план анализа научного текста

1)      Discuss the title of the article. In what way does it convey the article’s main idea?

      (Speak on the role of the title in terms of creating the readers’ presupposition)

2)      Speak on the layout of the article:

a)      Outline the contents.

b)      Analyse the logical parts it is divided into.

c)       Analyse what type of connection is used to join the paragraphs.

d)      Analyse each logical part separately (introduction, main body, conclusion)

Introduction

·         Does the writer begin the introduction stating the problem or providing general information on the topic?

·         In what way is the problem stated? (in the form of question or affirmation; providing key arguments for and against; using words that prove the ambiguity of the problem debatable, discussible, ambiguous, etc.)

·         Does the writer exemplify the problem?

Main Body

·         What are the key points of the main body?

·       Does the author provide different points of view on the problem or makes a comprehensive     analysis of the key argument?

·         Speak on the role of examples in this part of the article.

·         Speak on the role of link words and connectives employed by the author.

·         In what way does the author refer to the works of other researches in this area?

        

 Conclusion

·         Does the writer provide formal indicators of the conclusion?

·         Does he provide the summary of all the points considered above?

·         Does he/she make a balanced conclusion?

3)      Analyse the key concept of the article.

a)      Pick out the key words of the article that objectify the key concept.

b)      Speak on the evaluative nature of the words that refer to the key concept.

c)       Is the author subjective or objective in analyzing the key concept of the article?

d)      Does the author resort to special syntactical constructions to express his position in the problem discussed?

e)      What is the role of implication in the article?

4)      Appraisal part

Has the article changed you vision of the problem?

Do you agree with the author’s treatment of the problem?

Do you think the author used appropriate/inappropriate means to justify his/her point of view?

Can you think of further aspects of the problem discussed?