Heteroglossic Engagement Resources in Discussion Sections of Good and Excellent Master of Arts Theses Written by Iranian EFL Students in Applied Linguistics

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Department of English Language Teaching, Farhangian University, Tehran, Iran

2 English Language and Literature Department, Faculty of Letters and Humanities, Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran

Abstract

This study compares the use of heteroglossic engagement resources in the discussions of MA theses rated as good versus excellent written by Iranian EFL students majoring in TEFL. Engagement, a subsystem of the Appraisal model within Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), deals with writers’ authorial voice and how they position their voice with regard to, and engage with, alternative voices and positions in a communicative context. The final corpus of the study consisted of 24 MA theses in TEFL from four universities in Iran divided into two groups of theses rated as good and excellent based on the scores awarded to them and the raters’ reassessment. In addition to a qualitative analysis, descriptive and inferential statistics were applied to analyze the data. The results showed that heteroglossic resources were not equally employed by the authors. Although there was a correlation between the use of heteroglossic resources in the theses and their assigned rates, authors of excellent theses utilized more expand values compared to good theses. The qualitative analysis revealed that writers of excellent theses were more successful in expressing their authorial stance through dialogically contractive and expansive resources. Moreover, the results provide evidence that heteroglossic engagement resources are helpful in writing academically acceptable texts.

Keywords

References

Alia, M.M. & Jomaa, N. (2023). Authorial stance in academic writing by EFL Arab postgraduates. Eurasian Journal of English Language and Literature, 15(1), 96-131.
Babaii, E., Atai, M. R. & Mohammadi, V. (2015). Stance in English research articles: Two disciplines of the same science. TELL, 9(1), 1-27.
Babaii, E., Atai, M.R. & Saidi, M. (2017). Are scientists objective? An investigation of appraisal resources in English popular science articles. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 5(1), 1-19.
Bahmani, M., Chalak, A. & Heidari Tabrizi, H. (2021). A logogenetic delve into attitudinal meanings in native and non-native discussion section of research articles. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 9(37), 65-81.
Biber, D. & Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93–124.
Coffin, C. (2000). History as discourse: Construal of time, cause and appraisal. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of New South Wales.
Coffin, C. & Hewings, A. (2004). Grammar in the construction of on-line discussion messages. In C. Coffin; A. Hewings, & K. O'Halloran (Eds.), Applying English grammar: Functional and corpus approaches (pp. 91-103). Hodder-Arnold.
Crismore, A. (1989). Appraisal and emotion. In K. R. Scherer, A. Scherer, & T. Johnstone (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion (pp. 141–155). Oxford University Press.
Deng, L. & He, P. (2023). “We may conclude that:” A corpus-based study of stance-taking in conclusion sections of RAs across cultures and disciplines. Front. Psychol. 14: 1175144.
Englander, K. (2006). Revision of scientific manuscripts by nonnative-English-speaking scientists in response to journal editors’ language criticism of the language. Journal of Applied linguistics, 3, 129-161.
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of Journal editors to non-native speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35, 121-150.
Geng, Y. & Wharton, S. (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, 22, 80-91
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
Hamdan, N. N. & Ahmad, U. K. (2023). Asserting authorial identity through stance and voice: Expert vs. non-scientific writers. Arab world English Journal, 14(2), 360-377. DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol14no2.25.
Ho, V. L. (2011). Non–native argumentative writing by Vietnamese learners of English: A contrastive study. Unpublished PhD thesis. Washington, DC.
Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 321-337.
Hood, S. (2004). Appraising research: Taking stance in academic writing. Doctoral Philosophy Thesis, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
Hood, S. (2006). The persuasive power of prosodies: Radiating values in academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 37-49.
Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (2000). Evaluation in text. Ox­ford University Press.
Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: Meta-discourse in introductory course-books. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), 3-26.
Hyland, K. (2005a). Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education, 16, 363-377
Hyland, K. (2005b). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse studies, 7, 173-194.
Jakaza, E. (2013). Appraisal and evaluation in Zimbabwean discourse and its representation in newspaper articles. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. Stellenbosch University.
Jalilifar, A., Hayati, A. M., Mossavinia, S. R. & Jafar, D. (2016). A cross-cultural analysis of English and Arabic blurbs: An investigation into generic structure and appraisal markers. Teaching English Language, 10(2), 1-23.
Jalilifar, A. & Hemmati, A. (2013). Construction of evaluative meanings by Kurdish-speaking learners of English: A Comparison of high- and low-graded argumentative essays. Issues in Language Teaching (ILT), 2(2), 57-84.
Jin, H. (2015). A corpus-based study on engagement in English academic writing. English Teaching, 70(2), 27-54.
Jullian, P. M. (2008). An exploration of strategies to convey evaluation in the “notebook” texts. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. The University of Birmingham.
Lancaster, Z. (2014). Exploring valued patterns of stance in upper-level student writing in the disciplines. Written Communication, 31(4), 27-57.
Lee, S. H. (2006). The use of interpersonal resources in argumentative/persuasive essays by East–Asian ESL and Australian tertiary students. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Sydney.
Liu, X. (2010). An application of appraisal theory to teaching college English reading in China. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1, 133-135.
Liu, X. (2013). Evaluation in Chinese university EFL students’ English argumentative writing: An appraisal study. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching. 10(1), 40–53.
Liu, X. & Thompson, P. (2009). Attitude in students’ argumentative writing: A contrastive perspective. In L. J. O’Brien & D. S. Giannoni (Eds.), Language Studies Working Papers (Vol. 1), 3–15. University of Reading.
Loghmani, Z., Ghonsooly, B. & Ghazanfari, M. (2020). Engagement in doctoral dissertation discussion sections written by English native speakers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 45, 1-13.
Martin, J. R. (1995). Reading position/positioning readers: Judgement in English. Prospect, 10(2), 27–37.
Martin, J. R. & Rose, D. (2003). Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. Continuum.
Martin, J. R. (2000). Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 142–75). Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R. & White, P. R. R. (2005). Language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
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, 4(11), 1-22.
Mousavi, S. A. (1999). A Dictionary of Language Testing (2nd edition). Rahnama Publications.
Nakamura, A. (2009). Construction of evaluative meanings in the IELTS writing: an inter-subjective and inter-textual perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation: University of Wollonong.
Ngongo, M. (2017). Systematic analysis of text appraisal on students’ theses writing in English. Journal of Scientific Research and Studies, 4(4), 67-72 ISSN 2375-8791.
Pascual, M., & Unger, L. (2010). Appraisal in the research genres: An analysis of grant proposals by Argentinean researchers. Revista Signos, 43(3), 261–280.
Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion sections of research articles. System, 30, 479-497.
Robitaille, J. & Connelly, R. (2007). Writer’s Resources: From paragraph to essay. (2nd edition). Thomson Wadsworth.
Ruo-mei, W. (2016). A practical application of appraisal theory on critical reading in college English teaching. US-China Foreign Language, 14(12), 868-876.
Salmani Nodoushan, M. A., & Khakbaz, N. (2011). Theses Discussion Sections: A structural move analysis. International Journal of Language Studies (IJLS), 5(3), 111-132.
Scherer, F M. (1988). Corporate takeovers: The Efficiency arguments. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2(1), 69-82. 
Sharifi, M., Behnam, B. & Ahangari, S. (2021). Engagement resources used by expert and novice EFL academic writers. Journal of Language and Translation, 11(2), 231-249.
Smith, C. A., & Lazarus, R.S. (1993). Appraisal components, core relational themes, and the emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 7(3/4), 233-269.
Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (2003). English in today’s research world: A writing guide. The University of Michigan Press.
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader.   Applied Linguistics, 22, 58-78.
White, P.R.R. (2001). An introductory tour through Appraisal Theory [on line]. www.grammatics.com/Appraisal/Appraisal Outline/Appraisal Outline.doc
White, P.R.R. (2012). Attitudinal meanings, translational commensurability and linguistic relativity. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, 65,147-159.
Wu, S. M. & Allison, D. (2003). Exploring appraisal in claims of student writers in argumentative essays. Prospect, 18(3), 71–91.
Wu, S. M. (2007). The use of engagement resources in high– and low–rated undergraduate geography essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(3), 254–271.
Xie, J. (2016). Direct or indirect? Critical or uncritical? Evaluation in Chinese English-major MA theses literature reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 1-15.
Xinghua, L. (2010). An application of Appraisal Theory to teaching college English reading in China. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1(2), 133-135.
Xinghua, L., Thompson, P. (2009). Attitude in students’ argumentative writing: A contrastive perspective. Language Studies Working Paper, 1, 3-15.
Zemech, D.E., & Rumisek, L. A. (2005). Academic Writing: From paragraph to essay. Macmillan.
Teaching English Language
Volume 17, Issue 2
July 2023
Pages 135-167

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 01 February 2023
  • Revise Date: 04 September 2023
  • Accept Date: 18 September 2023

Share

How to cite

Statistics