The Use of Hedges and Boosters in English-Language Scientific Articles of the Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V527

Keywords:

hedges, boosters, hedging the proposition, boosting the proposition, scientific discourse of the late 19th – early 20th century, the English language

Abstract

This paper is aimed at revealing the question about using hedges and boosters, lexico-grammatical discourse items that promote regulations of proposition force – within anglophone scientific discourse of the late 19th – early 20th century. The relevance of the research is determined by the increased interest of modern linguistics in discursive units, including hedges and boosters, which play a significant role in scientific discourse, regulating the author’s ideological presence in the text of the work, contributing to maintaining contact between the authors of texts and their readers, as well as reflecting the author’s subjective position on the discussed issue. The scientific originality of the study lies in the fact that it is for the first time to perform a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the units mitigating and reinforcing the utterance in scientific articles by anglophone authors of the late 19th – early 20th century. The research material includes articles from the field of applied linguistics, theory of pedagogy, theoretical anthropology and applied astrophysics. The articles analysed were written between 1887 and 1914. The total number of hedges and boosters identified by the continuous sampling method was 3916 language units, of which 41.1 % were defined as hedges and 58.9 % as boosters. The results of empirical analysis show that boosters and hedges, being important tools for regulating the power of utterance, were actively used by anglophone authors in scientific publications of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The more frequent usage of boosters can be explained by the scientific traditions of that period. Due to a number of reasons (the relatively small number of published articles, the absence of strict requirements regarding article structure and length), the authors of scientific papers positioned themselves more as real experts in their field of knowledge, expressing their subjective thoughts very unambiguously and confidently.

For citation: Dubovik E.A., Bodnaruk E.V. The Use of Hedges and Boosters in English-Language Scientific Articles of the Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries. Vestnik Severnogo (Arkticheskogo) federal’nogo universiteta. Ser.: Gumanitarnye i sotsial’nye nauki, 2026, vol. 26, no. 4, pp. 52–62. https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V527

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Elizaveta A. Dubovik, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Arkhangelsk, Russia

Lecturer at the Department of the English Language

Elena V. Bodnaruk, Northern (Arctic) Federal University named after M.V. Lomonosov, Arkhangelsk, Russia

Dr. Sci. (Philol.), Assoс. Prof., Prof. at the Department of German and French Philology

References

Hyland K. Boosting, Hedging and the Negotiation of Academic Knowledge // Text. 1998. Vol. 18(3). P. 349–382.

Lakoff G. Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts // J. Philos. Logic. 1973. Vol. 2. P. 458–508.

Feng C. Metadiscourse in Research Articles: A Comparative Study across Disciplines and Research Paradigms. PhD-Dissertation. Nanyang, 2014. 393 p.

AlGhamdi G.A., Suleiman Alyousef H. The Construction of Knowledge Claims in Three Disciplines: An Exploration of Hedging and Boosting Strategies in Research Articles Written in English by Arab and Anglophone Writers // J. Lang. Educ. 2022. Vol. 8(2). P. 31–47.

Hyland K., Zou H.J. “I Believe the Findings are Fascinating”: Stance in Three-Minute Theses // J. English Acad. Purposes. 2021. Vol. 50. Аrt. № 100973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100973

Gribanova T.I., Gaidukova T.M. Hedging in Different Types of Discourse // Training, Language and Culture. 2019. Vol. 3(2). P. 85–99.

Ларина Л.И., Витрук Л.Ю. Средства выражения неуверенности в современном английском языке на примере академического дискурса // Соврем. проблемы гуманит. и обществ. наук. 2016. № 5(13). С. 66–71.

Malyuga E., McCarthy M. English and Russian Vague Category Markers in Business Discourse: Linguistic Identity Aspects // J. Pragmatics. 2018. Vol. 135. P. 39–52.

Викторова Е.Ю. Хеджи vs. бустеры: коммуникативное смягчение и усиление в жанре официального отзыва на диссертацию // Жанры речи. 2023. Т. 18, № 2(38). С. 126–131. https://doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2023-18-2-38-126-131

Богинская О.А. Бустеры как метадискурсивное средство персуазивности в защитительной речи // Дискурс проф. коммуникации. 2024. Т. 6, № 1. С. 26–43. https://doi.org/10.24833/2687-0126-2024-6-1-26-43

Boginskaya O. Dissenting with Conviction: Boosting in Challenging the Majority Opinion // Int. J. Leg. Disc. 2023. Vol. 7(2). P. 257–279.

Konukman В. Wissensbewertung im wissenschaftlichen Diskurs: Eine deskriptive linguistische Analyse in ausgewählten literaturwissenschaftlichen Artikeln // Diyalog. 2026. Vol. 1. C. 115–133.

Сальман Чиад Ч.И. К вопросу о научном дискурсе и его особенностях // Преподаватель XXI век. 2022. № 2-2. С. 421–432.

Panchenko N.N., Volkova Ya.A. Categoricalness in Scientific Discourse // J. Sib. Fed. Univer. Humanities Soc. Sci. 2021. Vol. 14(4). P. 535–543. http://dx.doi.org/10.17516/1997-1370-0740

Dontcheva-Navratilova O. Hedges and Boosters in L2 (Czech) Master’s Theses and Published Research Articles: A Contrastive Analysis // Int. J. App. Ling. 2025. Vol. 35(1). P. 73–90.

Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. A University Grammar of English. M., 1982. 391 p.

Peacock M. A Cross-Disciplinary Comparison of Boosting in Research Articles // Corpora. 2006. Vol. 1(1). P. 61–84.

Hyland K. Writing without Conviction? Hedging in Science Research Articles // Appl. Ling. 1996. Vol. 17, № 4. P. 433–454.

Biber D., Johansson S., Leech G., Conrad S., Finegan E. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow, 1999. 1204 p.

Quirk R., Greenbaum S., Leech G., Svartvik J. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London, 1985. 1779 p.

Lebedeva I.S., Pavlova Е.B. Intensifiers in Modern English // Vestnik MGLU. 2016. № 21(760). P. 43–56.

Боднарук Е.В. Модальные глаголы: между модальностью, эвиденциальностью и темпоральностью (на материале современного немецкого языка) // Вестн. Томск. гос. ун-та. Филология. 2019. № 59. С. 19–34.

Боднарук Е.В. Модальные глаголы в современном немецком языке: систематизация значений // Вестн. МГЛУ. Гуманит. науки, 2019. Вып. 1(817). С. 66–79.

Hyland K., Jiang F.K. Metadiscourse Choices in EAP: An Intra-Journal Study of JEAP // J. Engl. Acad. Purp. 2022. Vol. 60(2). P. 1–12.

Ларина Т.В. Категория вежливости и стиль коммуникации: Сопоставление английских и русских лингвокультурных традиций. М., 2009. 512 с.

Farrokhi F., Emami S. Hedges and Boosters in Academic Writing: Native vs. Non-Native Research Articles in Applied Linguistics and Engineering // J. Appl. Ling. 2008. Vol. 1, № 2. P. 62–98.

Published

2026-08-31

How to Cite

Dubovik Е. А., & Bodnaruk Е. В. (2026). The Use of Hedges and Boosters in English-Language Scientific Articles of the Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries. Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University Series "Humanitarian and Social Sciences", 26(4), 52–62. https://doi.org/10.37482/2687-1505-V527