<?xml version="1.0"?><rdf:RDF xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:edm="http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/" xmlns:wgs84_pos="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos" xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" xmlns:rdaGr2="http://rdvocab.info/ElementsGr2" xmlns:oai="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:owl="http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:ore="http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/" xmlns:skos="http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL/97572993-8b3a-4d1b-b541-9e5fe74b6b51/PDF"><dcterms:extent>251 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:WebResource rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL/6c23b84f-09ee-449a-a7b0-d0090990d43d/TEXT"><dcterms:extent>70 KB</dcterms:extent></edm:WebResource><edm:TimeSpan rdf:about="2004-2026"><edm:begin xml:lang="en">2004</edm:begin><edm:end xml:lang="en">2026</edm:end></edm:TimeSpan><edm:ProvidedCHO rdf:about="URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL"><dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:spr-SCXG6C82" /><dcterms:issued>2025</dcterms:issued><dc:creator>Sučková, Magda</dc:creator><dc:creator>Zmrzlá, Petra</dc:creator><dc:format xml:lang="sl">številka:2</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">letnik:22</dc:format><dc:format xml:lang="sl">str. 25-45</dc:format><dc:identifier>DOI:10.4312/elope.22.2.25-45</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>ISSN:1581-8918</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISSID_HOST:270868739</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>URN:URN:NBN:SI:doc-3KEHS4BL</dc:identifier><dc:language>en</dc:language><dc:publisher xml:lang="sl">Založba Univerze v Ljubljani</dc:publisher><dcterms:isPartOf xml:lang="sl">ELOPE (Ljubljana)</dcterms:isPartOf><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">blažitev</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">boosting</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">criticism</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">dissertation review</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">facework</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">hedging</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">jezikovna previdnost</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">kritika</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">ocena disertacij</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">ocenjevalec</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="sl">poudarjanje</dc:subject><dc:subject xml:lang="en">reviewer</dc:subject><dcterms:temporal rdf:resource="2004-2026" /><dc:title xml:lang="sl">Hedging and boosting criticism in dissertation thesis reviews|</dc:title><dc:description xml:lang="sl">Dissertation thesis reviews within the Czech academic context are, unlike journal article peer reviews, non-blind, non-anonymous, publicly available texts. The key feature of these reviews is evaluation, and they require a substantial amount of facework aimed at both the direct and the potential indirect participants. The present paper focuses on the critical comments, their content, strength, directness, and manner of formulation in a corpus of 32 reviews of technical university dissertations. All instances of criticism were analysed in terms of the use of hedges and boosters as important interactional metadiscoursal devices. These were then further scrutinized with regard to their lexical and syntactic properties. The results indicate that the reviewers are highly aware of the face-threatening nature of the genre and tend to shy away from direct criticism. The main aim of the present research is to enhance the awareness of the genre itself and the linguistic and metalinguistic evaluative features</dc:description><dc:description xml:lang="sl">Recenzije doktorskih disertacij v češkem akademskem kontekstu so, za razliko od recenzij člankov v strokovnih revijah, javno dostopna besedila, ki niso podvržena slepi in anonimni recenziji. Ključna značilnost teh recenzij je ocenjevanje, zato zahtevajo precejšnjo mero jezikovne previdnosti do neposrednih kot tudi potencialno posrednih udeležencev. Ta članek se osredotoča na kritične pripombe, njihovo vsebino, moč, neposrednost in način formulacije v korpusu 32 recenzij doktorskih disertacij tehniških univerz. Vsi primeri kritike so bili analizirani z vidika uporabe izrazov za ublažitev (ang. hedges) in okrepitev (ang. boosters) kot pomembnih interakcijskih metadiskurzivnih sredstev. Ti so bili nato nadalje preučeni z vidika njihovih leksikalnih in sintaktičnih lastnosti. Rezultati kažejo, da se recenzenti zelo zavedajo značilnosti tega žanra, ki lahko ogroža ugled, in se zato izogibajo neposredni kritiki. Glavni cilj te raziskave je povečati ozaveščenost o samem žanru ter o jezikovnih in metajezikovnih vrednotenjih</dc:description><edm:type>TEXT</edm:type><dc:type xml:lang="sl">znanstveno časopisje</dc:type><dc:type xml:lang="en">journals</dc:type><dc:type rdf:resource="http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q361785" /></edm:ProvidedCHO><ore:Aggregation rdf:about="http://www.dlib.si/?URN=URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL"><edm:aggregatedCHO rdf:resource="URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL" /><edm:isShownBy rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/stream/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL/97572993-8b3a-4d1b-b541-9e5fe74b6b51/PDF" /><edm:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/" /><edm:provider>Slovenian National E-content Aggregator</edm:provider><edm:intermediateProvider xml:lang="en">National and University Library of Slovenia</edm:intermediateProvider><edm:dataProvider xml:lang="sl">Univerza v Ljubljani, Filozofska fakulteta</edm:dataProvider><edm:object rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/streamdb/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL/maxi/edm" /><edm:isShownAt rdf:resource="http://www.dlib.si/details/URN:NBN:SI:DOC-3KEHS4BL" /></ore:Aggregation></rdf:RDF>