A framework for comparing evaluation resources across academic texts

Text and Talk

Volumn 28, Issue 6, 2008, Pages 749-769

  Moreno, Ana I ^a,b   Suárez, Lorena ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LEÓN   (Spain)

^b la Tecnologia y la Innovacion   (Spain)

^c NONE

Author keywords

Academic book reviews; Academic writing; Cross cultural studies; English for Academic Purposes; Evaluation; Metadiscourse

Indexed keywords

EID: 57349140467     PISSN: 18607330     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/TEXT.2008.038     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Atkinson, D. (2004). Contrasting rhetorics/contrasting cultures: Why contrastive rhetoric needs a better conceptualization of culture. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 277-289
2. Becher, T. (1987). Disciplinary discourse. Studies in Higher Education 12: 261-274
3. Belcher, D. (1995). Writing critically across the curriculum. In Academic Writing in a Second Language: Essays on Research and Pedagogy, D. Belcher and G. Braine (eds.), 135-155. Norwood, NY: Ablex
4. Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of Written Discourse: A Genre-Based View. London: Continuum
5. Biber, D. and Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9 (1): 93-124
6. Blakemore, D. (1987). Semantic Constraints on Relevance. Oxford: Blackwell
7. Burgess, S. and Fagan, A. (2004). Genre analysis and the novice researcher: The book review and the poster presentation. In Traditions and Innovations: Commemorating Forty Years of English Studies at ULL, M. Brito and J. I. Oliva (eds.), 61-77. La Laguna, Tenerife: RCEI
8. Connor, U. M. and Moreno, A. I. (2005). Tertium comparationis: A vital component in contrastive research methodology. In Directions in Applied Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Robert B. Kaplan, P. Bruthiaux, D. Atkinson, W. G. Egginton, W. Grabe, and V. Ramanathan (eds.), 153-167. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters
9. Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., and Steffenson, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication 10(1): 39-71
10. Dafouz Milne, E. (2003). Metadiscourse revisited: A contrastive study of persuasive writing in professional discourse. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 11: 29-52
11. Francis, G. (1994). Labelling discourse: An aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion. In Advances in Written Text Analysis, M. Coulthard (ed.), 83-101. London/New York: Routledge
12. Gea Valor, M. L. (2000). A Pragmatic Approach to Politeness and Modality in the Book Review Articles. Valencia: SELL Monographs, Lengua Inglesa, Universität de Valéncia
13. Gea Valor, M. L. (2000/2001). The pragmatics of positive politeness in the book review. RESLA 14: 145-159
14. Gea Valor, M. L. and del Saz Rubio, M. M. (2000/2001). The coding of linguistic politeness in the academic book review. Pragmalingüística 8/9: 165-178
15. Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Language in a Social Perspective. Explorations in the Functions of Language. London: Edward Arnold
16. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold
17. Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds.) (2000). Evaluation in Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press
18. Hyland, K. (1998a). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
19. Hyland, K. (1998b). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 18 (3): 349-382
20. Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourses: Writer stance in research articles. In Texts, Processes and Practices, N. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds.), 99-121. London: Longman
21. Hyland, K. (2000). Praise and criticism: Interactions in book reviews. In Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing, K. Hyland (ed.), 41-62. Harlow: Longman
22. Hyland, K. (2005a). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7 (2): 173-192
23. Hyland, K. (2005b). Metadiscourse. London: Continuum
24. Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997). Hedging in L1 and L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6 (2): 183-206
25. Hyland, K. and Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156-177
26. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y. (1998). Scholarly Book Reviewing in the Social Sciences and Humanities: The Flow of Ideas within and Amongst Disciplines. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press
27. Lyons, J. (1995). Linguistic Semantics. An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
28. Markkanen, R. and Schröder, H. E. (1997). Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter
29. Martin, J. (2000). Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English. In Evaluation in Text, S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds.), 142-175. Oxford: Oxford University Press
30. Martin, J. R. (2003). Introduction. Text 23 (2), 171-181
31. Martin, J. R. and White, P. R. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan
32. Mauranen, A. and Bondi, M. (1993). Editorial. Evaluative language use in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2: 269-271
33. Moreno, A. I. (1998). The explicit signalling of premise-conclusion sequences in research articles: A contrastive framework. Text 18 (4): 545-585
34. Moreno, A. I. (2003a). The role of cohesive devices as textual constraints on relevance: A discourse-as-process view. International Journal of English Studies 3 (1): 111-165
35. Moreno, A. I. (2003b). Matching theoretical descriptions of discourse and practical applications to teaching: The case of causal metatext. English for Specific Purposes 22: 265-295
36. Moreno, A. I. (2004). Retrospective labelling in premise-conclusion metatext: An English-Spanish contrastive study of research articles on business and economics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 321-339
37. Moreno, A. I. (2008). The importance of comparing comparable corpora in cross-cultural studies. In Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric, U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, and W. V. Rozycki (eds.), 25-41. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
38. Moreno, A. I. and Suârez, L. (2008). A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7 (1): 15-26
39. Motta-Roth, D. (1998). Discourse analysis and academic book reviews: A study of text and disciplinary cultures. In Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes, S. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, and J. F. Coll (eds.), 29-58. Castelló: Univesitat Jaume I
40. Mur Dueñas, M. P. (2004). Analysing stance in American and Spanish business management RAs: The case of sentence-initial 'retrospective labels'. Journal of English Studies 4: 137-154
41. Myers, G. (1989). Pragmatic politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10: 1-35
42. Neff, J., Ballesteros, F., Dafouz, E., Martínez, F., and Rica, J. P. (2004). Formulating writer stance: A contrastive study of EFL learner corpora. In Applied Corpus Linguistics: A Multidimensional Perspective, U. Connor and T. A. Upton (eds.), 73-90. New York: Rodopi
43. Roper, D. (1978). Reviewing before the Edinburgh: 1788-1802. London: Methuen
44. Salager-Meyer, F. (2006). From 'Mr. Guthrie is profoundly mistaken ...' to 'Our data do not seem to confirm the results of a previous study on ...': A diachronic study of polemicity in academic writing (1810-1995). Ibérica 1: 5-28
45. Simon, L. (1996). The pleasures of book reviewing. Journal of Scholarly Publishing 27 (4): 237-241
46. Sinclair, J. M. (1993). Written discourse structure. In Techniques of Description: Spoken and Written Discourse, A Festschrift for Malcolm Coulthard, J. M. Sinclair, M. Hoey, and G. Fox (eds.), 6-31. London: Routledge
47. Spink, A., Robins, D., and Scamber, L. (1998). Use of scholarly book reviews: Implications for electronic publishing and scholarly communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 49 (4): 364-374
48. Stubbs, M. (1996). Towards a modal grammar of English: A matter of prolonged fieldwork. In Text and Corpus Analysis: Computer-Assisted Studies of Language and Culture, M. Stubbs (ed.), 196-228. Oxford: Blackwell
49. Swales, J. M. (2004). Research Genres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
50. Swales, J. M. and Feak, C. B. (1994). Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press
51. Tadros, A. (1985). Prediction in Text. (Discourse Analysis Monographs 10.) Birmingham: English Language Research, University of Birmingham
52. Tadros, A. (1993). The pragmatics of text averral and attribution in academic texts. In Data, Description, Discourse, M. Hoey (ed.), 98-114. London: Harper Collins
53. Thompson, G. and Hunston, S. (2000). Evaluation: An introduction. In Evaluation in Text, S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds.), 1-27. Oxford: Oxford University Press
54. Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36: 257-268
55. White, P. R. R. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23 (2): 259-284