El lenguaje científico, la divulgación de la ciencia y el riesgo de las pseudociencias

  1. Llácer Llorca, Eusebio V.
  2. Ballesteros Roselló, Fernando J.
Journal:
Quaderns de filología. Estudis lingüístics

ISSN: 1135-416X

Year of publication: 2012

Issue Title: Lengua y ciencia. Recepción del discurso científico

Issue: 17

Pages: 51-67

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openRODERIC editor

More publications in: Quaderns de filología. Estudis lingüístics

Abstract

Scientific language is characterized by its specific characteristics. Common general words appear here with specific meanings, frequently different from the ones used in the daily language. Scientific discourse is also characterized by the great relative amount of specific vocabulary, exclusive of this discourse. This makes scientific language to reflect a certain degree of opacity, particularly to people alien to its use; this in turn creates a sort of barrier which in practice isolates the scientific community from the rest of society. It is no surprise that specialized scientific language is often employed by some scientists �those who believe themselves to be a part of an intellectual élite� as a sort of communicative barrier, which keeps them at a �prudential� distance away from the laypersons and distinguishes them from the rest of people. Fortunately these elitist scientists are nowadays a minority, for most of them understand that science must, above all, establish a fluid relationship with society. And here comes popularization of science. For science to reach society in its widest extension, and to be understandable, it must get rid of this incomprehensible scientific jargon in order to adopt a closer and more quotidian language. All this collides with an opposite trend: the adoption by the �pseudo-sciences�, such as homeopathy, osteopathy, or psychoanalysis, of a deliberately opaque language which imitates scientific language with the sole aim of arm these pseudo-sciences with a patina of respectability, which serves to protect themselves hence hindering the access to them and the comprehension of the general public.

Bibliographic References

  • Ardoz. I. (2004): “Tecnociencia y ciencia-ficción. Hacia el paradigma tecnohermético”. In: Alonso, A. & Galán, C. (eds.): La tecnociencia y su divulgación: un enfoque transdisciplinar. Rubí (Barcelona): Anthropos, 97-128.
  • Ballesteros F. & Luque, B. (2011): 10.000 años mirando estrellas. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
  • Barber, C. L. (1962): “Some measurable characteristics of modern scientific Prose”. In: J. Swales (ed.): Episodes in ESP, Oxford: Pergamon Press Ltd, 1985.
  • Bazerman, Ch. (1985): “Physicists Reading Physics”. Written Communication 2,1.
  • Brown, P. & Levinson, S. (1987): Politeness: Some Universals in Language Use. Cambridge: C.U.P.
  • Calvo Hernando, M. (2005): Nuevos escenarios y desafíos para la divulgación de la ciencia. [Recurso electrónico]. Madrid: Fundación General de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid.
  • Escandel-Vidal, M. V. (1996): Introducción a la pragmática. Barcelona: Ariel Lingüística.
  • Fenimore, E. E. & Cannon, T. M. (1978): “Coded aperture imaging with uniformly redundant arrays”. Applied Optics 17(3): 337.
  • Fernández Fernández, F. & Gil Salom, L. (2000): “Enlaces oracionales y organización retórica del discurso científico en inglés y en español”. Studies in English Language and Linguistics: Monographs 7. Universitat de València.
  • Galán Rodríguez, C. (2004): “Ciencia y retórica en el discurso de divulgación social”. In: Alonso, A. & Galán, C. (eds.). La tecnociencia y su divulgación: un enfoque transdisciplinar. Rubí (Barcelona): Anthropos, 171-198.
  • Gallardo, S. (1999): “Evidencialidad: la certeza y la duda en los textos periodísticos sobre ciencia”. Revista de Lingüística Teórica y Aplicada (Concepción: Chile) 37: 53-66.
  • Gilbert, G. N. & Mulkay, M. (1984): Opening Pandora’s Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discourse. Cambridge: C.U.P.
  • Gläser, R. (1982): “The Stylistic Component of Language for Specific Purposes”. Fachsprache 1: 69-83.
  • Hill, S. S., Soppelsa, B. F. & West, G. K. (1982): “Teaching ESL students to read and write experimental research papers”. TESOL Quarterly 16: 333- 47.
  • Jurdant, B. (1993): “Popularization of science as the autobiography of science”. Public Understanding of Science 2: 365-373.
  • Llácer Llorca, E. V. (1997): “Translation in the Teaching of Scientific English: Translation or Text Typology”. In: Pique, J. & Vieira, D. (eds.): Applied Languages: Theory and Practice in ESP. València: Universitat de València, 243-258.
  • Luque B., Lacasa L., Ballesteros F. J. & Robledo, A. (2011): “Feigenbaum Graphs: A Complex Network Perspective of Chaos”. PLoS ONE 6(9): e22411. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022411.
  • Minsky, M. (1975): “A Framework for Representing Knowledge”. In: P. H. Winston (ed.): The Psychology of Computer Vision. Nueva York: McGrawHill.
  • Myers, G. A. (1986): “Textbooks: and the Sociology of Scientific Language”. English for Specific Purposes 11: 3-17.
  • Olson, R. (2009): Don’t be such a scientist. Washington: Island Press.
  • Pennock Speck, B. & Llácer Llorca, E. V. (2000): “Contrasting anaphoric nouns: Pragmática, Análisis del Discurso y Comunicación”. Panorama Actual de la Lingüística Aplicada: Conocimiento, Procesamiento y Uso del Lenguaje I: 339-348. [Actas XVI Congreso Nacional de AESLA, Universidad de la Rioja. 1998].
  • Reguera, I. (2004): “Divulgación de la ciencia, canon científico, imagen del mundo”. In: Alonso, A. & Galán, C. (eds.): La tecnociencia y su divulgación: un enfoque transdisciplinar. Rubí (Barcelona): Anthropos, 13-52.
  • Rumelhart, D. E. & Norman, D. A. (1987): “Representation of Knowledge”. In: Aitkhead, A. M. & Slack, J. M. (eds.): Issues in Cognitive Modelling. Londres: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: The Open University.
  • Rumszewicz, W. (1967): “On contemporary dramatic and scientific English”. Uniwersytet im. Adama Michkiewicza w Poznaniu Glottodidactica II: 71- 83.
  • Torres Alvero, C., Fernández Esquinas, M., Rey Rocha, J. & Martín Sempere, M. J. (2011): “Dissemination practices in the Spanish research system. Scientists trapped in a golden cage”. Public Understanding of Science 20(1): 12-25.
  • Swales, J. M. (1990): Genre Analysis. Cambridge: C.U.P.
  • Ursua, N. (2004): “Divulgación de la ciencia, la ciencia y el público. Algunos problemas teóricos”. In: Alonso, A. & Galán, C. (eds.): La tecnociencia y su divulgación: un enfoque transdisciplinar. Rubí (Barcelona): Anthropos, 53-96.
Data source: Dialnet