CARS模型下中文学术论文引言的价值宣称构建——基于互动式元话语的实证分析

The Construction of Value Claims in Chinese Academic Research Article Introductions Based on the CARS Model—An Empirical Study of Interactional Metadiscourse

摘要: 本研究旨在探讨中文学术论文引言中价值宣称的修辞构建机制。研究融合了Swales的CARS (创建研究空间)模型和Hyland的互动式元话语理论，构建了一个“语步–策略”双层分析框架。作者选取了语言学及应用语言学领域的25篇实证论文引言作为语料，采用语料库驱动的混合研究方法，对其中的互动式元话语进行标注和统计分析。研究发现：1) 在总体分布上，增强语(boosters)和介入标记(engagement markers)是支撑论证的核心资源，而自我提及(self-mentions)的使用则相对克制。2) 元话语策略与CARS模型的语步功能高度协同：在“确立领域”(Move 1)时，多使用态度标记和增强语进行正面评价；在“指出空白”(Move 2)时，混合使用模糊语和增强语以平衡批评与礼貌；在“填补空白”(Move 3)时，通过“自我提及 + 介入标记 + 增强语”的组合模式来系统性地宣告研究价值。研究最终认为，中文学术论文引言的价值构建是一个结构化和策略化的过程，其语言选择反映了中文学术共同体在彰显研究贡献与维系学术和谐之间的修辞偏好。

Abstract: This study investigates the rhetorical mechanisms through which value claims are constructed in introductions to Chinese academic research articles. Integrating Swales’ CARS (Create a Research Space) model with Hyland’s theory of interactional metadiscourse, it constructs a two-tier “move-strategy” analytical framework. Based on a corpus of 25 empirical article introductions from linguistics and applied linguistics, the study adopts a corpus-driven mixed-methods approach to annotate and statistically analyze interactional metadiscourse resources. Findings reveal that: 1) At the macro-distributional level, boosters and engagement markers serve as the core argumentative resources, while the use of self-mentions is relatively restrained; 2) Metadiscourse strategies are functionally synergistic with CARS model moves: attitude markers and boosters are predominantly employed for positive evaluation in “Establishing a Territory” (Move 1); a combination of hedges and boosters is used to balance criticism with politeness in “Establishing a Niche” (Move 2); and a systematic “self-mentions + engagement markers + boosters” pattern is deployed to proclaim research value in “Occupying the Niche” (Move 3). The study concludes that value construction in Chinese academic article introductions is a structured and strategic process, whose linguistic choices reflect the Chinese academic community’s rhetorical preference for negotiating between highlighting research contributions and maintaining academic harmony.