Epistemic Modality and Knowledge Attribution in Scientific Discourse: A Taxonomy of Types and Overview of Features

We propose a model for knowledge attribution and epistemic evaluation in scientific discourse, consisting of three dimensions with different values: source (author, other, unknown); value (unknown, possible, probable, presumed true) and basis (reasoning, data, other). Based on a literature review, we investigate four linguistic features that mark different types epistemic evaluation (modal auxiliary verbs, adverbs/adjectives, reporting verbs and references). A corpus study on two biology papers indicates the usefulness of this model, and suggest some typical trends. In particular, we find that matrix clauses with a reporting verb of the form 'These results suggest', are the predominant feature indicating knowledge attribution in scientific text.

[1]  Songbo Tan,et al.  A survey on sentiment detection of reviews , 2009, Expert Syst. Appl..

[2]  B. Latour,et al.  Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts , 1983 .

[3]  Ken Hyland,et al.  The Author in the Text: Hedging Scientific Writing. , 1995 .

[4]  Mariette Schrier,et al.  A Genetic Screen Implicates miRNA-372 and miRNA-373 As Oncogenes in Testicular Germ Cell Tumors , 2006, Cell.

[5]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Annotating Opinions in the World Press , 2003, SIGDIAL Workshop.

[6]  Hagit Shatkay,et al.  New directions in biomedical text annotation: definitions, guidelines and corpus construction , 2006, BMC Bioinformatics.

[7]  Padmini Srinivasan,et al.  The Language of Bioscience: Facts, Speculations, and Statements In Between , 2004, HLT-NAACL 2004.

[8]  George Lakoff,et al.  Hedges: A Study In Meaning Criteria And The Logic Of Fuzzy Concepts , 1973 .

[9]  Ted Briscoe,et al.  Weakly Supervised Learning for Hedge Classification in Scientific Literature , 2007, ACL.

[10]  M. Rothenberg,et al.  Analysis of the CCR3 promoter reveals a regulatory region in exon 1 that binds GATA-1 , 2005, BMC Immunology.

[11]  Kees Hengeveld,et al.  Functional Discourse Grammar: A Typologically-Based Theory of Language Structure , 2008 .

[12]  Peter Crompton,et al.  Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems , 1997 .

[13]  Soo-Min Kim,et al.  Determining the Sentiment of Opinions , 2004, COLING.

[14]  Halil Kilicoglu,et al.  Recognizing speculative language in biomedical research articles: a linguistically motivated perspective , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[15]  Pedro Angel Martín Martín,et al.  THE MITIGATION OF SCIENTIFIC CLAIMS IN RESEARCH PAPERS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY , 2008 .

[16]  Thomas Hawes,et al.  Reporting verbs in medical journal articles , 1994 .

[17]  Sophia Ananiadou,et al.  Categorising Modality in Biomedical Texts , 2008, LREC 2008.

[18]  János Csirik,et al.  The BioScope corpus: biomedical texts annotated for uncertainty, negation and their scopes , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[19]  Ken Hyland,et al.  Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse , 2005 .

[20]  Françoise Salager-Meyer,et al.  Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse , 1994 .