Cover not available

Article published In: Spanish in Context
Vol. 22:2 (2025) ► pp.445–471

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Patrones y funciones discursivas de seis encapsuladores nominales en español en la escritura académica de estudiantes universitarios

ORCiD logo with link | Universidad de las Américas Puebla (UDLAP)

Article language: Spanish

Published online: 8 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/sic.23008.uri
Abstracta
Los encapsuladores nominales (Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: from corpus to cognition. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) son mecanismos de cohesión léxica frecuentemente utilizados en la escritura académica. En este estudio guiado por datos se presentan los patrones léxicogramaticales de los encapsuladores nominales cuestión, factor, hecho, idea, tema y problema en un corpus de escritura académica en español de estudiantes universitarios mexicanos. Asimismo, se describen algunas funciones metadiscursivas (Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, . 2017. “Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?” Journal of Pragmatics 1131: 16–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) que cumplen estos sustantivos, además de la función cohesiva. Los resultados apoyan la evidencia de que los encapsuladores nominales se utilizan, principalmente, para organizar la información, pero también para que los estudiantes emitan opiniones y evaluaciones que orientan la interpretación de los lectores. Se reporta también la identificación de dos nuevos patrones léxicogramaticales: uno ambivalente (que permite la inclusión de una cita) y otro que ejemplifica. Los resultados tienen el potencial de aplicarse en la enseñanza de la escritura académica.
Abstract
Patterns and discourse functions of six shell nouns in Spanish in the academic writing of university students
Shell nouns (Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: from corpus to cognition. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) are lexical cohesion mechanisms frequently used in academic writing. In this data-driven corpus study, the lexicogrammatical patterns of shell nouns cuestión, factor, hecho, idea, tema and problema in a corpus of academic writing in Spanish by Mexican university students are presented. Also, some metadiscursive functions (Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar, . 2017. “Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?” Journal of Pragmatics 1131: 16–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) served by these nouns, in addition to the cohesive function, are described. The results support the evidence that shell nouns are used, mainly, to organize information, but also for students to issue opinions and evaluations that guide readers’ interpretation. Two new lexicogrammatical patterns (one inserting a quote and another one inserting examples) are also reported. Results have the potential to be used in the teaching-learning of academic writing.
Article outline
  • 1.Introducción
  • 2.Antecedentes
  • 3.Planteamiento del problema
  • 4.Metodología
    • 4.1Descripción del corpus
    • 4.2Procesamiento y extracción de datos
  • 5.Resultados
    • 5.1Patrones léxicogramaticales
      • 5.1.1Patrones identificados en la literatura
      • 5.1.2Patrones inéditos
    • 5.2Funciones discursivas
      • 5.2.1Funciones interactivas o metatextuales
      • 5.2.2Función interaccional o persuasiva
  • 6.Discusión
  • 7.Conclusiones
  • Agradecimientos
  • Notas
  • Referencias
References (26)
Referencias
Adelstein, Andreína, y Victoria de los Ángeles Boschiroli. 2015. “Estatuto terminológico de nombres abstractos meronímicos de referencia general: descripción y propuesta de representación en diccionarios para la producción académica.” Debate Terminológico 141: 30–24.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Anthony, Laurence. 2022. AntConc Software Version 4.1.1. Tokyo: Waseda University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Benítez-Castro, Miguel-Angel, y Paul Thompson. 2015. “Shell-nounhood in academic discourse. A critical state-of-the-art review.” International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 20 (3): 378–404. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duque, Eladio. 2021. “Etiquetas de discurso en la enseñanza de español como lengua extranjera.” En Internacionalización y enseñanza del español como LE/L2: plurilingüismo y educación intercultural, ed. por Marta Saracho-Arnáiz, y Herminda Otero-Duval, 854–873. Asociación de Español como Lengua Extranjera (ASELE).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John. 2003. “Signalling nouns in discourse.” English for Specific Purposes 22 (4): 329–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flowerdew, John, y Richard W. Forest. 2015. Signalling nouns in English. A corpus-based discourse approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Francis, Gill. 1994. “Labelling discourse: an aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion.” En Advances in Written Text Analysis, ed. por Malcolm Coulthard, 83–101. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle, y Magali Paquot. 2008. “Too chatty. Learner academic writing and register variation.” English Text Construction 1 (1): 41–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., y Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael. 1993. “A common signal in discourse: how the word reason is used in texts.” En Techniques of Description. Spoken and written discourse, ed. por John M. Sinclair, Michael Hoey, y Gwyneth Fox, 67–82. Abingdon, New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. “Bundles in academic discourse.” Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 321: 150–169. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2017. “Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?” Journal of Pragmatics 1131: 16–29. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ignatieva, Natalia, y Cecilia Colombi (eds.). 2014. CLAE: Corpus del Lenguaje Académico del Español de México y los Estados Unidos: Un análisis sistémico funcional. México: Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) y Hyland, Ken. 2018. “Nouns and Academic Interactions: A Neglected Feature of Metadiscourse.” Applied Linguistics 39 (4): 508–531. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López-Ferrero, Carmen. 2012. “Lexical connection: Semiterm grammatical patterns in Spanish.” Applied Linguistics 33 (4): 428–449. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López Samaniego, Anna. 2011. La categorización de entidades del discurso en la escritura profesional. Las etiquetas discursivas como mecanismo de cohesión léxica. Tesis Doctorals en Xarxa. Universitat de Barcelona. [URL]
. 2018. “La encapsulación nominal en el discurso académico-científico oral y escrito: patrones de aparición.” Caplletra. Revista Internacional de Filología 641: 129–152. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony, Xiao, Richard y Tono, Yukio. 2006. Corpus-Based Language Studies: An Advanced Resource Book. London y New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony y Hardie, Andrew. 2012. Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2000. English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: from corpus to cognition. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2018. “Shell nouns in English: a personal roundup.” Caplletra 641: 109–128. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sinclair, John M. 1993. “Written discourse structure.” En Techniques of Description. Spoken and written discourse, ed. por John M. Sinclair, Michael Hoey, y Gwyneth Fox, 6–31. Abingdon, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Urizar Ocampo, Carolina, e Ignacio Rodríguez Sánchez. 2022. “Encapsuladores nominales hecho, tema, idea y problema en un corpus de escritura académica en español.” Estudios de Lingüística Aplicada, 40 (74): 153–191. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Winter, Eugene. 1977. “A clause-relational approach to English texts: A study of some predictive lexical items in written discourse.” Instructional Science, 61: 1–92. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wray, Alison. 2002. Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue