Adversative Function in Scientific Abstracts
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20524432 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hadinei Ribeiro Batista (0000-0002-3157-6366, Universidade Federal de Sergipe, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 69 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Alfa (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0002-5216 • E-ISSN: 1981-5794 |
| Publisher | FapUNIFESP (SciELO) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1590/1981-5794-e19426t |
| OpenAlex | W7128426852 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 1 |
The adversative function, despite being frequent in the abstracts of scientific articles, is not described in detail in the literature. In addition to the basic rhetorical structure of academic abstracts ( Swales, 1990 ), signaling, through contrast, either the motivating context of the research or the comparison/discussion of its results, is recurrent in this textual genre, regardless of the area of study. With the objective of describing the use and distribution of operators that establish an adversarial relationship in scientific abstracts, based on the Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST), this research analyzes a corpus composed of 28,121 abstracts, totaling 4,350,415 words. The results indicate that the ‘adversative’ argument (1) is rhetorically complex; (2) appears in different rhetorical movements of the abstract; and (3) it is used with high frequency, in particular to problematize the phenomenon under investigation as well as to support the presentation of results
Adversarial system · Argument (complex analysis) · Context (archaeology) · Function (biology) · Presentation (obstetrics) · Rhetorical question · Cultural and political discourse analysis · Discourse Analysis in Language Studies · Media and Communication Studies
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |