Disciplinary tribes and the discourse of mainstream media expert opinion articles: evidencing COVID-19 knowledge claims for a public audience

[thumbnail of 113976 VoR.pdf]
Preview
Text - Published Version
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview
[thumbnail of R2 Disciplinary tribes Hafner Jaworska Sun FINAL RJ CH_SJ CH_SJ.docx]
Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
Restricted to Repository staff only

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Hafner, C. A., Jaworska, S. orcid id iconORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7465-2245 and Sun, T. (2024) Disciplinary tribes and the discourse of mainstream media expert opinion articles: evidencing COVID-19 knowledge claims for a public audience. Applied Linguistics Review. ISSN 1868-6311 doi: 10.1515/applirev-2023-0260

Abstract/Summary

Much applied linguistic research has investigated how experts from different disciplines - different “disciplinary tribes” - present knowledge claims, drawing on taken-for-granted disciplinary ideologies and epistemologies. However, this research has mainly focused on specialist to specialist communication rather than specialist to non-specialist communication. This article aims to fill this gap by examining a corpus of mainstream media “expert opinion articles”, written by experts for members of the public, on the topic of the Covid-19 crisis and published in The Guardian and The New York Times. The corpus included articles by experts in Medical Science, Medical Practice, Science, Humanities and Social Sciences, Law, and Economics. Using corpus-based discourse analysis, we consider the effect of discipline on the way that experts present and evidence knowledge claims. We compare the kinds of experts, their content focus, and forms of evidentiality seen in verbal evidentials used in the articles. The analysis identifies four discourse strategies: 1) deriving knowledge from experience; 2) invoking the knowledge of the expert community; 3) invoking vernacular knowledge; and 4) raising claims in argument or critique. Differences in disciplinary epistemologies lead to systematic differences in presenting and evidencing knowledge claims, even in texts primarily intended for a wide public audience.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/113976
Identification Number/DOI 10.1515/applirev-2023-0260
Refereed Yes
Divisions Arts, Humanities and Social Science > School of Literature and Languages > English Language and Applied Linguistics
Uncontrolled Keywords disciplinary discourses, media discourse, opinion article, evidentiality, corpus-based discourse analysis
Publisher De Gruyter
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar