EUFEMIZAM U SLUŽBI OBJEKTIVNOSTI : STRATEGIJE VREDNOVANJA U RECENZIJAMA ZNANSTVENIH TEKSTOVA
EUPHEMISM IN THE SERVICE OF OBJECTIVITY : EVALUATION STRATEGIES IN REVIEWS OF SCIENTIFIC TEXTS

Summary/Abstract: Review, as a subtype of secondary texts (“texts about texts”), is – according to many classifications of text types – considered to be scientific in nature, which necessarily implies objectivity of expression. But that objectivity can be easily jeopardized by merely looking at differences between the various definitions of review, which can be found among different authors. This distinction is based largely on the particular dimension of this type of text that the author wishes to place in the foreground. Although there are authors who include review among informational texts (e.g. Brinker 2010: 91), a large number of them emphasize another dimension: the persuasive-appellative one(Luger 1995, Mecklenburg 1977). Despite striving for objectivity alongside the primary function of informing, one can – more or less obviously – observe some other relationships within reviews, such as those of the author toward the primary text, the author toward the recipient, and the author toward the author of the primary text. In addition, when writing the review, the author directly presents himself through his own scientific achievements and interests. Taking all these aspects into consideration, a logical question is imposed on us: how much room for manipulation is opened by this kind of text in which the author has a free hand in highlighting certain aspects – and consequently neglecting or even disguising others – of the text he is reviewing? In this work – based on the analysis of selected examples of reviews of Croatian scientific articles in the field of linguistics – we have shown how evaluation strategies are applied, whereby we are especially interested in negative evaluations and the way they are communicated through the use of euphemistic forms.

• Details
• Contents