Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Discourse communities and their writing styles: A case study of Robert Boyle

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this chapter

+ Tax (if applicable)

Chapter Summary

In this paper the disciplines medicine and natural science are interpreted as discourse communities, and it is assumed that discourse communities are characterized by their writing styles. The difference between the writing styles of the two discourse communities is demonstrated by a multidimensional analysis of five medical and five science texts of the 17th century. Robert Boyle (1627-1691) is introduced as a member of the medical and of the science discourse community. A corpus of five of his medical and five of his science texts is analyzed to test the hypotheses that his medical and his science writing styles were as different from each other as the writing styles of the authors of the other 17th century medical and science texts, and that Boyle followed the discourse practices of his contemporaries. Both hypotheses are refuted, and Boyle’s deviating writing styles are explained as manifestations of his authorial identity. The appreciation of Boyle’s achievements by the medical and science discourse communities of the 18th century is taken as the motivation for the hypothesis that his writing styles, too, were admired and imitated. This hypothesis is tested through a diachronic analysis of 17th century medical and science texts, Boyle’s medical and science texts, and 18th century medical and science texts. A comparison of their linguistic profiles weakly support the hypothesis in the case of Boyle’s science writing style and strongly in the case of his medical writing style. As a conclusion it is suggested that future research should treat science and medicine as distinct disciplines already in the 17th century and that linguists should pay more attention to Boyle’s medical texts.



Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
    English Corpus Linguistics: Variation in Time, Space and Genre — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation