Cover not available
Part of
“All families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts
Edited by Isabel Moskowich, Inés Lareo and Gonzalo Camiña
[Not in series 237] 2021
► pp. 227–248

Chapter 12
Evaluative that structures in the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts

ORCID logo | University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
ORCID logo | University of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Stance and evaluative-that
  • 3.Method
  • 4.Evaluative that-expressions: Analysis and results
    • 4.1Evaluative entity
    • 4.2Evaluative stance
      • 4.2.1Attitudinal stance
      • 4.2.2Epistemic stance
    • 4.3Evaluative source
      • 4.3.1Human -subjective
      • 4.3.2Abstract entity–inanimate source
      • 4.3.3Concealed–source not identified
    • 4.4Expression
      • 4.4.1Non-verbal predicates
        • 4.4.1.1Non-verbal noun predicates
        • 4.4.1.2Non-verbal adjective predicates
      • 4.4.2Verbal predicates
        • 4.4.2.1Research acts in the real world
        • 4.4.2.2Discourse acts
        • 4.4.2.3Cognitive acts
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Works cited
Published online: 10 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/z.237.12alo
References (42)
Works cited
Abdollahzadeh, Esmaeel. 2011. Poring over the findings: Interpersonal authorial engagement in applied linguistics papers. Journal of Pragmatics, Elsevier B.V. 43/1: 288–297. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Almeida, Francisco. 2015. On the mitigating function of modality and evidentiality. Evidence from English and Spanish medical research papers. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12/1: 33–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alonso-Almeida, Francisco and Mele-Marrero, Margarita. 2014. Stancetaking in seventeenth-century prefaces on obstetrics. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 15/1: 1–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Álvarez-Gil, Francisco J. 2021. “Authority and deontic modals in Late Modern English: Evidence from the Corpus of Life Sciences Texts”. In Moskowich, Isabel; Lareo, Inés and Camiña, Gonzalo (eds.), “All families and genera”: Exploring the Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 249–264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barsaglini-Castro, Anabella and Valcarce, Daniel. 2020. The Coruña Corpus Tool: Ten Years On. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural, 64: 13–19.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas; Johansson, Stig; Leech, Geoffrey; Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Finegan, Edward. 1989. Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse Processes, 11: 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caffi, Claudia. 2007. Mitigation (Studies in Pragmatics). London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace. 1986. “Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing”. In Chafe, William and Nichols, Johanna (eds.), Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 261–272.Google Scholar
Charles, Maggie. 2007. Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the Noun that pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes, 23: 203–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Clift, Rebecca. 2006. Indexing stance: Reported speech as an interactional evidential. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 10/5: 569–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Crespo, Begoña. 2015. Women writing Science in the eighteenth century: A preliminary approach to their language in use. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies, 24/2: 103–127.Google Scholar
Crespo, Begoña and Moskowich, Isabel. 2015. Involved In Writing Science: Nineteenth-Century Women in the Coruña Corpus. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2/5: 76–88.Google Scholar
Crismore, Avon and Farnsworth, Rodney. 1989. Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension of ethos. Rhetoric Review, 8/1: 91–112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Estellés, Maria and Albelda Marco, Marta. 2018. “On the dynamicity of evidential scales”. In Bates Figueras, Carolina and Cabedo Nebot, Adrián (eds.), Perspectives on Evidentiality in Spanish. Explorations across genres. Amsterdam, New York: John Benjamins. 25–48. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fox, Barbara A. 2008. Evidentiality: Authority, Responsibility, and Entitlement in English Conversation. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 11: 167–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, Michael and Matthiessen, Christian. 2014. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. New York: Taylor & Francis. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardie, Andrew. 2014. Log ratio–an informal introduction. ESCR Centre for Corpus Approaches to Social Science (CASS). Retrieved May 17, 2020, from [URL]
Hyland, Ken. 1998. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series). Vol. 54. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005a. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7/2: 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005b. Metadiscourse. Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken and Jiang, Feng (Kevin). 2018a. “In this paper we suggest”: Changing patterns of disciplinary metadiscourse. English for Specific Purposes, 51: 18–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018b. ‘We Believe That … ’: Changes in an Academic Stance Marker. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 38/2: 139–161. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken and Tse, Polly. 2005a. Evaluative that constructions: Signalling stance in research abstracts. Functions of Language, 12/1: 39–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005b. Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 24/2: 123–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jalilifar, Alireza; Hayati, Samira and Don, Alexanne. 2018. Investigating metadiscourse markers in book reviews and blurbs: A study of interested and disinterested genres. Studies About Languages, 2824/33: 90–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) and Hyland, Ken. 2015. “The fact that”: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse Studies, 17/5: 529–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johnstone, Barbara. 2009. “Stance, style, and the linguistic individual”. In Jaffe, Alexandra (ed.), Stance: sociolinguistic perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 29–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kendall, Shari. 2004. Framing authority: Gender, face, and mitigation at a radio network. Discourse and Society, 15/1: 55–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Chanhee and Crosthwaite, Peter. 2019. Disciplinary differences in the use of evaluative that: Expression of stance via that-clauses in business and medicine. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 100775: 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lareo, Inés; Monaco, Leida Maria; Esteve-Ramos, María José and Moskowich, Isabel (comps.). 2020. The Corpus of English Life Sciences Texts (CELiST). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marín-Arrese, Juana I. 2011. Epistemic legitimizing strategies, commitment and accountability in discourse. Discourse Studies, 13/6: 789–797. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marín Arrese, Juana I. 2009. “Effective vs. epistemic stance, and subjectivity/ intersubjectivity in political discourse. A case study”. In Tsangalidis, Anastasios and Facchinetti, Roberta (eds.), Studies on English modality. In honour of Frank R. Palmer. Bern/ New York: Peter Lang. 23–52.Google Scholar
Martin, James. 2000. “Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English”. In Hunston, Susan and Thompson, Geoffrey (eds.), Evaluation in text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 142–175.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna and Bondi, Marina. 2003. Evaluative language use in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2/4: 269–271. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEnery, Anthony and Baker, Helen. 2016. Corpus Linguistics and 17th-Century Prostitution: Computational Linguistics and History. London, New York: Bloomsbury Publishing.Google Scholar
Moskowich, Isabel. 2013. Eighteenth Century Female Authors: Women and Science in the Coruña Corpus of English Scientific Writing. Australian Journal of Linguistics 33/4: 467–487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rozumko, Agata. 2019. Between acknowledgement and countering: Interpersonal functions of English reportative adverbs. Journal of Pragmatics, 140: 1–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stotesbury, Hilkka. 2003. Evaluation in research article abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2/4: 327–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff. 2001. Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics, 22/1: 58–78. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vande Kopple, William J. 2002. “Metadiscourse, discourse and issues in composition and rhetoric”. In Barton, Ellen and Stygall, Gail. (eds.), Discourse Studies in Composition. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. 91–113.Google Scholar
Wetherell, Margaret. 2013. Affect and discourse –What’s the problem? From affect as excess to affective/discursive practice. Subjectivity, 6/4: 349–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Alonso-Almeida, Francisco
2024. Turo Hiltunen and Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), Corpus pragmatic studies on the history of medical discourse (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 330). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2022. Pp. vii + 322. ISBN 9789027211101.. English Language and Linguistics 28:1 ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 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.