Appropriate use of grammatical metaphor

 

 

Grammatical metaphor is a key feature of scientific and technical writing. Using grammatical metaphors ‘processes or actions’ become ‘things or concepts’ and human actions are made invisible to the reader  i.e. ‘the process of designing research’ becomes ‘research design’

The writing also becomes more ‘noun heavy’ which is a typical feature of academic style writing
 

Refer to extract 2.3 ‘the falseness of the narrative congruence’

 

 

Extract 2:

There are three main psychological theories that examine humour, its comic nature and its quantifiable elements, insofar to say each theory proposes a different hypothesis to why we laugh. Most prevalent amongst these is the incongruity theory (Berger, 1994; Clark, 1970; Curco, 1996; Meyer, 2000 & Rutter, 1997).1 Schopenhauer’s interpretation of incongruity (2010) furthers Kant (2007) and is the most widely accepted theoretical basis for contemporary research on humour.2 Perhaps most important to denote in this theory is how recognition and understanding multiple sets of scripts and roles contribute to the presentation of the joke and the falseness  of the narrative congruence3, thus leading to the difference in expectation and the surprise effect (Shurcliff, 1968). This highlights a link that shows how a cognitive understanding of semantics (Giora, 1991; Grice 1975) can, in this sense lead to a better understanding of humour as a concept. Moreover, it could be suggested that the form of incongruence theory shares commonalities with the form of a joke, wherein there is a setup, expectation and twist; advocating evidence for why incongruence is the most popular humour theory.4