中文摘要：

学科不仅仅是机构,还可以看作是由社会作用者制定和建构的不同文化。这些社会作用者同时还制定和建构作为学科成员和作为个体学者的自我身份。学科语言惯例使得世界变得可预测,但是这并不会消除个体的选择,评鉴名词的使用就可以看作是个体选择时诉诸的有效途径之一。基于DISCORPUS语料库的实证对比研究表明：中国英语二语博士生和英美博士生在评鉴名词problem、difficulty、achievement、assumption、claim、failure、success、challenge的使用方面表现出显著的学科专有性和文化专有性[皮尔逊卡方值的渐近显著性值（双侧）=.000];英语语言文学学科习惯使用diffi culty、success、achievement、challenge,而土木工程学科习惯使用problem、failure、assumption;中国英语二语博士生偏爱使用failure、problem,但较少选择claim、success。

英文摘要：

Disciplines can be seen as cultures and not merely institutional designations; they are enacted and constructed by social actors. At the same time these actors are also enacting and constructing identities for themselves as disciplinary members and individual academics. The routinely patterned uses of language in a discipline help make the world predictable, but they do not eliminate choice. The use of evaluative nouns can be regarded as one of the effective ways of individual choice. The DISCORPUS- based empirical contrastive study shows that there is significant disciplinary and cultural specificity in the Chinese L2 English and Anglo-American Ph.D. students＇ use of evaluative nouns： problem, difficulty, achievement, assumption, claim, failure, success, and challenge （Asymp. Sig. （2-sided） =.000 for both Pearson Chi-square tests）. ELL routinely prefers difficulty, success, achievement and challenge while CE prefers problem, failure and assumption; the Chinese L2 English Ph.D. students favor failure and problem but seldom choose claim or success.