“At the end of this study, see the following discussion”: Endophoric markers in Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian research articles

This study focuses on the metadiscourse category of endophoric markers in Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian linguistics research articles. The aim is to investigate whether language, writing tradition, or disciplinary conventions play a more significant role in the variation of these metadiscourse markers across the three languages. Furthermore, the study seeks to determine whether the use of endophoric markers might reflect distinct writing traditions in the Baltic states. For the study, we collected corpora from the key linguistics journals in Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian. Comparison of different types of endophoric markers, including reviewing and previewing markers, visuals, and references to the whole text, reveals a number of language- and discipline-specific differences in the distributional properties and functions of these metadiscourse markers. This crosslinguistic variation of endophorics might be attributed to different writing styles or writing traditions in the Baltic states. *** "“Vt järgnevat arutelu siinse uuringu lõpus”: tekstisisesed viited eesti, läti ja leedu teadusartiklites" Artikkel uurib metadiskursuse üht kategooriat, tekstisiseseid viiteid (ingl endophoric markers) eesti, läti ja leedu keeleteaduslikes artiklites. Eesmärk on välja selgitada, kas tekstisiseste viidete varieerumist võib mõjutada rohkem keel, kirjutamistraditsioon või valdkondlikud tavad. Otsitakse vastust küsimusele, kas tekstisiseste viidete kasutusmustrid peegeldavad Balti riikide erinevaid kirjutamis traditsioone. Uurimisandmestiku moodustavad kolm omakorpust, millest igaühte on kogutud keeleteaduslikud artiklid ühes keeles. Analüüs keskendub teadus artiklites esinevatele eri tüüpi tekstisisestele viidetele: 1) ees- või 2) tagapool kirjutatule, 3) visuaalsetele elementidele või 4) kogu tekstile osutavatele keelenditele. Analüüsi tulemusena ilmnesid mitmesugused keele- ja valdkonnaspetsiifilised eripärad nii metadiskursuse markerite jaotuses kui ka funktsioonides. Sellist tekstisiseste viidete varieerumist keeliti võib põhjendada erinevate kirjutamisstiilide või -traditsioonidega Balti riikides

Cross-linguistic patterns of metadiscourse: Disciplinary similarities and section-based differences

This study examines metadiscourse markers across a corpus of Estonian and Lithuanian journal articles in the field of linguistics. We aim to 1) compare the global use of all the metadiscourse markers across the languages and texts, making distinctions between these languages and specific academic journals, and 2) to discern whether similar and/or different patterns can be identified across the languages and whether such patterns also manifest across various academic journals. We find that Estonian writers use self-mentions more frequently in methods sections than Lithuanian counterparts. Comparing journals, the Lithuanian journal Kalbotyra shows more transition markers, code glosses, and endophoric markers, while the Estonian ERÜ aastaraamat relies more on transition markers in results and discussion sections. Despite discipline similarities, variations emerge in specific sections and interpersonal categories across languages and journals. The study provides insights into metadiscourse patterns and their role in different languages and academic contexts, offering potential guidance for future research and practice in non-English academic writing. *** "Metadiskursuse mustrite keeltevaheline võrdlus: valdkondlikud sarnasused ja artikliosade erinevused" Artikkel käsitleb metadiskursuse markereid eesti ja leedu keeleteaduslikes ajakirjades. Meie eesmärk on 1) võrrelda kõigi metadiskursuse markerite üldist kasutust tekstides keeliti, otsides nii keeltes kui ka ajakirjade kaupa ilmnevaid erinevusi, ning 2) leida keeliti võimalikud sarnased ja/või erinevad mustrid ja selgitada välja, kas need mustrid tulevad esile ka eri ajakirjades. Tulemused näitavad, et eesti autorid kasutavad artiklite meetodiosas enesele osutamisi (ingl self mentions) sagedamini kui leedu autorid. Ajakirjade võrdluses leidub leedu ajakirjas Kalbotyra rohkem sidususmarkereid (transition markers), täpsustavaid markereid (code glosses) ja tekstisiseseid viiteid (endophoric markers), samal ajal kui Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu aastaraamatus jäävad sellised lugejat juhatavad markerid rohkem tulemuste ja arutelu osadesse. Vaatamata valdkondlikele sarnasustele ilmneb siiski erinevusi teatud artikliosades ja interpersonaalse metadiskursuse kategooriates nii keeliti kui ka ajakirjade lõikes. Uurimus heidab valgust metadiskursuse kasutusmustritele ja nende rollile eri keeltes ja akadeemilistes kontekstides ning võib olla edaspidi suunanäitajaks mitteingliskeelsete akadeemiliste tekstide uurijatele ja praktikutele

National language in science: The case of Latvian

Aim. To show and describe the current situation in Latvian language as a case study of the problem about the place of a national language and its existence in sciences in modern globalised times, when the dominance of English as the lingua franca of science grows. Methods.  A descriptive method, including literature review of language of science used globally. Empirical discourse content analysis was conducted; it examined various documents, including Latvian legal texts that governs the rights and rules of Latvian language use, as well as a wide array of mainly online media. Results. During the study, 21 different sources and 304 online comments under articles relating to the issue were analysed. The material revealed that there is a breadth of opinions, ranging from the Ministry stance to organisations and the general public. It could be said that the main trend in the opinions can be described as follows: there is a variety of language options – a dissertation written only in Latvian; a dissertation written in English; a choice of language that is up to the doctoral student. This would ensure that the language choice fits the doctoral students’ goals and field of research and making English mandatory would not likely lead to guaranteed scientific excellence as what matters is the research itself, not the language. Conclusions. National language of science is a current issue in Latvia, as there is a need for state language use in the scientific register. The discussed Ministry document is still a draft report and it is not yet known what final decisions on the PhD process and dissertation language will be taken. Latvian is a scientific language and it should be recognised as one of the languages used in science  within the international scientific discourse