1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Pragmatics and Society
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Negotiating academic conflict in discussion sections of doctoral dissertations
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study explores how doctoral students negotiated academic conflict (AC) in discussion section of their dissertations and what engagement resources they utilized to convey academic conflict. To this end, discussion chapters of 30 doctoral dissertations in Applied Linguistics (15 samples by each writer group) were analyzed using Huston’s (1991) academic conflict framework and Martin and White’s (2005) engagement system of Appraisal Theory. The functional analysis constituted discovering components of academic conflict and engagement resources in the discussions. We found that components of academic conflict determined engagement values used to convey them. The linguistic background of the authors was less of an issue in resolving conflicts. The two writer groups managed academic conflict and related engagement resources more or less similarly in different components of academic conflict. They mainly expressed their novel contribution readily and identified the flaws of previous research; however, both writer groups showed little tendency to explain controversial points. The findings have pedagogical implications for academic writing courses highlighting the importance of developing awareness of AC and resolving the conflicts.

© 2023 John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
2023-12-01
2024-10-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Anderson, T., Alexander, I., Saunders, G.
    (2020) An examination of education-based dissertation macrostructures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , 10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100845
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100845 [Google Scholar]
  2. Askehave, I., & Swales, J.
    (2001) Genre Identification and Communicative Purpose: A Problem and a Possible Solution. Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1093/applin/22.2.195
     https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.2.195 [Google Scholar]
  3. Can, T., & Cangir, H.
    (2019) A corpus-assisted comparative analysis of self-mentions markers in doctoral dissertations of literature studies written in Turkey and the UK. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , .
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Cheng, F., & 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]
  5. Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P.
    (1996) Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies. SAGE Publication.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. El-Dakhs, D.
    (2018) Why are abstracts in PhD theses and research articles different? A genre-specific perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.005 [Google Scholar]
  7. Fløttum, K., & Dahl, T.
    (2011) Climate Change Discourse: Scientific Claims in a Policy Setting. Fachsprache(), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Giannoni, D. S.
    (2005) Negative evaluation in academic discourse: A comparison of English and Italian research articles. Linguistica e Filologia, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Gil-Salom, L. & Soler-Monreal, C.
    (2014) Writers’ positioning in literature reviews in English and Spanish computing doctoral theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2014.08.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2014.08.002 [Google Scholar]
  10. Harwood, N.
    (2009) An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, , –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.06.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  11. Holliday, A.
    (2010) Complexity in cultural identity. Language and Intercultural Communication, , , –, 10.1080/14708470903267384
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14708470903267384 [Google Scholar]
  12. Hyland, K.
    (2000) Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Harlow, England: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. (2001) Bringing in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles. Written Communication, (). 10.1177/0741088301018004005
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088301018004005 [Google Scholar]
  14. (2002) Authority and invisibility: authorial identity in academic writing. J. Pragmat, , –. 10.1016/S0378‑2166(02)00035‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00035-8 [Google Scholar]
  15. (2004) Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. (2005) Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, , –. 10.1177/1461445605050365
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  17. Hunston, S.
    (1993) “Professional conflict: disagreement in academic discourse” InBaker, M., G. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.). Texts and Technology. InHonor of John Sinclair. Amsterdam. John Benjamins. –. 10.1075/z.64.08hun
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.64.08hun [Google Scholar]
  18. (1994) Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. InM. Coul-thard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. –). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hunston, S., & Thompson, G.
    (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. Itakura, H., & Tsui, A.
    (2011) Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023 [Google Scholar]
  21. Jalilifar, A. R., Hayati, A. M., & Namdari, N.
    (2012) A comparative study of research article discussion sections of local and international applied linguistic journals. The Journal of Asia TEFL, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Lim, J. M.
    (2012) How do writers establish research niches? A genre-based investigation into management researchers’ rhetorical steps and linguistic mechanisms. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2012.05.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lin, C. & Lau, K.
    (2021) “I found it very special and interesting”: Evaluative language in Master’s thesis defenses in Taiwan universities. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , . 10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101035
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101035 [Google Scholar]
  24. Loi, C., Lim, J., & 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]
  25. Loghmani, Z., Ghonsooly, B., & Ghazanfari, M.
    (2020) Engagement in Doctoral Dissertation Discussion Sections Written by English Native Speakers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, . 10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100851
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100851 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kawase, T.
    (2015) Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006 [Google Scholar]
  27. Kwan, B., & Chan, H., & Lam, C.
    (2012) Evaluating prior scholarship in literature reviews of research articles: A comparative study of practices in two research paradigms. English for Specific Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.esp.2012.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2012.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  28. Martín-Martín, P., & Burgess, S.
    (2004) The rhetorical management of academic criticism in research article abstracts. Text, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Mei, W. S., & Allison, D.
    (2003) Exploring appraisal in claims of student writers in argumentative essays, Prospect ().
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Mei, W. 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]
  31. Miller, R., Mitchell, T. D., & 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]
  32. Parkinson, J.
    (2011) The Discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for Specific Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  33. Pho, P. D., Musgrave, S., & Bradshaw, J.
    (2011) Establishing a niche in applied linguistics and Educational Technology research articles. InF. Salager-Meyer, & B. A. Lewin (Eds.), Crossed words: Criticism in scholarly writing (pp. 283e305). Bern/Berlin: Peter Lang
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Ravelli, L. J., & Eliss, R. A.
    (2005) Analyzing academic writing: Contextualized framework. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Ruiying, Y., & Allison, D.
    (2003) Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, , –. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(02)00026‑1
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1 [Google Scholar]
  36. Qui, X., & Jiang, K.
    (2021) Stance and engagement in 3MT presentations: How students communicate disciplinary knowledge to a wide audience. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , .
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Sadeghi, K., & Alinasab, M.
    (2020) Academic conflict in Applied Linguistics research article discussions: The case of native and non-native writers. English for Specific Purposes, , –. 10.1016/j.esp.2020.03.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.03.001 [Google Scholar]
  38. Salager-Meyer, F.
    (1999) Contentiousness in written medical English discourse: A diachronic study (1810–1995). Text, (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Salager-Meyer, F., & Alcaraz Ariza, M. A.
    (2004) Negative appraisals in academic book reviews: a cross-linguistic approach. InIntercultural aspects of specialized communication. Christopher N. Candlin & Maurizio Gotti, eds.Bern: Peter Lang. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Salager-Meyer, F., & Beverly. A. Lewin
    (2011) Crossed words: criticism in scholarly writing. Bern: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0265‑9
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0265-9 [Google Scholar]
  41. Samraj, B.
    (2008) A discourse analysis of master’s thesis across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, , –.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Soliday, M.
    (2005) Mapping genres in a science in society course. Genre Across the Curriculum, (). –. 10.2307/j.ctt46nx0j.6
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt46nx0j.6 [Google Scholar]
  43. Starfield, S., & Ravelli, L. J.
    (2006) “The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist”1: Self and structure in New Humanities research theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.07.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.07.004 [Google Scholar]
  44. Swales, J.
    (1990) Genre Analysis. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Thompson, P.
    (2012) Achieving a voice of authority in PhD theses. InK. Hyland & C. Sancho-Guinda (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genre (pp.–). London: Palgrave MacMillan. 10.1057/9781137030825_8
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825_8 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
Loading
Negotiating academic conflict in discussion sections of doctoral dissertations
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
/content/journals/10.1075/ps.22060.esm
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: engagement resources ; doctoral dissertations ; academic writers ; discussion section ; academic conflict

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