Ken Hyland

Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse

A great deal of research has now established that written texts embody interactions between writers and readers. A range of linguistic features have been identified as contributing to the writers projection of a stance to the material referenced by the text, and, to a lesser extent, the strategies employed to presuppose the active role of an addressee. As yet, however, there is no overall typology of the resources writers employ to express their positions and connect with readers. Based on an analysis of 240 published research articles from eight disciplines and insider informant interviews, I attempt to address this gap and consolidate much of my earlier work to offer a framework for analysing the linguistic resources of intersubjective positioning. Attending to both stance and engagement, the model provides a comprehensive and integrated way of examining the means by which interaction is achieved in academic argument and how the discoursal preferences of disciplinary communities construct both writers and readers.

Genre and Second Language Writing

The last 20 years have seen increasing interest in the idea of genre and how it can be applied in second language writing classrooms. Because genres represent how writers typically use language to respond to recurring situations, they are a key resource for L2 writers unfamiliar with the conventions other members of the community recognize and find convincing. In the classroom, teachers are asked to identify the genres students will have to write and then make the typical structures and key features of these genres explicit to students so they can communicate effectively. In this entry I provide a brief overview of different views of genre and what they mean for teachers of L2 writing.

Authority and invisibility: authorial identity in academic writing

Academic writing is not just about conveying an ideational ‘content’, it is also about the representation ofself . Recent research has suggested that academic prose is not completely impersonal, but that writers gain credibility by projecting an identity invested with individual authority, displaying confidence in their evaluations and commitment to their ideas. Perhaps the most visible manifestation of such an authorial identity is the use of first person pronouns and their corresponding determiners. But while the use of these forms are a powerful rhetorical strategy for emphasising a contribution, many second language writers feel uncomfortable using them because oftheir connotations ofauthority. In this paper I explore the notion of identity in L2 writing by examining the use ofpersonal pronouns in 64 Hong Kong undergraduate theses, comparisons with a large corpus ofresearch articles, and interviews with students and their supervisors. The study shows significant underuse ofauthorial ref erence by students and clear preferences for avoiding these forms in contexts which involved making arguments or claims. I conclude that the individualistic identity implied in the use of I may be problematic for many L2 writers. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

PERSUASION AND CONTEXT: THE PRAGMATICS OF ACADEMIC METADISCOURSE

Metadiscourse refers to aspects of a text which explicitly organise the discourse, engage the audience and signal the writers attitude. Its use by writers to guide readers and display an appropriate professional persona is an important aspect of persuasive writing. Its role in establishing and maintaining contact between the writer and the reader and between the writer and the message also makes it a central pragmatic concept. Based on a textual analysis of 28 research articles in four academic disciplines, this paper seeks to show how the appropriate use of metadiscourse crucially depends on rhetorical context. The study identifies a taxonomy of metadiscourse functions and suggests that metadiscourse reflects one way in which context and linguistic meaning are integrated to allow readers to derive intended interpretations. It is argued that metadiscourse provides writers with a means of constructing appropriate contexts and alluding to shared disciplinary assumptions. The study of academic metadiscourse can therefore offer insights into our understanding of this concept and illuminate an important dimension of rhetorical variation among disciplinary communities.

HUMBLE SERVANTS OF THE DISCIPLINE? SELF-MENTION IN RESEARCH ARTICLES

In this paper, I examine the view that research writing is a modest, self-effacing task which involves authors eradicating themselves from their texts to gain acceptance for their work. Conflicting advice in textbooks and style guides, and the apparently diverse conventions of different disciplines, mean that the extent to which writers can explicitly intrude into their discourse is highly problematic for students, teachers, and experienced writers alike. However, the choices which express writer presence are also closely associated with authorial identity and authority and these not only affect the ideational meaning that writers convey, but also influence the impression they make on their readers. Self-mention is therefore a powerful rhetorical strategy for emphasising a writer’s contribution. Here I focus on the use of self-citation and exclusive first person pronouns in a corpus of 240 research articles in eight disciplines. Through an analysis of these texts and interviews with expert informants I seek to reveal something of how self-mention is used and perceived as a way of understanding more about writing in the disciplines and about the kinds of options available to students.

Hedging in academic writing and EAF textbooks

Abstract Academic writing is rich in hedged propositions. By allowing writers to express their uncertainty concerning the factuality of their statements or to indicate deference to their readers, epistemic devices are a significant characteristic of academic writing. While there is clear pedagogical justification for assisting learners to develop an awareness of the significance of hedging and the principles of its correct use, tentative language continues to be an important source of pragmatic failure in the writing of second language science students. This paper discusses the importance, functions, and expression of epistemic modality in scientific discourse in order to evaluate the treatment given to hedging devices in a range of EAP and EST writing textbooks. It is suggested that despite the interest hedging has attracted in the research literature, a number of widely used textbooks display an ignorance of empirical usage, and that pedagogic writing materials would benefit from revisions based on authentic data.

Specificity revisited: how far should we go now?

Abstract ESP has become central to the teaching of English in university contexts and there can be little doubt of its success as an approach to understanding language use. This success is largely due to ESPs distinctive approach to language teaching based on identification of the specific language features, discourse practices and communicative skills of target groups, and on teaching practices that recognize the particular subject-matter needs and expertise of learners. Unfortunately, however, this strength is increasingly threatened by conceptions of ESP which move it towards more general views of literacy, emphasizing the idea of ‘generic’ skills and features which are transferable across different disciplines or occupations. In this paper I argue the case for specificity: that ESP must involve teaching the literacy skills which are appropriate to the purposes and understandings of particular academic and professional communities. The paper traces the arguments for a specific view, outlines some supporting research, and advocates the need to reaffirm our commitment to research-based language education.

EAP: issues and directions

Abstract The field of English for Academic Purposes has developed rapidly in the past 25 years to become a major force in English language teaching and research. Drawing its strength from broad theoretical foundations and a commitment to research-based language education, EAP has begun to reveal some of the constraints of social contexts on language use and to develop ways for learners to gain control over these. In this first issue of a new journal devoted to developments and understandings in this field, the editors briefly sketch the context within which the journal has emerged and point to some of the issues which currently influence and confront our discipline. In so doing we raise a number of questions which are likely to preoccupy JEAP s readers and contributors into the near future.

Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students' writing

Abstract A major problem for second language students writing academic essays in English is to convey statements with an appropriate degree of doubt and certainty. Such epistemic comments are crucial to academic writing where authors have to distinguish opinion from fact and evaluate their assertions in acceptable and persuasive ways. Despite its importance however, we know little about how second language writers present assertions in their writing and we often measure their attempts to master appropriate forms against the work of expert writers. Based on a corpus of one million words, this paper compares the expression of doubt and certainty in the examination scripts of 900 Cantonese speaking school leavers writing in English with those of 770 British learners of similar age and educational level. A detailed analysis of the texts reveals that these L2 writers differ significantly from the NSs in relying on a more limited range of items, offering stronger commitments, and exhibiting greater problems in conveying a precise degree of certainty. The authors highlight a number of issues raised by the research and make some pedagogical suggestions for developing competence in this important pragmatic area.

Talking to the Academy Forms of Hedging in Science Research Articles

Hedging refers to linguistic strategies that qualify categorical commitment to express possibility rather than certainty. In scientific writing, hedging is central to effective argument: Hedging is a rhetorical means of gaining reader acceptance of claims, allowing writers to convey their attitude to the truth of their statements and to anticipate possible objections. Because hedges allow writers to express claims with precision, caution, and modesty, they are a significant resource for academics. However, little is known about the way hedging is typically expressed in particular domains or the particular functions it serves in different genres. This article identifies the major forms, functions, and distribution of hedges in a corpus of 26 molecular biology research articles and describes the importance of hedging in this genre.