Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing: Making the linguistic resources explicit for L2 writers in the social sciences

Abstract Taking an assertive stance toward research being reviewed or reported is a challenging task for second language writers. This aspect of interpersonal meaning is especially difficult to address through direct instruction, as attention to particular grammatical and lexical choices outside of contexts of use is not enough to help students develop the prosodies ( Hood, 2004 , Hood, 2006 , Lemke, 1992 , Lemke, 1998 ) that are required to be authoritative and create a texture that coherently presents an authorial perspective. This article illustrates how a systemic functional linguistics analysis can identify and render explicit to second language writers some ways published authors create textures of expanding or contracting options as research is presented, reviewed, and evaluated. Drawing on the Engagement framework ( Martin & White, 2005 ), we illustrate different approaches to research article introductions in connection with their rhetorical purposes ( Swales, 1990 , Swales, 2004 ), highlighting the linguistic resources that are in interaction with each other as authors introduce their studies and review related studies. Specifically, we describe two patterns of expanding options and two patterns of contracting options found in educational research, and suggest pedagogical approaches to making these patterns salient to L2 writers.

[1]  Anne Herrington,et al.  Writing, Teaching, and Learning in the Disciplines , 1994 .

[2]  Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: a focus on the introductions to research reports , 2004 .

[3]  K. Hyland,et al.  English for Academic Purposes , 2012, US-China Foreign Language.

[4]  Jeannett Martin.  Beyond Exchange : Appraisal Systems in English , 2000 .

[5]  David Rose,et al.  Working with Discourse: Meaning Beyond the Clause , 2003 .

[6]  Tony Silva.  L1 vs L2 writing; ESL graduate students' perceptions , 1992 .

[7]  Susan Hunston,et al.  Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse , 2002 .

[8]  Maggie Charles,et al.  Reconciling top-down and bottom-up approaches to graduate writing: Using a corpus to teach rhetorical functions , 2007 .

[9]  Roz Ivanič,et al.  I am how I sound , 2001 .

[10]  Lynne Flowerdew,et al.  Corpus linguistic techniques applied to textlinguistics , 1998 .

[11]  J. Foley.  Language, Education and Discourse: Functional Approaches , 2004 .

[12]  Susan Parks,et al.  Transitions: Orienting to Reading and Writing Assignments in EAP and MBA Contexts , 2002 .

[13]  J. Swales.  Research Genres: Explorations and Applications , 2004 .

[14]  Louise J. Ravelli,et al.  Analysing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks , 2004 .

[15]  Jeannett Martin,et al.  The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English , 2005 .

[16]  K. Hyland,et al.  Hedging in scientific research articles , 1998 .

[17]  Macro-Proposals: Meaning by Degree , 1992 .

[18]  S. Thompson,et al.  Discourse description : diverse linguistic analyses of a fund-raising text , 1992 .

[19]  S. Hood.  The persuasive power of prosodies: Radiating values in academic writing , 2006 .

[20]  J. Lemke.  Resources for attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientations in text semantics , 1998 .

[21]  Susan Conrad,et al.  Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use , 1998 .

[22]  Sylviane Granger,et al.  Computer Learner Corpora, Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Teaching , 2002 .

[23]  Karen Phalet,et al.  How Future Goals Enhance Motivation and Learning in Multicultural Classrooms , 2004 .

[24]  George Braine,et al.  Academic Writing in a Second Language: Essays on Research and Pedagogy , 1995 .

[25]  Diane Pecorari.  Plagiarism and International Students: How the English-Speaking University Responds , 2001 .

[26]  Peichin Chang,et al.  Taking an Effective Authorial Stance in Academic Writing: Inductive Learning for Second Language Writers using a Stance Corpus. , 2010 .

[27]  Frances Christie,et al.  Genre and Institutions: Social Processes in the Workplace and School , 2005 .

[28]  Phuong Dzung Pho,et al.  Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: a study of linguistic realizations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance , 2008 .

[29]  Susan Kay Miller,et al.  Studying L2 writers’ digital writing: An argument for post-critical methods , 2005 .

[30]  J. Milton,et al.  Qualification and Certainty in L1 and L2 Students' Writing , 1997 .

[31]  Louise J. Ravelli,et al.  Advances in systemic linguistics : recent theory and practice , 1993 .

[32]  Alan Hirvela,et al.  Coming back to voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers , 2001 .

[33]  Jette G. Hansen.  Interactional Conflicts among Audience, Purpose, and Content Knowledge in the Acquisition of Academic Literacy in an EAP Course , 2000 .

[34]  Malcolm Coulthard,et al.  Advances in Written Text Analysis , 1994 .

[35]  Betty Samraj,et al.  Introductions in research articles: variations across disciplines , 2002 .

[36]  Robyn Woodward-Kron,et al.  Critical analysis versus description? Examining the relationship in successful student writing , 2002 .

[37]  Tony Silva.  Toward an Understanding of the Distinct Nature of L2 Writing: The ESL Research and Its Implications , 1993 .

[38]  S. Hunston,et al.  Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse , 2001 .

[39]  Ken Hyland,et al.  Second Language Writing , 2003 .

[40]  K. Hyland,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2001 .

[41]  Anna Mauranen,et al.  Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish - English Economics texts. , 1993 .

[42]  Chengzhi Wang,et al.  Basic Education Reform in China: Untangling the Story of Success , 2002 .