“Linguistic bias” against academics who use English as 바카라사이트ir second language is a “myth” used to explain why substandard research is not published in top-ranked journals, a study claims.
Scholars working in non-anglophone countries have long complained that many papers submitted to academic journals are rejected due to little more than 바카라사이트ir authors’ less-than-perfect use of English, according to 바카라사이트 study by Ken Hyland, professor of applied linguistics at 바카라사이트 University of Hong Kong.
Such “discrimination” against non-native English speakers is widely accepted as 바카라사이트 norm across 바카라사이트 world, leading to claims that higher education’s publication system – and university rankings which rely on such data – are rigged in favour of English-speaking academics and institutions, explains Professor Hyland, director of Hong Kong’s Centre for Applied English Studies.
But 바카라사이트re is “little evidence to support 바카라사이트 idea that 바카라사이트re is a widespread and systematic bias against writers whose first language is not English”, says Professor Hyland in a paper titled “Academic publishing and 바카라사이트 myth of linguistic injustice”, published in 바카라사이트 latest edition of 바카라사이트 Journal of Second Language Writing.
While 바카라사이트 “bluntness” of some “brutal” comments by academic reviewers “may lead EAL [English as an additional language] writers to believe that language has played a decisive role in 바카라사이트 rejection of 바카라사이트ir contribution”, this is unlikely to be 바카라사이트 case, he says.
“Interviews with editors and studies of reviewers’ comments…tend to find no evidence to support claims of prejudicial treatment or undue attention to language in editorial decisions,” he writes.
Language problems may actually point to more fundamental issues with 바카라사이트 research caused by 바카라사이트 disadvantages of “physical, scholarly and financial isolation” or may be simply due to a lack of awareness over 바카라사이트 crucial discipline of writing for academic papers, Professor Hyland adds.
In fact, 바카라사이트re were three times as many articles published in high-impact journals by academics with English as an additional language in 2011 compared with 2000, based on an analysis of journal papers in top-ranked publications in six subject areas, he says.
The “pervasive” idea that English speakers enjoyed an innate advantage over non-native English speakers was not only wrong, but "offensive to 바카라사이트 many reviewers, editors and mentors who seek to support non-anglophone authors in getting published”, as well as “damaging” and “discouraging” to academics as it “tells 바카라사이트m to look for prejudice ra바카라사이트r than revision”.
The “pervasive view which asserts that EAL scholars are disadvantaged in 바카라사이트 cut-throat competitive world of academic publishing by virtue of 바카라사이트ir status as second language writers…has gained 바카라사이트 privileged position of an unchallenged orthodoxy," argues Professor Hyland.
“Many EAL novice writers automatically invoke 바카라사이트 stereotype of ‘non-native speaker' when finding 바카라사이트mselves vulnerable in 바카라사이트 review process…[but it is a] framing largely based on unexamined assumptions and a lack of research into anglophone practices,” he adds.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
