Cover not available
Article published In:
International Journal of Corpus Linguistics
Vol. 22:1 (2017) ► pp.85–106

Stance and voice in academic writing

The “noun + that” construction and disciplinary variation

| Jilin University

Stance and voice are two crucial elements of social interactions in academic writing. However, their conceptual constructs are elusive and their linguistic realisation is not fully explored. A relatively overlooked feature is the “noun + that” structure, where a stance head noun takes a nominal complement clause (as advantage that in Flow cytometry offers the advantage that long term is available). This construction allows a writer to express authorial stance towards complement content and attribute a voice to that stance through pre-modification. This paper examines this construction in a corpus of 60 journal articles across six disciplines extracted from the BNC corpus. Developing an expressive classification of stance nouns and the possible voice categorisation, this study shows that the structure is not only widely used to project stance and voice, but that it displays considerable variation in the way that it is used to build knowledge across different disciplines.

Keywords: stance, voice, academic writing, “noun + that” construction, argument
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Stance and voice in academic writing
  • 3.“Noun + that” construction
  • 4.Corpus, categorisation and analysis
  • 5.Stance expressions through choice of head nouns
  • 6.Voice projection through averal, attribution or concealment
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 28 July 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.1.04jia
References
Aktas, R. N., & Cortes, V.
(2008) Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 3–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anthony, L.
(2014) AntConc (Version 3.4.3w) [Computer Software]. Tokyo: Waseda University.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M. M.
(1981) The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Bazerman, C.
(1988) Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press Madison.Google Scholar
Becher, T., & Trowler, P.
(2001) Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines. Buckingham: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E.
(1989) Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) Longman Grammar of Written and Spoken English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Burgess, A., & Ivanič, R.
(2010) Writing and being written: Issues of identity across timescales. Written Communication, 27(2), 228–255. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chafe, W., & Nichols, J.
(1986) Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Orwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
Channell, J.
(1994) Vague Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Charles, M.
(2006) The construction of stance in reporting clauses: A cross-disciplinary study of theses. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 492–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the noun “that” pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 203–218. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A.
(2000) A new academic word list. Tesol Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dryer, M. S.
(1996) Focus, pragmatic presupposition, and activated propositions. Journal of Pragmatics, 26(4), 475–523. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fløttum, K., Dahl, T., & Kinn, T.
(2006) Academic Voices: Across Languages and Disciplines. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, J.
(2003) Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 329–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2010) Use of signalling nouns across L1 and L2 writer corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(1), 36–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Francis, G.
(1986) Anaphoric Nouns. Birmingham: English Language Research, University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Gilbert, G. N., & Mulkay, M.
(1984) Opening Pandora’s Box: A Sociological Analysis of Scientists’ Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Grice, H. P.
(1975) Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and Semantics (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Guinda, C. S., & Hyland, K.
(2012) Introduction: A context-sensitive approach to stance and voice. In K. Hyland & C. Guinda, Sancho (Eds.), Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres (pp. 1–11). London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K.
(1993a) The analysis of scientific texts in English and Chinese. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power (pp. 137–146). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
(1993b) The construction of knowledge and value in the grammar of scientific discourse: Charles Darwin’s The Origin of the Species . In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power (pp. 95–116). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R.
(1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Martin, J. R.
(1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
(2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar (4th ed.). London: Taylor & Francis. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hinkel, E.
(2004) Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techiniques in Vocabulary & Grammar. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Hudson, R.
(2013) The struggle with voice in scientific writing. Journal of Chemical Education, 90(12), 1580–1580. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, S.
(2000) Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse (pp. 176–207). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, K.
(2001) Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002) Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091–1112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004) Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005a) Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
(2005b) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008) Disciplinary voices: Interactions in research writing. English Text Construction, 1(1), 5–22. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012) Disciplinary Identities: Individuality and Community in Academic Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hyland, K., & Guinda, C. S.
(2012) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Tse, P.
(2005) Evaluative that constructions: Signalling stance in research abstracts. Functions of Language, 12(1), 39–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivanič, R.
(1991) Nouns in search of a context: A study of nouns with both open-and closed-system characteristics. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 29(2), 93–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1998) Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ivanič, R., & Camps, D.
(2001) I am how I sound: Voice as self-representation in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10(1), 3–33. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jiang, K. F., & Hyland, K.
(2015) ‘The fact that’: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 529–550. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MAXQDAplus
(2012) (Version 11) [Computer software]. Berlin: VERBI GmbH.Google Scholar
Matsuda, P. K., & Tardy, C. M.
(2007) Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 235–249. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEnery, T., & Hardie, A.
(2011) Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nesi, H., & Moreton, E.
(2012) EFL/ESL writers and the use of shell nouns. In R. Tang (Ed.), Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 126–145). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Parkinson, J.
(2013) Representing own and other voices in social science research articles. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 18(2), 199–228. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petrić, B.
(2010) Students’ conceptions of voice in academic writing. In R. Lorés-Sanz, P. Mur-Dueñas & E. Lafuente-Millán (Eds.), Constructing Interpersonality: Multiple Perspectives on Written Academic Genres (pp. 324–336). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Prelli, L. J.
(1989) A Rhetoric of Science: Inventing Scientific Discourse. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina PressGoogle Scholar
Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D.
(1999) Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45–75. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmid, H. -J.
(2000) English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, J. M.
(1986) Fictional worlds. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Talking about Text (pp. 43–60). Birmingham: University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
Swales, J. M.
(2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tadros, A.
(1993) The pragmatics of text averral and attribution in academic texts. In M. Hoey (Ed.), Data, Description, Discourse (pp. 98–114). London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
Tardy, C. M., & Matsuda, P. K.
(2009) The construction of author voice by editorial board members. Written Communication, 26(1), 32–52. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, G., & Hunston, S.
(2000) Evaluation: An introduction. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse (pp. 1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, G., & Ye, Y. Y.
(1991) Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics, 12(4), 365–382. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winter, E. O.
(1982) Towards a Contextual Grammar of English: The Clause and its Place in the Definition of Sentence. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 21 other publications

Abbasi Montazeri, Ebtesam, Alireza Jalilifar & Jorge Arus Hita
2023. Evaluative language in applied linguistics research article discussions: exploring the functions and patterns of that-structures in argumentative texts. Language Awareness 32:2 ► pp. 193 ff. DOI logo
Alghazo, Sharif, Mohd Nour Al Salem & Imran Alrashdan
2021. Stance and engagement in English and Arabic research article abstracts. System 103 ► pp. 102681 ff. DOI logo
Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad
2019. Register, Genre, and Style, DOI logo
Birhan, Amare Tesfie
2021. An exploration of metadiscourse usage in book review articles across three academic disciplines: a contrastive analysis of corpus-based research approach. Scientometrics 126:4 ► pp. 2885 ff. DOI logo
Cañada Pujols, Maria Dolors & Carme Bach
2022. Marcadores metadiscursivos interaccionales en resúmenes de TFG: ¿indicadores de dominio del género?. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 90 ► pp. 5 ff. DOI logo
Curry, Niall & Pascual Pérez-Paredes
2021. Stance nouns in COVID-19 related blog posts. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 26:4 ► pp. 469 ff. DOI logo
Deng, Liming & Ping He
2023. “We may conclude that:” a corpus-based study of stance-taking in conclusion sections of RAs across cultures and disciplines. Frontiers in Psychology 14 DOI logo
Dong, Jihua & Louisa Buckingham
2018. The collocation networks of stance phrases. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36 ► pp. 119 ff. DOI logo
Dong, Youneng, Jingjing Wang & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2022. Epistemic positioning by science students and experts: a divide by applied and pure disciplines. Applied Linguistics Review 0:0 DOI logo
Hyland, Ken & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2022. Metadiscourse choices in EAP: An intra-journal study of JEAP. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 60 ► pp. 101165 ff. DOI logo
Hyland, Ken, Wenbin Wang & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2022. Metadiscourse across languages and genres: An overview. Lingua 265 ► pp. 103205 ff. DOI logo
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) & Ken Hyland
2021. ‘The goal of this analysis …’: Changing patterns of metadiscursive nouns in disciplinary writing. Lingua 252 ► pp. 103017 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Xueying & Haoran Zhu
2023. Linguistic positivity in soft and hard disciplines: temporal dynamics, disciplinary variation, and the relationship with research impact. Scientometrics 128:5 ► pp. 3107 ff. DOI logo
Lorés, Rosa
2023. Dual voices, hybrid identities: the recontextualization of research in digital dissemination scientific discourse . Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 93 ► pp. 69 ff. DOI logo
Qi, Qi & Cecilia Guanfang Zhao
2023. Discoursal scholarly identity in research writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 62 ► pp. 101052 ff. DOI logo
Qiu, Xuyan & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2021. Stance and engagement in 3MT presentations: How students communicate disciplinary knowledge to a wide audience. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 51 ► pp. 100976 ff. DOI logo
Rørvik, Sylvi
2021. Cross-disciplinary and cross-linguistic uses of tensed verb phrases in the methods sections of master’s theses. In Time in Languages, Languages in Time [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 101], ► pp. 255 ff. DOI logo
Simaki, Vasiliki, Carita Paradis & Andreas Kerren
2018. Evaluating stance-annotated sentences from the Brexit Blog Corpus: A quantitative linguistic analysis. ICAME Journal 42:1 ► pp. 133 ff. DOI logo
Simanjuntak, Risa Rumentha
2022. Revealing the rhetorical moves and linguistic patterns in discipline-related undergraduate thesis. JOALL (Journal of Applied Linguistics and Literature) 7:2 ► pp. 345 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Weiyu & Yin Ling Cheung
2023. The different ways to write publishable research articles: Using cluster analysis to uncover patterns of APPRAISAL in discussions across disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 63 ► pp. 101231 ff. DOI logo
Zhang, Yimin & Hang Su
2022. “We define X as …”: A local grammar of definition in linguistics research articles and its pedagogical value. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 59 ► pp. 101143 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 31 march 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.