OBJECTIVISM/SUBJECTIVISM IN SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES FROM DIFFERENT FIELDS: THE HETEROGENEITY OF ACADEMIC WRITING

ABSTRACT: This paper is aimed at discussing the homogenization of scientific and academic writing in the process of text constitution, by analyzing aspects related to objectivism and subjectivism in academic texts. The selection of some A1 Brazilian scientific articles from different fields of knowledge was carried out according to specific genre: compositional form, style and theme which delimit texts in terms of objectivism and subjectivism. The work is guided by the dialogic assumptions of the Bakhtin's Circle regarding genres, as well as some authors from the New Literacy Studies framework. Results show that: a) every utterance consists of subjective and objective elements; b) aspects delimiting objectivity and subjectivity are predominantly marked in the compositional and architectural forms and in the text style related to the theme; c) articles of different fields are similar while dealing with elements concerning objectivity, such as compositional form and language resources; d) the articles differ by showing aspects which, although observed in verbal materiality, find meaning in the extra verbal context, pervading subjectivity as a thematic choice as well as some variation in the amount of authors; e) objectivity and subjectivity nuances observed in the discourse allow us to characterize traces of heterogeneous writing in these fields.

摘要：本文旨在探讨文本建构过程中科学学术写作的同质化现象，通过分析学术文本中的客观性与主观性相关维度展开研究。本研究选取巴西不同学科领域的A1级学术期刊论文作为样本，依据界定文本客观性与主观性的特定体裁标准——包括篇章组织结构、文体风格与主题范畴——进行筛选。本研究以巴赫金学派（Bakhtin's Circle）关于体裁的对话性理论假设为指导框架，同时借鉴新读写研究（New Literacy Studies）领域部分学者的相关观点。研究结果如下：（a）所有话语均兼具主观性与客观性要素；（b）界定客观性与主观性的维度主要体现在文本的组织结构、架构形式以及与主题相关的文体风格之中；（c）不同学科领域的论文在处理客观性相关要素（如篇章组织结构与语言资源）时呈现出相似性；（d）不同论文则存在差异：尽管其相关维度均可在话语物质性中被观测到，但意义生成依托于超话语语境，既存在作为主题选择的主观性渗透，也伴随作者数量层面的差异；（e）话语中呈现的客观性与主观性细微差异，可用于刻画这些学科领域中写作异质性的痕迹。