Klasykacja operatorów metatekstowych i częstość ich występowania w krótkich tekstach naukowych w języku polskim

The usage and meaning of "mentioned" ("wspomniany") and "described" ("opisany") metatext markers in Polish scientific texts

“…The notion of informativeness may further explain the results of both experiments. For example, in Experiment 1 a minority of the MMs from the corpus had a global scope (they referred to a concept that was supposed to be active at every stage of the text processing; this replicates the results obtained on a shorter corpus in Czoska, 2011). Moreover, direction was rarely explicitly marked when an MM had a global scope and referred to a text unit which should be held active throughout the text processing.…”

“…The corpus consisted of 85 peer-reviewed papers from three issues of the proceedings of Poznańskie Forum Kognitywistyczne (Poznan Cognitive Sciences Forum, PFK) conference (editions 5-7, years 2009-2011; a shorter version of the corpus, including only editions 5-6, was described in Czoska, 2011). The texts were 1532 -5672 word-long (mean=2835,39; SD=831,991), and sometimes the same participant authored or co-authored more than one text.…”

“…Conversely, the difference between mentioning and describing may be irrelevant for the metatextual usage of the expressions, and thus the MMs may only inform readers that something has appeared (or will appear) in the current text. Opisany (described ) and wspomniany (mentioned ) are most frequently used with a backward scope functioning as reviews (Czoska, 2011) and in these cases indicate that a lexeme or a concept already given in the text is to appear again. They may also be used as previews announcing a concept that will appear in the text, but in these cases they appear in a phrase, for example with the verb zostania (will be).…”