Keywords
academic discourse
rhetorical question
scientific
How to Cite
Abstract
Intertextuality is considered one of the fundamental characteristics of scientific discourse, reflecting the relationship between a new study and previous academic works. The present study investigates the functional features of intertextuality and interrogative constructions in Uzbek and English scientific texts. The research applies comparative linguistic analysis, discourse analysis, and contextual examination to identify similarities and differences in the use of citations, rhetorical questions, and question-answer constructions. The findings reveal that English academic writing tends to employ explicit citation systems and structured referencing models, while Uzbek scientific texts frequently demonstrate implicit intertextuality and generalized references. In addition, interrogative constructions in scientific discourse perform stylistic and communicative functions such as emphasizing research problems, directing readers’ attention, and establishing an implicit dialogue between the author and the audience. The study contributes to the understanding of academic writing practices and provides methodological recommendations for improving scientific discourse in Uzbek academic writing.References
1. Abdurahmonov, G. O‘zbek tili grammatikasi. Toshkent. 1996. -196 b.
2. Bakhtin, M. Speech genres and other late essays. University of Texas Press. 1986. - 223 p.
3. Bazerman, C. Intertextuality: How texts rely on other texts. In C. Bazerman P. Prior (Eds.), What writing does and how it does it. Routledge. 2004. - 278 p.
4. Beaugrande, R., Dressler, W. Introduction to text linguistics. Longman. 1981. - 432 p.
5. Biber, D., Conrad, S. Register, genre and style. Cambridge University Press. 2009. - 236 p.
6. Bo‘ronov, J. Ingliz tili grammatikasi. Toshkent. 2004. - 231 b.
7. Carey, F. Organic chemistry. McGraw Hill. 2007. - 198 p.
8. Fairclough, N. Critical discourse analysis. Longman. 1995. - 265 p.
9. Hyland, K. Metadiscourse. Continuum. 2005. - 178 p.
10. Kristeva, J. Desire in language. Columbia University Press. 1980. - 167 p.
11. Leech, G., Svartvik, JA communicative grammar of English. Longman. 2002. - 245 p.
12. Madiyeva, M. Theoretical analysis of brands from a linguistic perspective. Society and Innovations, 3(7/S), 2022. 114-121. https://doi.org/10.47689/2181-1415- vol3-iss7/S-pp.114-121.
13. Madiyeva, M. The foundations of the brand name: Structure and semantics of new complex brand names. Theoretical Applied Science, (23), 2020. 39-42. https://doi.org/10.15863/TAS.2020.23.39-42.
14. Madiyeva, M. Features of brand names and language hybridization. Art of Word International Journal, 5(1), 2022. 147-154. https://doi.org/10.26739/2181-9297.
15. Ilie, C. What else can I tell you? A pragmatic study of English rhetorical questions. Almqvist Wiksell. 1994. - 235 p.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.