Cover not available
Part of
Intercultural Perspectives on Research Writing
Edited by Pilar Mur-Dueñas and Jolanta Šinkūnienė
[AILA Applied Linguistics Series 18] 2018
► pp. 255–275

Chapter 12
Evaluation in research article introductions in the Social Sciences written by English as a lingua franca and English native users

| Universidad de Zaragoza
The present paper investigates cultural and linguistic differences in the use of evaluation in Research Article (RA) introductions in the Social Sciences. To do this a corpus of published RA introductions written by English as a Native Language (ENL) researchers was compared with a corpus of introductions extracted from RAs manuscripts written by English as a Lingua Franca (ELF) users as part of the Sci-ELF corpus. The texts were analysed manually and several parameters of evaluation were identified, which made the classification of evaluative acts possible. The results revealed introductions by ELF writers do not comply with the CARS structure and show peculiar rhetorical and evaluative features which diverge from the Anglo-Saxon rhetorical patterns typically used by ENL writers.
Keywords: evaluation, discourse analysis, corpus analysis, article introductions, move analysis, ELF, intercultural variations
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theoretical background
    • 2.1Evaluation
    • 2.2Research-oriented evaluation and topic-oriented evaluation
    • 2.3Move structure
  • 3.Methodology
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Move analysis
    • 4.2Overal results on evaluation
    • 4.3Entities evaluated
    • 4.4Types of values
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • Appendix
  • References
Published online: 6 December 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/aals.18.12laf
References (62)
References
Alcaraz-Ariza, M. A. (2011). Evaluation in English-medium medical book reviews. International Journal of English Studies, 11(1), 137–153. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bennett, K. (Ed.). (2014). The semiperiphery of academic writing. London: Palgrave MacMillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blagojević, S. (2009). Expressing attitudes in academic research articles written by English and Serbian authors. Linguistics and Literature, 7(1), 63–73.Google Scholar
Burgess, S. (2002). Packed houses and intimate gatherings: audience and rhetorical structure. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 196–215). Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Canagarajah, S. (1996). Nondiscursive requirements in academic publishing, material resources of periphery scholars, and the politics of knowledge production. Written Communication, 13(4), 435–472. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002). A geopolitics of academic writing. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. 2001. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 56–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ferguson, G. (2007). The global spread of English, scientific communication and ESP: Questions of equity, access and domain loss. Ibérica, 13, 7–38.Google Scholar
Fernández Polo, J., & Cal Varela, M. (2009). English for research purposes at the University of Santiago de Compostela: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 152–164. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, J. (1999). Writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(3), 123–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35(3), 121–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). The non-Anglophone scholar on the periphery of scholarly publication. AILA Review, 20, 14–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fortanet Gómez, I. (2008). Evaluative language in peer review referee reports. English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 27–27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giannoni, D. S. (2005). Negative evaluation in academic discourse: A comparison of English and Italian research articles. Linguistica e Filologia, 20, 71–99.Google Scholar
Hirano, E. (2009). Research article introductions in English for specific purposes: A comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 240–250. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hood, S. (2004). Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: A focus on the introductions to research reports. In L. J. Ravelli & R. A. Ellis (Eds.), Analysing academic writing (pp. 24–44). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (1993). Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice (pp. 57–73). London: Pinter.Google Scholar
(2011). Corpus approaches to evaluation: Phraseology and evaluative language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2018). Academic writing and non-anglophone scholars. In P. Mur-Dueñas & J. Šinkūnienė (Eds.), Intercultural perspectives on research writing. (pp. vii-x) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Itakura, H., & Tsui, A. (2011) Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1366–1379. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jogthong, C. (2001). Research article introductions in Thai: Genre analysis of academic writing (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV.Google Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Introduction to Move Analysis. In B. Douglas, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using Corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 23–41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lafuente-Millán, E. (2012). A contrastive study of generic integrity in the use of attitudinal evaluation in RAs written for different audiences. Brno Studies in English, 38(2), 79–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014a). Reader engagement across cultures, languages and contexts of publication in Business research articles. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24(2), 201–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b). The projection of critical attitude in research article introductions by Anglo-American and Spanish authors. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 69, 65–82.Google Scholar
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2006) Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 23, 3–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorés Sanz, R. (2011). The construction of the author’s voice in academic writing: the interplay of cultural and disciplinary factors. Text and Talk, 3(2), 173–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R. (2001). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston, & G. Thomson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 142–175.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Martín, P., & León Pérez, I. 2014. Convincing peers of the value of one’s research: A genre analysis of rhetorical promotion in academic texts. English for Specific Purposes, 34, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martín Martín, P., & Burges, S. (2004). The rhetorical management of academic criticism in research article abstracts. Text, 24, 171–195. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martínez, I. A. (2005). Native and non-native writer’s use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14, 174–190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, A., Pérez-Llantada, C., & Swales, J. M. (2010). Academic Englishes: A standardized knowledge? In A. Kirkpatrick (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of World Englishes (pp. 634–652). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian Linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 83–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moreno, A., & Suárez, L. (2008). A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 15–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mu, C., Zhang, L. J., Ehrich, J., & Hong, H. (2015).  The use of metadiscourse for knowledge construction in Chinese and English research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 135–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2008). Analysing engagement markers cross-culturally: The case of English and Spanish business management research articles. In S. Burgess & P. Martín Martín (Eds.), English as an additional language in research publication and communication (pp. 197–213). Berlin: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
(2010). Attitude markers in business management research articles: A cross-cultural corpus-driven approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 20(1), 50–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3068–3079. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Najjar, H. (1990). Arabic as a research language: The case of the Agricultural Sciences (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Preacher, K. J. (2001) Calculation for the chi-square test: An interactive calculation tool for chi-square tests of goodness of fit and independence [Online computer software]. Available at <[URL]> (15 April 2017).
SciELF. (2015). The SciELF corpus. Director: Anna Mauranen. Compilation manager: Ray Carey. <[URL]>
Seidlhofer, B. (2012). Anglophone-centric attitudes and the globalization of English. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 1(2), 393–407. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shaw, P. 2003. Evaluation and promotion across languages. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 343–357. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheldon, E. (2009). From one I to another: Discursive construction of self-representation in English and Castilian Spanish research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 28(4), 251–265. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Rhetorical differences in RA introductions written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(4), 238–251. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silver, M. (2003). The stance of stance: A critical look at ways stance is expressed and modeled in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 359–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soler, V. (2002). Analysing adjectives in scientific discourse: An exploratory study with educational applications for Spanish speakers at advanced university level. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 145–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stotesbury, H. (2003). Evaluation in research article abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 327–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J., & Burke, A. (2003). It’s really fascinating work: Differences in evaluative adjectives across academic registers. In 3rd North American symposium on corpus linguistics and language teaching (pp. 1–18). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Taylor, G., & Chen, T. (1991). Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 12, 319–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thetela, P. (1997). Evaluated entities and parameters of value in academic research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 101–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S. (2001). Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press, Google Scholar
Tribble, C. (2017). ELFA vs. Genre: New paradigm war in AP writing instruction? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 25, 30–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Valero-Garcés, C. (1996). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 15, 279–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vassileva, I. (1998). ‘Who am I/who are we in academic writing?’ A contrastive analysis of authorial presence in English, German, French, Russian and Bulgarian. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 163–189. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 83–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vold, E. T. (2006). Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 61–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xie, J., (2016). Direct or indirect? Critical or uncritical? Evaluation in Chinese English-major MA thesis literature reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Maňáková, Monika
2021. Self-mention in the academic discourse of ELF writers. Topics in Linguistics 22:2 ► pp. 32 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.