Person

Invoice Address

Notes or Comments

This is the heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Ut elit tellus, luctus nec ullamcorper mattis, pulvinar dapibus leo.

High-quality academic research articles on global topics and journals.

Nominalizations: from Features to Applications in Abstracts of Linguistics Academic Papers

Lei Yue
Lei Yue
Yi Zhang
Yi Zhang

Research Journals