The politics of English, language and uptake: The case of international academic journal article reviews
Abstract
Drawing on 95 text histories from a longitudinal project on writing for publication in 4 national contexts, this article analyses the language ideologies enacted in referees’ and editors’ comments on articles submitted for publication in English-medium ‘international’ journals. It considers how orientations to ‘English’, ‘language’ and ‘language work’ are enacted in practices of reviewer uptake and the consequences of such practices for knowledge production, evaluation and circulation. In exploring evaluation practices, the article problematizes three foundational categories in applied linguistics: (1) The treating of English as a single stable semiotic resource over which the ‘native’ speaker is attributed a privileged evaluative position; (2) The overriding transparency approach to language and communication; (3) The focus on production as distinct from uptake.
Keywords:
Quick links
Agar, M.H
1996 The Professional Stranger: An Informal Introduction to Ethnography, 2nd rev. edn. New York NY: Academic Press.
Aktas, R. & Cortes, V
2008 Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7(1): 3–14. 
Austin, J.L
1970 How to Do Things with Words, 2nd edn. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Belcher, D
2007 Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing 16: 1–22.
Berkenkotter, B. & Hanganu-Bresch, C
2011 Lunatic asylum occult genres and the certification of madness in the 19th century. Written Communication 28: 220–250.
Blommaert, J
2005 Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge: CUP.
2010 The Sociolinguistics of Globalization. Cambridge: CUP.
Bourdieu, P
1985 The forms of capital. In Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education, J.G. Richardson (ed.), 241–258. New York NY: Greenwood.
1987 Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, R. Nice (transl.). Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
Cameron, D
2012 [1995] Verbal Hygiene. Abingdon: Routledge.
Casanave, C.P
2008 The stigmatizing effect of Goffman’s stigma label: A response to John Flowerdew. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7: 264–267.
Connor, U. & Mauranen, A
1999 Linguistic analysis of grant proposals: European Union research grants. English for Specific Purposes 18(1): 47–62.
Curry, M.J. & Lillis, T
2010 Academic research networks: Accessing resources for English-medium publishing. English for Specific Purposes 29(4): 281–295.
Englander, K
2009 Transformation of the identities of nonnative English-speaking scientists as a consequence of the social construction of revision. Journal of Language, Identity, and Education 8: 35–53.
Flowerdew, J
2008 Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: What can Goffman’s “stigma” tell us? Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7: 77–86.
Fortanet-Gómez, I
2008a Evaluative language in peer review referee reports. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7: 27–37.
2008b Strategies for teaching and learning an occluded genre: The RA referee report. In English as an Additional Language in Research Publication and Communication, S. Burgess & P. Martin-Martin (eds), 19–38. Bern: Peter Lang.
Fraenkel, B
2001 La résistible ascension de l’écrit au travail. In Langage et Travail, Communication, Cognition, Action, A. Borzeix & B. Fraenkel (eds), 113–142. Paris: CNRS Editions.
Giannoni, D.S
2008 Medical writing at the periphery: The case of Italian journal editorials. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7: 97–107.
Gosden, H
2003 ‘Why not give us the full story?’ Functions of referees’ comments in peer reviews of scientific research papers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2: 87–101.
Harwood, N
2005a “I hoped to counteract the memory problem, but I made no impact whatsoever”: Discussing methods in computing science using I
. English for Specific Purposes 24: 243–267.
2005b “Nowhere has anyone attempted... In this article I do just that”: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics 37: 1027–1231.
Hewings, M
2004 An ‘important contribution’ or ‘tiresome reading’? A study of evaluation in peer reviews in journal article submissions. Journal of Applied Linguistics 1(3): 247–274.
Hyland, K
2004 Genre and Second Language Writing. Ann Arbor MI: University of Michigan Press.
2005 Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Kourilova, M
1998 Communicative characteristics of reviews of scientific papers written by non-native users of English. Endocrine Regulations 32: 107–114.
Lillis, T
2008 Ethnography as method, methodology, and ‘deep theorizing’: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication 25(3): 353–388.
2012 English medium writing for academic purposes: Foundational categories, certainty and contingency. In Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language: Issues and Challenges Facing ESL/EFL Academic Writers in Higher Education Contexts, R. Tang (ed.), 235–247. London: Continuum.
2013 The Sociolinguistics of Writing. Edinburgh: EUP.
Lillis, T. & Curry, M.J
2006a Reframing notions of competence in scholarly writing: From individual to networked activity. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 53: 63–78.
2006b Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication 23(1): 3–35.
2010 Academic Writing in a Global Context: The Politics and Practices of Publishing in English. London: Routledge.
Lillis, T., Hewings, A., Vladimirou, D. & Curry, M.J
2010 The geolinguistics of English as an academic lingua franca: Citation practices across English-medium national and English-medium international journals. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20(1): 111–135.
Lillis, T. & McKinney, C
2013 The sociolinguistics of writing in a global context: Objects, lenses, consequences. Journal of Sociolinguistics 17(4): 415–439.
Lillis, T. & Turner, J
2001 Student writing in higher education: Contemporary confusion, traditional concerns. Teaching in Higher Education 6(1): 57–68.
Mauranen, A
2013 Hybridism, edutainment, and doubt: Science blogging finding its feet. Nordic Journal of English Studies 13(1):7–36.
Mungra, P. & Webber, P
2010 Peer review process in medical research publications: Language and content comments. English for Specific Purposes 29: 43–53.
Paltridge, B
2013 Referees’ comments on submissions to peer-reviewed journals: When is a suggestion not a suggestion? Studies in Higher Education 40(1): 106–122.
Sarangi, S. & Candlin, C
2003 Categorisation and explanation of risk: A discourse analytical perspective. Health, Risk & Society 5(2): 115–228.
Shehzad, W
2006 How to end an introduction in a computer science article: A corpus-based approach. In Language and Computers, Corpus Linguistics beyond the Word: Corpus Linguistics from Phrase to Discourse, E. Fitzpatrick (ed.), 227–241. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Swales, J
1990 Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: CUP.
2009 Worlds of genre-metaphors of genre. In Genre in a Changing World, C. Bazerman, A. Bonini & D. Figueiredo (eds), 1–16. Anderson SC: Parlor Press. Available at the WAC Clearinghouse http://wac.colostate.edu/books/genre/
Turner, J
2011 Language in the Academy: Cultural Reflexivity and Intercultural Dynamics. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.