Move-based investigation of appraisal in the introduction section of Applied Linguistics research articles: Similarities and differences between L1 and L2 English texts

سال انتشار: 1398
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 232

فایل این مقاله در 38 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این مقاله:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_JTLS-38-3_001

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 8 بهمن 1399

چکیده مقاله:

Recent research has shown that academic writing is not ‘author-evacuated’ but, rather, carries a representation of the writers’ identity. One way through which writers project their identity in academic writing is stance-taking toward propositions advanced in the text. Appropriate stance-taking has proved to be challenging for novice writers of Research Articles (RAs), especially those writing in a foreign language. To contribute to the literature on stance-taking, the present study compared the move-based use of evaluative resources in the introduction section of L1 (written by native English speakers) and L2 (written by Iranian, non-native writers) English RAs in the discipline of Applied Linguistics. To this end, 100 English Research Article Introductions (RAIs), 50 by L1 writers and 50 by L2 writers, were investigated as the corpus of the study. Categories of analysis were taken from Appraisal framework (Martine & White, 2005) and CARS model (Swales, 2004). The results revealed that the two groups of texts were not substantially different in the overall use of appraisal resources in the whole body of RAIs. However, more detailed analyses of the specific categories of appraisal in each of the rhetorical moves demonstrated that in some cases, especially in moves 1 and 3, L1 and L2 writers made different choices when taking a stance. The findings of this study can serve as a valuable source providing a practical and comprehensive understanding of the use of evaluative resources in RAIs for EAP researchers, teachers, and other professionals involved in the teaching of academic writing.

نویسندگان

Jalil Abdi

English Language Department, Faculty of Humanities, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

Karim Sadeghi

English Language Department, Faculty of Humanities, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

Mohammad Mohammadi

English Language Department, Faculty of Humanities, Urmia University, Urmia, Iran

مراجع و منابع این مقاله:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :
  • Abdi, J., & Sadeghi, K. (2018). Promotion through claiming centrality ...
  • Abdollahzadeh, E. (2011). Poring over the findings: Interpersonal authorial engagement ...
  • Adel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: ...
  • Arrese, J. I. M., & Perucha, B. (2006). Evaluation and ...
  • Barrass, R. (2002). Scientists must write: A guide to better ...
  • Berkenkotter, C. (1991). Paradigm debates, turf wars, and the conduct ...
  • Bhatia, V. K. (1999). Integrating products, processes and participants in ...
  • Biber, D. (2006). Stance in spoken and written university registers. ...
  • Chang, P. & Schleppegrell, M. (2011). Taking an effective authorial ...
  • Charles, M. (2007). Reconciling top-down and bottom-up approaches to graduate ...
  • Cobb, T. (2003). Analyzing late interlanguage with learner corpora: Quebec ...
  • Coffin, C. (2002). The voices of history: Theorizing the interpersonal ...
  • Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: ...
  • Du Bois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In R. ...
  • Engelbreston, R. (Ed.). (2007). Stancetaking in discourse. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Benjamins. ...
  • Geng, Y. & Wharton, S. (2016). Evaluative language in discussion ...
  • Grant, L., & Ginther, A. (2000). Using computer-tagged linguistic features ...
  • Halliday, M. A. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ...
  • Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. ...
  • Hinkel, E. (2003). Adverbial markers and tone in L1 and ...
  • Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching academic ESL writing: Practical techniques in ...
  • Hood, S. (2004). Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic ...
  • Hood, S. (2006). The persuasive power of prosodies: Radiating values ...
  • Hood, S. (2011). Writing discipline: comparing inscriptions of knowledge and ...
  • Hood, S., & Forey, G. (2005). Introducing a conference paper: ...
  • Hunston, S., & Thomson, G. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation in text: ...
  • Hyland, K. & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in ...
  • Hyland, K. (2002). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT ...
  • Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. ...
  • Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum. ...
  • Hyland, K. (2005b). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction ...
  • Hyland, K., & Guinda, C. S. (2012). Stance and voice ...
  • Ivanic, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of ...
  • Jaffe, A. (Ed.). (2009). Stance: Sociolinguistic perspectives. New York, NY: ...
  • Jalilfar, A., & Moazzen, M. (2014). Attitudinal language in research ...
  • Jalilfar, A., Hayati, A., & Mashhadi, A. (2012). Evaluative Strategies ...
  • Jiang, F. (2015). Nominal stance construction in L1 and L2 ...
  • Johnstone, B. (2009). Stance, style, and the linguistic individual. In ...
  • Khedri, M. & Kritsis, K. (2018). Metadiscourse in applied linguistics ...
  • Lachowicz, D. (1981). On the use of passive voice for ...
  • Lan, X. Y. (2011). Evaluation strategies in English academic book ...
  • Lancaster, Z. (2014). Exploring valued patterns of stance in upper-level ...
  • Liu, X. (2013). Evaluation in Chinese university EFL students' argumentative ...
  • Loi, C. K., Lim, J. M., & Wharton, S. (2016). ...
  • Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The ...
  • Mei, W., & Allison, D. (2003). Exploring appraisal in claims ...
  • Ngo, T., & Unsworth, L. (2015). Reworking the appraisal framework ...
  • Page, R. E. (2003). An analysis of appraisal in childbirth ...
  • Painter, C. (2003). Developing attitude: An ontogenetic perspective on Appraisal. ...
  • Pascual, M., & Unger, L. (2010). Appraisal in research genres: ...
  • Pho, P. (2008). Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and ...
  • Soepriatmadji, L., & Vidhiasi, D. M. (28-41). Appraisal system recognized ...
  • Soler-Monreal, C., & Gil-Salom, L. (2011). A cross-language study on ...
  • Soliday, M. (2011). Everyday genres: Writing assignments across the disciplines. ...
  • Swales, J. M. & Feak, C. B. . (2000). English ...
  • Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (1994). Academic writing ...
  • Tavassoli, F., Jalilfar, A., & White, P. R. (2019). British ...
  • Thomas, D. P., Thomas, A. A., & Moltow, D. T. ...
  • Wang, W. (2008). Intertextual aspects of Chinese newspaper commentaries on ...
  • Wang, Z. (2004). Research genres: Exploration and application. Foreign Language ...
  • White, P. R. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic ...
  • Wu, S. M. (2007). The use of engagement resources in ...
  • Xie, J. (2016). Direct or indirect? Critical or uncritical? Evaluation ...
  • Zobel, J. (2004). Writing for computer science. NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-85729-422-7 ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع