1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Concentric
  4. Volume 50, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 50, Issue 2
  • ISSN 1810-7478
  • E-ISSN: 2589-5230
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The present study attempts to unveil patterns in interactive information structure of clause enhancement that conventionalize the actual representation of circumstantial elements which add information about time, place, manner, means, and reason/cause through circumstantial augmentation, tactic augmentation, or connectives in method sections of research articles (RAs). The dataset consisted of 120 method sections of randomly selected empirical RAs from ISI-indexed Q1-ranked applied linguistic journals published between 2020 and 2022. The results of the study point to a significant distinction in hypotactic augmentation to register circumstantial information in comparison to other choices available to authors. Moreover, the most striking observation to emerge from the data is that a logical information structure of circumstantial meaning is mostly facilitated through hypotactic non-finite enhancement rather than its finite counterpart. This viable preference lies in elliptical, evincing, and expressive functions of hypotactic clauses that make comprehension more attainable to the readers and assist authors in fulfilling the generic conventions and communicative purposes of academic writing and managing interactive information structures. A major theoretical implication of the current research entails the significance of the interactive functions of the options available to authors which can impose priorities on the system of choices within the context of information.

© 2024 Department of English, National Taiwan Normal University
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
2024-11-18
2024-12-13

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bachman, Lyle F.
    2006 A journey into the nature of empirical research in applied linguistics. Inference and Generalizability in Applied Linguistics: Multiple Perspectives, ed. byMicheline Chalhoub-Deville, Patricia A. Duff and Carol A. Chapelle, 165–208. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/lllt.12.11bac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.12.11bac [Google Scholar]
  2. Badley, Graham Francis
    2019 Post-academic writing: Human writing for human readers. Qualitative Inquiry25.21:180–191. 10.1177/1077800417736334
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800417736334 [Google Scholar]
  3. Baklouti, Akila Sellami
    2011 The impact of genre and disciplinary differences on structural choice: Taxis in research article abstracts. Text & Talk31.51:503–523. 10.1515/text.2011.025
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2011.025 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bartlett, Tom, and Gerard O’Grady
    2017 The Routledge Handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics. London & New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315413891
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315413891 [Google Scholar]
  5. Bruce, Ian
    2008 Cognitive genre structures in methods sections of RAs: A corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes7.11:38–54. 10.1016/j.jeap.2007.12.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Butt, David, Rhondda Fahey, Susan Feez, Sue Spinks, and Colin Yallop
    1999 Using Functional Grammar. Sydney: Macquarie University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chappelle, Carol A.
    2006 L2 vocabulary acquisition theory: The role of inference, dependability and generalizability in assessment. Inference and Generalizability in Applied Linguistics: Multiple Perspectives, ed. byMicheline Chalhoub-Deville, Patricia A. Duff and Carol A. Chapelle, 47–64. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/lllt.12.05cha
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.12.05cha [Google Scholar]
  8. Duff, Patricia A.
    2006 Beyond generalizability: Contextualization, complexity and credibility in applied linguistic research. Inference and Generalizability in Applied Linguistics: Multiple Perspectives, ed. byMicheline Chalhoub-Deville, Patricia A. Duff and Carol A. Chapelle, 65–96. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/lllt.12.06duf
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.12.06duf [Google Scholar]
  9. Eggins, Suzanne
    2004 Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. New York & London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Farinde, Raifu Olanrewaju, Johnson Oludare Ojo, and Yemi Ogunsiji
    2015 Functional values of the English clause in grammatical analysis. International Journal of English Linguistics5.31:88–95. 10.5539/ijel.v5n3p88
     https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v5n3p88 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gerot, Linda, and Peter Wignell
    1994 Making Sense of Functional Grammar: An Introductory Workbook. Queensland, Australia: Antipodean Educational Enterprises.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gillaerts, Paul, and Freek van de Velde
    2010 Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes9.21:128–139. 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  13. Halliday, Michael
    1994 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Halliday, Michael, and Christian Matthias Ingemar Martin Matthiessen
    1999 Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-based Approach to Cognition. New York & London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 2004 An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London & New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hawes, Thomas
    2015 Thematic progression in the writing of students and professionals. Ampersand21:93–100. 10.1016/j.amper.2015.06.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2015.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hoey, Michael
    2001 Textual Interaction: An Introduction to Written Discourse Analysis. London & New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Holsting, Alexandra
    2008 Projecting clause complexes and the subjunctive mood as means of projection in German. Systemic Functional Linguistics in Use. Odense Working Papers in Language and Communication, vol.291, ed. byNina Nørgaard, 381–399. Odense, Denmark: University of Southern Denmark.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hunston, Susan, and Geoffrey Thompson
    (eds.) 2000 Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hyland, Ken
    1999 Persuasion in academic articles. Perspective11.21:73–103.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. 2002 Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics23.21:215–239. 10.1093/applin/23.2.215
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/23.2.215 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2005a Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education16.41:363–377. 10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2005b Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies7.21:173–192. 10.1177/1461445605050365
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  24. 2008a Genre and academic writing in the disciplines. Language Teaching41.41:543–562. 10.1017/S0261444808005235
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444808005235 [Google Scholar]
  25. 2008b Disciplinary voices: Interaction in research writing. English Text Construction1.11:5–22. 10.1075/etc.1.1.03hyl
     https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.1.1.03hyl [Google Scholar]
  26. 2008c Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge: Representing self and others in research writing. International Journal of English Studies8.21:8–18.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Hyland, Ken, and Polly Tse
    2004 Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics25.21:156–177. 10.1093/applin/25.2.156
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jalilifar, Alireza, A. Majid Hayati, and Amir Mashhadi
    2012 Evaluative strategies in Iranian and international research article introductions: Assessment of academic writing. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics3.11:81–109.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Jiang, Feng Kevin, and Ken Hyland
    2018 Nouns and academic interactions: A neglected feature of metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics39.41:508–531.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Jomaa, Nayef Jomaa, and Siti Jamilah Bidin
    2019 Reporting and quoting: Functional analyses of logico-semantic relations of clause complex citations. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies25.11:158–178. 10.17576/3L‑2019‑2501‑12
     https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2019-2501-12 [Google Scholar]
  31. Khedri, Mohsen, and Konstantinos Kritsis
    2018 Metadiscourse in applied linguistics and chemistry research article introductions. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics9.21:47–73. 10.22055/rals.2018.13793
     https://doi.org/10.22055/rals.2018.13793 [Google Scholar]
  32. Lehman, Christian
    1988 Towards a typology of clause linkage. Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse, vol.181, ed. byJohn Haiman and Sandra A. Thompson, 181–226. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/tsl.18.09leh
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.18.09leh [Google Scholar]
  33. Leong, Ping Alvin
    2021 Writing in the sciences and humanities: A clause-complex perspective. Word67.21:137–158. 10.1080/00437956.2021.1909866
     https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2021.1909866 [Google Scholar]
  34. Martin, James R.
    2014 Evolving systemic functional linguistics: Beyond the clause. Functional Linguistics1.11:1–24. 10.1186/2196‑419X‑1‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1186/2196-419X-1-3 [Google Scholar]
  35. Matthiessen, Christian Matthias Ingemar Martin
    2002 Combining clauses into clause complexes: A multi-faceted view. Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson, ed. byJoan Bybee and Michael Noonan, 237–322. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/z.110.13mat
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.110.13mat [Google Scholar]
  36. McGrath, Lisa, and Maria Kuteeva
    2012 Stance and engagement in pure mathematics RAs: Linking discourse features to disciplinary practices. English for Specific Purposes31.31:161–173. 10.1016/j.esp.2011.11.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.11.002 [Google Scholar]
  37. Ngongo, Magdalena
    2018 Taxis and logico-semantic relation in undergraduate students’ English theses writing text: A systemic functional linguistics approach. Researchers World9.21:146–152. 10.18843/rwjasc/v9i2/19
     https://doi.org/10.18843/rwjasc/v9i2/19 [Google Scholar]
  38. Nguyen, Thị Minh Tâm
    2013 The notion of clause complex in systemic functional linguistics. VNU Journal of Foreign Studies29.41:25–36.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Schleppegrell, Mary J., and Maria Cecilia Colombi
    1997 Text organization by bilingual writers: Clause structure as a reflection of discourse structure. Written Communication14.41:481–503. 10.1177/0741088397014004003
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088397014004003 [Google Scholar]
  40. Sinclair, John McHardy
    1993 Written discourse structure. Techniques of Description, ed. byJohn McHardy Sinclair, Michael Hoey, Gwyneth Fox and Malcolm Coulthard, 6–31. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Swain, Merrill
    2006 Verbal protocol: What does it mean for research to use speaking as a data collection tool?Inference and Generalizability in Applied Linguistics: Multiple Perspectives, ed. byMicheline Chalhoub-Deville, Patricia A. Duff and Carol A. Chapelle, 97–114. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing. 10.1075/lllt.12.07swa
     https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.12.07swa [Google Scholar]
  42. Swales, John M., and Christine B. Feak
    2012 Academic Writing for Graduate Students (3rd edition). Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.2173936
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.2173936 [Google Scholar]
  43. Thompson, Geoff
    2001 Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics22.11:58–78. 10.1093/applin/22.1.58
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2013 Introducing Functional Grammar. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203431474
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203431474 [Google Scholar]
  45. Thompson, Sandra A.
    1985 Grammar and written discourse: Initial vs. final purpose clauses in English. Text5.11:55–84.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. van Atteveldt, Wouter, Tamir Sheafer, Shaul R. Shenhav, and Yair Fogel-Dror
    2017 Clause analysis: Using syntactic information to automatically extract source, subject, and predicate from texts with an application to the 2008–2009 Gaza War. Political Analysis25.21:207–222. 10.1017/pan.2016.12
     https://doi.org/10.1017/pan.2016.12 [Google Scholar]
  47. White, Peter R. R.
    2002 Appraisal — The language of evaluation and stance. Handbook of Pragmatics, ed. byJef. Verschueren, John Ola Östman, Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen, 1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Winter, Eugene
    1982 Towards a Contextual Grammar of English: The Clause and its Place in the Definition of Sentence. London & New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Yu, Shulin., Feng Geng, Chunhong Liu, and Yao Zheng
    2021 What works may hurt: The negative side of feedback in second language writing. Journal of Second Language Writing541:1–15. 10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100850
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2021.100850 [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhang, Xian
    2020 A bibliometric analysis of second language acquisition between 1997 and 2018. Studies in Second Language Acquisition42.11:199–222. 10.1017/S0272263119000573
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000573 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
Loading
Circumstantial and tactic augmentation
Concentric 50, 293 (2024); https://doi.org/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
/content/journals/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
/content/journals/10.1075/consl.00041.ali
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): circumstantial augmentation; circumstantial meaning; clause; interactive information structure; tactic augmentation; 互動信息結構; 子句; 情境增強; 情境意義; 策略增強

Most Cited

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