Cover not available
Part of
Dialogicity in Written Specialised Genres
Edited by Luz Gil-Salom and Carmen Soler-Monreal
[Dialogue Studies 23] 2014
► pp. 23–54

Chapter 1. Academic voices and claims

Reviewing practices in research writing

| Universidad Politecnica de Valencia
| Universidad Politecnica de Valencia
This paper investigates contrastively how politeness strategies that involve reporting verbs are deployed in the Literature Review (LR) chapters of PhD theses written in English and in Spanish. It analyses a comparable corpus of 20 theses– 10 in English and 10 in Spanish – in computer science. It focuses on usesof reporting structures realised through integral and non-integral citations ofother texts (Hyland 1999). The research design is based on the model proposed by Thompson and Ye (1991), who distinguished three categories of reporting verbs according to the process they perform: textual, mental and research verbs,and analysed the evaluative potential of verbal processes whose responsibility is ascribed either to the reviewed author or to the reporting writer. We also took as a reference the politeness model offered by Brown & Levinson (1987) to study the presence of specific face-redressive politeness means in the double-voiced dialogue which is established in the corpus of LRs. Data show that English writers show personal commitment and tentativeness, while Spanish writers tend to mask individual voices and avoid personal confrontation.
Published online: 10 July 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.23.03sol
References (50)
Biber, Douglas, and Finnegan, Edward. 1989. “Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect”. Text 9: 93–124.Google Scholar
Brown, Paul, and Levinson, Samuel C. 1987. Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Charles, Maggie. 2006a. “Phraseological patterns in reporting clauses used in citation: A corpus-based study of theses in two disciplines”. English for Specific Purposes 25: 310–331. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006b. “The construction of stance in reporting clauses: A cross-disciplinary study of theses”. Applied Linguistics 27 (3): 492–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cooley, Linda, and Lewkowicz, Jo. 1997. “Developing awareness of the rhetorical and linguistic conventions of writing a thesis in English: addressing the needs of EFL/ESL postgraduate students”. In Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse, Ann Duszak (ed), 113–129. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Garcés-Conejos, Pilar, and Sánchez-Macarro, Antonia. 1998. “Scientific discourse as interaction: Scientific articles vs. popularizations”. In Linguistic Choice across Genres. Variation in Spoken and Written English(Vol. 158), Antonia Sánchez-Macarro and Ronald Carter (eds), 173–190. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gea Valor, Mª Luisa. 2000–2001. “The pragmatics of positive politeness in the book review”. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 14: 145–160.Google Scholar
Gesauto, Sara. 2009. “Evaluation Guidelines: A regulatory genre informing reviewing practices”. In Commonality and Individuality in Academic Discourse, Maurizio Gotti (ed), 325–348. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Gil-Salom, Luz, and Soler-Monreal, Carmen. 2009. “Interacting with the reader: Politeness strategies in engineering research article discussions”. International Journal of English Studies Special Issue: 175–189.Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael. 1994 (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan. 1993. “Professional conflict: Disagreement in academic discourse”. In Text and Technology: In Honour of John Sinclair, Mona Baker, Gill Francis and Elena Tognini-Bognelli (eds), 115–134. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
. 1994. “Evaluation and organisation in a sample of written academic discourse”. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, Malcolm Coulthard (ed), 191–218. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken. 1996. “Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles”. Applied Linguistics 17 (4): 433–454. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998a. “Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse”. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 437–455. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998b. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. “Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge”. Applied Linguistics 20 (3): 341–367. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. “Activity and evaluation: Reporting practices in academic writing”. In Academic Discourse, John Flowerdew (ed), 115–130. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 2005. “Prudence, precision, and politeness: hedges in academic writing”. In Las lenguas de especialidad: Nuevas perspectivas de investigación (Quaderns de Filologia. Estudis Linguistics 10), Mª Amparo Olivares Pardo & Francisca Suau Jiménez (eds), 99–112. Valencia: Universitat de València.Google Scholar
. 2008. “Disciplinary voices. Interactions in research writing”. English Text Construction 1 (1): 5–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken, and Diani, Giani. 2009. “Introduction: Academic evaluation and review genres”. In Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings, Ken Hyland and Giani Diani (eds), 1–14. London: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Koutsantoni, Dimitra. 2006. “Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses: Advanced academic literacy and relations of power”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5: 19–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004. “Attitude, certainty and allusions to common knowledge in scientific research articles”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 142–175. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuo, Chih-Hua. 1999. “The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles”. English for Specific Purposes 18 (2): 121–138. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwan, Becky. 2006. “The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics”. English for Specific Purposes 25: 30–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lave, Jean, and Wenger, Etienne. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
LoCastro, Virginia. 2008. ““Long sentences and floating commas”: Mexican students’ rhetorical practices and the sociocultural context”. In Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric, Ulla Connor, Ed Nagelhout and William V. Rozycki (eds), 195–217. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Co. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Carolyn. 1984. “Genre as social action”. Quarterly Journal of Speech 70: 151–167. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moreno, Ana I. 2011. “On the universality of the politeness concept of ‘face’: Evaluation strategies for construing ‘good face’ across writing cultures: writers’ voice in academic book reviews”. Bulería: 1–11. [URL].Google Scholar
Myers, Greg. 1989. “The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles”. Applied Linguistics 10 (1): 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1992. “‘In this paper we report…’ Speech acts and scientific facts”. Journal of Pragmatics 17 (4): 295–313. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Driscoll, Jim. 1996. “About face: A defence and elaboration of universal dualism”. Journal of Pragmatics 25 (1): 1–32. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paltridge, Brian. 2002. “Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice”. English for Specific Purposes 21: 125–143. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paré, Anthony, Starke-Meyerring, Doreen, and McAlpine, Lynn. 2009. “The dissertation as multi-genre: Many readers, many readings”. In Genre in a Changing World, Charles Bazerman, Adair Bonini, and Débora Figueiredo (eds), 179–193. Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse.Google Scholar
Ridley, Diane. 2000. “The different guises of a PhD thesis and the role of a literature review”. In Patterns and Perspectives: Insights into EAP Writing Practice, Paul Thompson (ed), 61–76. Reading: University of Reading.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ronald, and Scollon, Suzanne W. 1995. Intercultural Communication: A Discourse Approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Shaw, Philip. 1992. “Reasons for the correlation of voice, tense, and sentence function in reporting verbs”. Applied Linguistics 13 (3): 302–319. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soler-Monreal, Carmen, and Gil-Salom, Luz. 2011. “A cross-language study on citation practice in PhD thesis”. International Journal of English Studies 11 (2): 53–76. [URL]Google Scholar
Stotesbury, Hilkka. 2003. “Evaluation in research articles abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2 (4): 327–341. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, Malcolm J. 1990. Genre Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Sarah, and Hawes, Thomas P. 1994. Reporting verbs in medical journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 13 (2): 129–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff. 1996. “Voices in the text: Discourse perspectives on language reports”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 17 (4): 501–530.Google Scholar
Thompson, Paul. 2002. “Manifesting intertextuality in the PhD thesis”. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses44 (April): 97–114.Google Scholar
. 2005a. “Aspects of identification and position in intertextual reference in PhD theses”. In Strategies in Academic Discourse, Elena Tognini-Bonelli and Gabriella Del Lungo Camiciotti (eds), 31–50. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005b. “Points of focus and position: Intertextual reference in PhD theses”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4: 307–323. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. “Literature reviews in applied PhD theses: Evidence and problems”. In Academic Evaluation. Review Genres in University Settings, Ken Hyland and Giani Diani (eds), 50–67. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Thompson, Paul, and Tribble, Chris. 2001. “Looking at citations: Using corpora in English for Academic Purposes”. Language Learning & Technology 5 (3): 91–105.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoffrey, and Ye, Yiyun. 1991. “Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers”. Applied Linguistics 12 (4): 365–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weigand, Edda. 2009. Language as Dialogue. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 
 DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2010. Dialogue: The Mixed Game. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wenger, Etienne. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Trushchelev, Pavel N., Elena V. Petrenko & Larisa A. Piotrovskaya
2023. Conceptualizing emotions through discourse: a pragmatic view on the reader's interest. Slovo.ru: Baltic accent 14:2 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Bondi, Marina
2018. Dialogicity in written language use. In From Pragmatics to Dialogue [Dialogue Studies, 31], ► pp. 137 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 6 september 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.