1887
image of Writing to evaluate

Abstract

Abstract

Evaluative language is crucial in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing, particularly in expressing authorial stance and supporting arguments. Among various linguistic frameworks, appraisal in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) has been extensively used to map and assess evaluative linguistic features. Since its inception in the early 1990s, appraisal has been widely applied to EAP writing studies. This synthesis reviews EAP writing studies using the appraisal framework published over the past decades, synthesizing 69 publications. We developed coding schemes based on research questions, focusing on learner levels, subjects studied, text type, and generated findings. Our findings indicate that appraisal has been applied by EAP writers at different levels to perform a range of functions in their writing. However, previous studies show that there is a lack of longitudinal study of appraisal resources used by EAP writers at different levels. We recommend systematic and explicit instruction in the use of appraisal resources in EAP writing. Based on our findings, we offer pedagogical suggestions for EAP writing and teaching, aiming to enhance the effectiveness of EAP instruction and the quality of student writing.

Available under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24027.xua
2024-07-19
2025-02-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/aral.24027.xua/aral.24027.xua.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24027.xua&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Babaii, E., Atai, M., & Saidi, M.
    (2017) Are scientists objective? an investigation of appraisal resources in English popular science articles. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, (),–.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhtin, M.
    (1981) The dialogic imagination. Trans.C. Emerson & M. Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bednarek, M.
    (2006) Evaluation in media discourse: Analysis of a newspaper corpus. Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Brooke, M.
    (2014) Attribution and authorial (Dis) endorsement in high-and low-rated undergraduate ESL students’ English academic persuasive essays. English linguistics research, (), –. 10.5430/elr.v3n1p1
    https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v3n1p1 [Google Scholar]
  5. Chang, P., & Schleppegrell, M.
    (2011) Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing: making the linguistic resources explicit for L2 writers in the social sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.05.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.05.005 [Google Scholar]
  6. Chang, P.
    (2012) Using a stance corpus to learn about effective authorial stance-taking: A textlinguistic approach. ReCALL, (), –. 10.1017/S0958344012000079
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344012000079 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cheung, L.
    (2015) Legitimising the knower’s multiple voices in applied linguistics postgraduate written discourse. TESOL International Journal, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. (2018) Development of evaluative stance and voice in postgraduate academic writing. [Doctoral dissertation, Hong Kong Polytechnic University]. https://theses.lib.polyu.edu.hk/handle/200/9410
  9. Cheung, L., & Unsworth, L.
    (2016) Stance-taking as negotiating academic conflict in applied linguistics research article discussion sections. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.09.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  10. Christie, F., & Derewianka, B.
    (2008) School Discourse: Learning to Write Across the Years of Schooling. Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Coffin, C.
    (2000) History as discourse: Construals of time, cause and appraisal. Sydney: University of New South Wales.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (2002) The voices of history: Theorizing the interpersponal semantics of historical discourses. Text & Talk, (), –. 10.1515/text.2002.020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2002.020 [Google Scholar]
  13. (2010) Incorporating and evaluating voices in a film studies thesis. Writing and Pedagogy, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Coffin, C., & Hewings, A.
    (2004) IELTS as preparation for tertiary writing: Distinctive interpersonal and textual strategies. InRavelli, J. & Ellis, R. (ed.), Analysing academic writing: Contextualized frameworksI (pp.–), Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Cominos, N.
    (2011) Managing the subjective: exploring dialogistic positioning in undergraduate essays (Doctoral dissertation).
  16. Derewianka, B.
    (2007) Using appraisal theory to track interpersonal development in adolescent academic writing. InMcCabe, A., O’Donnell, M., & Whittaker, R. (Eds.). Advances in language and education (pp. 142–165). Bloomsbury Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Dong, J., & Jiang, F.
    (2019) Construing evaluation through patterns: Register-specific variations of the introductory it pattern. Australian Journal of Linguistics, (), –. 10.1080/07268602.2019.1542932
    https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1542932 [Google Scholar]
  18. Fryer, D.
    (2013) Exploring the dialogism of academic discourse: Heteroglossic Engagement in medical research articles. InGisle Anderson & Kristin Bech (ed.), Englishcorpus linguistics: Variation in time, space and genre (pp.–), Amsterdam: Rodopi. 10.1163/9789401209403_011
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789401209403_011 [Google Scholar]
  19. Geng, Y.
    (2015) Appraisal in discussion sections of doctoral theses in the discipline of ELT/Applied Linguistics at Warwick University: A corpus-based analysis (Doctoral dissertation, University of Warwick).
  20. Geng, Y., & Wharton, S.
    (2019) How do thesis writers evaluate their own and others’ findings? an appraisal analysis and a pedagogical intervention. English for Specific Purposes, , –.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. (2016) Evaluative language in discussion sections of doctoral theses: Similarities and differences between L1 Chinese and L1 English writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.001 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hao, J., & Humphrey, S.
    (2012) Burnishing and tarnishing in academic literacy. In Papers from the 39th International Systemic Functional Congress. Sydney: The Organising Committee of the 39th International Systemic Functional Congress.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hao, J.
    (2015) Construing biology: An ideational perspective. Unpublished PhD thesis. The University of Sydney.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Hood, S.
    (2008) Summary writing in academic contexts: Implicating meaning in processes of change. Linguistics and education, (), –. 10.1016/j.linged.2008.06.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2008.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  25. (2005) What is evaluated, and how, in academic research writing? The co-patterning of attitude and field. Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1075/aralss.19.03hoo
    https://doi.org/10.1075/aralss.19.03hoo [Google Scholar]
  26. (2004) Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: a focus on the introductions to research reports. InRavelli, E. & R. Ellis (eds.). Analysing academic writing: Contextualized frameworks. Bloomsbury Academic 2004, –.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Hood, S., & Martin, J. R.
    (2005) 25. Invoking attitude: the play of graduation in appraising discourse. InHasan, R., C. Matthiessen & J. Webster (eds.), Continuing discourse on language: A functional perspective (volume 2). Equinox eBooks Publishing, –.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hunston, S., & Thompson, G.
    (2000) Evaluation: An introduction. InS. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 127). Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  29. Hyland, K.
    (2005) Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Bloomsbury Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Hyland, K., & Diani, G.
    (2009) Introduction: Academic Evaluation and Review Genres. Palgrave Macmillan UK. 10.4324/9780203879016‑1
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203879016-1 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hood, S.
    (2006) The persuasive power of prosodies: radiating values in academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  32. (2007) Arguing in and across disciplinary boundaries: Legitimizing strategies in applied linguistics and cultural studies. InWhittaker, R., and O’Donnel McCabe (Ed.), Advances in language and education (pp–), Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. (2010) Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. Palgrave Macmillan UK. 10.1057/9780230274662
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662 [Google Scholar]
  34. (2012) Voice and stance as APPRAISAL: Persuading and positioning in research writing across intellectual fields. InK. Hyland & C. Sancho Guinda (Eds.), Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres (pp. 51–6.png). Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137030825.0011
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825.0011 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ho, V., & Li, C.
    (2018) The use of metadiscourse and persuasion: An analysis of first year university students’ timed argumentative essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Hu, G., & Wang, G.
    (2014) Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2013.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Isaac, Y.
    (2012) Modelling voice as Appraisal and Involvement resources: The portrayal of textual identities and interpersonal relationships in the written stylistic analyses of non-native speaker, international undergraduates. Doctoral thesis, University of Canberra.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K.
    (2018) Nouns and academic interactions: A neglected feature of metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/amw023
    https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw023 [Google Scholar]
  39. (2021) ‘The goal of this analysis...’: Changing patterns of metadiscursive nouns in disciplinary writing. Lingua, , . 10.1016/j.lingua.2020.103017
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.103017 [Google Scholar]
  40. Jou, Y.
    (2019) Scaffolding L2 writers’ metacognitive awareness of voice in article reviews: A case study of SFL-based pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100770
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100770 [Google Scholar]
  41. Khosravi, M., & Babaii, E.
    (2017) Reply articles: where impoliteness and judgment coincide. Journal of Politeness Research, (), –. 10.1515/pr‑2015‑0020
    https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2015-0020 [Google Scholar]
  42. Koutsantoni, D.
    (2004) Attitude, certainty and allusions to common knowledge in scientific research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2003.08.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2003.08.001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Lam, S., & Crosthwaite, P.
    (2018) Appraisal resources in L1 and L2 argumentative essays: A contrastive learner corpus-informed study of evaluative stance. Journal of Corpora and Discourse Studies, (), –. 10.18573/jcads.1
    https://doi.org/10.18573/jcads.1 [Google Scholar]
  44. Lancaster, Z.
    (2011) Interpersonal stance in L1 and L2 students’ argumentative writing in economics: Implications for faculty development in WAC/WID programs. Across the Disciplines, (), –. 10.37514/ATD‑J.2011.8.4.22
    https://doi.org/10.37514/ATD-J.2011.8.4.22 [Google Scholar]
  45. Lancaster, L.
    (2014) Linguistic markers of stance and genre in upper-level student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Lee, S.
    (2007) An application of multiple coding for the analysis of ATTITUDE in an academic argument. Linguistics & the Human Sciences, (), –. 10.1558/lhs.v3i2.165
    https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v3i2.165 [Google Scholar]
  47. (2008a) Attitude in undergraduate persuasive essays. Prospect, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. (2008b) An integrative framework for the analyses of argumentative/persuasive essays from an interpersonal perspective. Text & Talk, (), –. 10.1515/TEXT.2008.011
    https://doi.org/10.1515/TEXT.2008.011 [Google Scholar]
  49. (2010) Attribution in high-and low-graded persuasive essays by tertiary students. Functions of Language, (), –. 10.1075/fol.17.2.02lee
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.17.2.02lee [Google Scholar]
  50. Lee, S. H.
    (2011) Differences in the use of Appraisal resources between L1 and L2 writers: Focusing on GRADUATION system. Issues in Intercultural Communication, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. (2015) Evaluative stances in persuasive essays by undergraduate students: Focusing on appreciation resources. Text & Talk, (), –. 10.1515/text‑2014‑0029
    https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0029 [Google Scholar]
  52. Liardét, C. & Cassi, L.
    (2018) ‘as we all know’: examining Chinese EFL learners’ use of interpersonal grammatical metaphor in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.005 [Google Scholar]
  53. Liardét, C. L., & Black, S.
    (2019) “So and so” says, states and argues: A corpus-assisted engagement analysis of reporting verbs. Journal of Second Language Writing, , –. 10.1016/j.jslw.2019.02.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2019.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  54. Loghmani, Z., Ghonsooly, B., & Ghazanfari, M.
    (2017) Textual Engagement of Native English Speakers in Doctoral Dissertation Discussion Sections. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, , 78107.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. (2019) Textual engagement of native English speakers in doctoral dissertation discussion sections. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, , –.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Loi, C., Lim, M., & Wharton, S.
    (2016) Expressing an evaluative stance in English and Malay research article conclusions: international publications versus local publications. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.004 [Google Scholar]
  57. Marshall, C., Adendorff, R., & Klerk, V.
    (2010) The role of appraisal in the nrf rating system: an analysis of judgement and appreciation in peer reviewers’ reports. Southern African Linguistics & Applied Language Studies, (), –. 10.2989/SALALS.2009.27.4.3.1023
    https://doi.org/10.2989/SALALS.2009.27.4.3.1023 [Google Scholar]
  58. Martin, J. R.
    (2000) Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. InS. P. Corder & E. H. H. Gudmundsson (Eds.), Explorations in linguistics (pp.–). London: Continuum. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0008
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.003.0008 [Google Scholar]
  59. Martin, J., & White, P.
    (2005) The language of evaluation. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  60. McKinley, J.
    (2018) Integrating appraisal theory with possible selves in understanding university EFL writing. System, , –. 10.1016/j.system.2018.07.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.07.002 [Google Scholar]
  61. Mei, W. S., & Allison, D.
    (2005) Evaluative expressions in analytical arguments: Aspects of Appraisal in assigned English Language essays. Journal of Applied Linguistics, (). 10.1558/jal.v2i1.105
    https://doi.org/10.1558/jal.v2i1.105 [Google Scholar]
  62. Miller, R., Mitchell, T., & Pessoa, S.
    (2014) Valued voices: Students’ use of Engagement in argumentative history writing. Linguistics and Education, , –. 10.1016/j.linged.2014.10.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2014.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  63. Millar, N., & Hunston, S.
    (2015) Identifying patterns of appraisal: A comparative study of three corpora. Text & Talk, (), 331351.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Mori, M.
    (2017) Using the Appraisal framework to analyze source use in essays: a case study of engagement and dialogism in two undergraduate students’ writing. Functional Linguistics, (), –. 10.1186/s40554‑017‑0046‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-017-0046-4 [Google Scholar]
  65. Moyano, E.
    (2018) Knowledge construction in discussions of research articles in two disciplines in Spanish: the role of resources of appraisal. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2018.09.011
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.09.011 [Google Scholar]
  66. Myskow, G., & Gordon, T.
    (2012) Getting interpersonal on a university entrance exam impromptu writing task. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), 92104. 10.1016/j.jeap.2011.11.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.11.009 [Google Scholar]
  67. Myskow, G., & Ono, M.
    (2018) Construing emotion in academic writing: L2 writers’ use of Affect in historical explanation essays. Writing & Pedagogy, ,–. 10.1558/wap.32850
    https://doi.org/10.1558/wap.32850 [Google Scholar]
  68. (2018) A matter of facts: L2 writers’ use of evidence and evaluation in biographical essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, , –. 10.1016/j.jslw.2018.08.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  69. Ortega, L., & Norris, J. M.
    (2002) Theorizing and implementing the process genetics of L2 writing. InS. Ransdell & M. L. Barbier (Eds.), New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 92–104). Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Byrnes, H., & Ortega, L.
    (2008) Theorizing advancedness, setting up the longitudinal research agenda. InOrtega, L., & Byrnes, H. (ed.), The longitudinal study of advanced L2 capacities (pp.–), Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Pascual, M., & Unger, L.
    (2010) Appraisal in the research genres: an analysis of grant proposals by Argentinean researchers. Revista Signos, (), –. 10.4067/S0718‑09342010000200004
    https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342010000200004 [Google Scholar]
  72. Pennycook, A.
    (2009) The place of the English language in the global order: A response to Skutnabb-Kangas. InT. Skutnabb-Kangas & R. Phillipson (Eds.), Language rights and wrongs (pp. 3450). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Rothery, J., & Stenglin, M.
    (2000) Interpreting literature: The role of appraisal. InUnsworth, L. (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities: Functional linguistic perspectives (pp.–), AC Black.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Ryshina-Pankova, M.
    (2014) Exploring academic argumentation in course-related blogs through ENGAGEMENT. InThompson, G., & Albe-Juez, L. (ed.), Evaluation in context (pp.–), Johns Benjamin Publishing. 10.1075/pbns.242.14rys
    https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.14rys [Google Scholar]
  75. Sheldon, E.
    (2018) Dialogic spaces of knowledge construction in research article conclusion sections written by English L1, English L2 and Spanish L1 writers. Iberica 2018(), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Su, H. & Bednarek, M.
    (2019) Bibliography of Appraisal, Stance and Evaluation. www.isfla.org/Systemics/Bibliographies/Bibliographyofappraisal2019.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Sun, S. A., & Crosthwaite, P.
    (2022) “The findings might not be generalizable”: Investigating negation in the limitations sections of PhD theses across disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , . 10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101155
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101155 [Google Scholar]
  78. Swain, E.
    (2007) Constructing an effective ‘voice’ in academic discussion writing: an appraisal theory perspective. InWhittaker, R. (ed.), Advances in language and education (pp.–), Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  79. (2010) Getting engaged: dialogistic positioning in novice academic discussion writing, inElizabeth Swain (edited by): “Thresholds and Potentialities of Systemic Functional Linguistics: Multilingual, Multimodal and Other Specialised Discourses”, Trieste, EUT Edizioni Università di Trieste 2010, pp.
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Szenes, E.
    (2017) The linguistic construction of business reasoning: Towards a language-based model of decision-making in undergraduate business (Doctoral dissertation). University of Sydney. https://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/16815
  81. Thomas, D.
    (2014) Writing for change: Persuasion across the school years (Doctoral dissertation, University of Tasmania).
  82. Thomas, D., Thomas, A., & Moltow, D.
    (2015) Evaluative stance in high achieving Year 3 persuasive texts. Linguistics and Education, , –. 10.1016/j.linged.2015.03.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2015.03.003 [Google Scholar]
  83. White, P.
    (2005) Exploring the language of appraisal: A window on the nature of academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Wu, S., & Allison, D.
    (2003) Exploring appraisal in claims of student writers in argumentative essays. Prospect, (), –.
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Wu, S.
    (2007) The use of engagement resources in high-and low-rated undergraduate geography essays. Journal of English for academic purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2007.09.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.09.006 [Google Scholar]
  86. Xie, J.
    (2016) Direct or indirect? Critical or uncritical? Evaluation in Chinese English-major MA thesis literature reviews. Journal of English for academic purposes, , –.
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Xu, X., & Nesi, H.
    (2019) Differences in engagement: a comparison of the strategies used by British and Chinese research article writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.02.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  88. Xuan, W. W., & Chen, S.
    (2019) A synthesis of research on grammatical metaphor: Meta-data and content analysis. WORD, (), –. 10.1080/00437956.2019.1670911
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2019.1670911 [Google Scholar]
  89. (2020) Taking stock of accumulated knowledge in projection studies from Systemic Functional Linguistics: a research synthesis. Functional Linguistics, , –. 10.1186/s40554‑019‑0070‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-019-0070-7 [Google Scholar]
  90. Zhang, X.
    (2018) Supporting EFL learners’ reflective practices through systemic functional linguistic praxis: A longitudinal case study. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice, (),–.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24027.xua
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/aral.24027.xua
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: appraisal ; evaluation ; synthesis ; EAP writing ; academic writing
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error