Evaluative Language in Scientific Discourse:Terminological Framework and Methodological Perspectives
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17072/2073-6681-2022-3-44-55Keywords:
evaluation; value; evaluative language; appraisal; stance; voice; epistemic evaluation; scientific text.Abstract
Evaluation is considered as a key feature in scientific communication and academicwriting. It is a crucial pragmatic tool in scientific activity among specialists and experts. The paper provides a systematic review of authorial evaluation research in the literature and aims to outline the major strands of current research. The study was carried out as interdisciplinary and intercultural analysis. It showed that different methodological approaches have been adopted to examine the issues of evaluation across disciplines, different sociocultural practices, languages, through different analytical lenses. The review is based on the publications in the scientific area in Russian and English. Based on contextual-interpretive analysis, comparative analysis of literature, analytical review of theoretical concepts, the study identified the current state and the major theoretical and methodological approaches adopted in the field of pragmatic linguistics, text linguistics, discourse analysis, linguistic axiology over the past thirty years. It revealed the terminological diversity used to describe the evaluative language in English literature. As relevant sources there were selected publications in peer-reviewed journals and/or chapters from monographs published in 1990–2022, indexed in the RSCI, Scopus, WoS, ERIH PLUS databases. The search query included the Russian terms otsenka, otsenochnost’, and the English terms evaluation, stance, appraisal, voice. The main strands in research on the evaluative use of language have been identified, namely: the stance strand, the analysis of the authorial stance, when the speaker/writer adopts a certain value position and makes it visible in the text structure by means of linguistic devices; the appraisal strand, the study of a wide range of evaluative devices that show the author’s attitude to the subject of the statement, the communicative partner; the voice strand, coordination with other voices, dialogic involvement of the author’s voice in other subjective positions.References
Арутюнова Н. Д. Аксиология в механизмах жизни и языка // Проблемы структурной лингвистики. М.: Наука, 1984. С. 5–23.
Баженова Е. А. Научный текст в аспекте политекстуальности. Пермь: Изд-во Перм. ун-та, 2001. 269 с.
Баранов А. Н. Аксиологические стратегии в структуре языка (паремиология и лексика) // Вопросы языкознания. 1989. № 3. С. 74–90.
Беляева Л. Н., Чернявская В. Е. Доказательная лингвистика: метод в когнитивной парадигме // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2016. № 3. С. 77–84. doi 10.20916/1812-3228-2016-3-77-84
Вольф Е. М. Функциональная семантика оценки. М.: Наука, 1985. 228 с.
Данилевская Н. В. Чередование старого и нового знания как механизм развертывания научного текста (аксиологический аспект): автореф. дис. … д-ра филол. наук. Екатеринбург, 2006. 47 с.
Докучаев И. И. Ценность и экзистенция. СПб.: Наука, 2009. 595 с.
Ивин А. Л. Основания логики оценок. М.: Изд-во Моск. ун-та, 1970. 230 с.
Леонтьев Д. А. Психология смысла: природа, строение и динамика смысловой реальности.3-е изд. М.: Смысл. 2003. 511 с.
Молодыченко Е. Н. Об операционализации категории «ценность» в текстовом и дискурсивном анализе: к вопросу о лингвистической аксиологии // Вестник Московского городского педагогического университета. Серия «Филология. Теория языка. Языковое образование».2015а. № 3. С. 90–97.
Молодыченко Е. Н. Аксиология дискурса консюмеризма: о роли языковой оценки в жанре лайфстайл // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология. 2015б. № 6(38). С. 55–66. doi 10.17223/19986645/38/5
Молодыченко Е. Н. Ценности и оценка в дискурсе консюмеризма: лингво-прагматический и критический анализ // Вестник Северного (Арктического) федерального университета. 2016. № 3. С. 122–130. doi 10.17238/issn2227-6564.2016.3.122
Молодыченко Е. Н. Метасемиотические проекты и лайфстайл-медиа: дискурсивные механизмы превращения предметов потребления в ресурсы выражения идентичности // Russian Journal of Linguistics. 2020. Т. 24, № 1. С. 117–136. doi 10.22363/2687-00882020-24-1-117-136.
Нефедов С. Т. Варьирование оценки в коммуникативных практиках научного дискурса. Вестник Санкт-Петербургского университета. Язык и литература. 2021. Т. 18, № 4. С. 760–778. doi 10.21638/spbu09.2021.408
Нефедов С. Т., Чернявская В. Е. Контекст в лингвистическом анализе: прагматическая и дискурсивно-аналитическая перспектива // Вестник Томского государственного университета. Филология. 2020. № 63. С. 83–97. doi 10.17223/19986645/63/5
Серебренникова Е. Ф. Этносемиометрия как способ лингвистического аксиологического анализа // Лингвистика и аксиология: кол. монография. М.: Тезаурус, 2011. С. 7–48.
Чернявская В. Е. Научный дискурс: Выдвижение результата как коммуникативная и языковая проблема. М.: УРСС, 2017. 144 c.
Чернявская В. Е. Дискурсивный анализ и корпусные методы: необходимое доказательное звено? Объяснительные возможности качественного и количественного подходов // Вопросы когнитивной лингвистики. 2018. № 2. P. 31–37. doi 10.20916/1812-3228-2018-2-31-37.
Чернявская В. Е. Текст и социальный контекст: Социолингвистический и дискурсивный анализ смыслопорождения. М.: URSS, 2021. 208 с.
Aull B., Bandarage D., Miller M. R. Generality in student and expert epistemic stance: A corpus analysis of first-year, upper-level, and published academic writing // Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2017. № 26. P. 29–41.
Biber D. Stance in spoken and written university registers // Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2006. № 5. P. 97–116.
Biber D., Finegan E. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect // Text. 1989. № 9. P. 93–124. doi 10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93
Bondi M. Voice in textbooks: Between exposition and argument // Stance and voice in written academic genres / Ed. by K. Hyland, & C. S. Guinda. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. P. 101–115.
Bondi M. Changing voices: Authorial voice in abstracts // Abstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change / Ed. by M. Bondi, & R. L. San. Berlin: Peter Lang, 2014. P. 243–270.
Chang P., Schleppegrell M. Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing: Making the linguistic resources explicit for L2 writers in the social sciences // Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2011. № 10(3). P. 140–151.
Conrad S., Biber D. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing // Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse / Ed. by S. Hunston, G. Thompson. UK: Oxford University Press, 2000. P. 57–73.
Crompton P. Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes. 1997. № 16(4). P. 271–287.
Gillaerts P. Shifting metadiscourse: Looking for diachrony in the abstract genre // Abstracts in academic discourse: Variation and change / Ed. by M. Bondi, R. L. Sanz. Berlin: Peter Lang, 2014. P. 271–287
Gray B., Biber D. Current conceptions of stance // Stance and voice in written genres / Ed. by K. Hyland, C. S. Guinda. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 2012. P. 15–33.
Gross A. G., Chesley P. Hedging, stance and voice in medical research articles. Stance and voice in written academic genres. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. P. 85–100.
Halliday M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold, 1978. 256 p.
Hood S. Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 2010. XI, 227 p.
Hu G. W., Cao F. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals // Journal of Pragmatics. 2011. № 43. P. 2795–2809.
Hunston S., Thompson G. (Eds.) Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. UK: Oxford University Press, 2000. xii, 225 p.
Hyland K. Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness. 2000. № 9(4). P. 179–197.
Hyland K., Diani G. Introduction: Academic evaluation and review genres // Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings / Ed. by K. Hyland, G. Diani. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 2009. P. 1–14.
Hyland K., Guinda C. S. (Eds.) Stance and voice in written academic genres. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. 2012. XVI, 263 p.
Lewin B. A. Hedging: An exploratory study of authors’ and readers’ identification of ‘toning down’in scientific texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2005. № 4(2). P. 163–178.
Martin J. R., Rose D. Working with discourse. London; NY: Continuum. 2007. 239 p.
Martin J. R., White P. R. The language of evaluation. NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 2005. 278 p.
Matsuda P. K., Tardy C. M. Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes. 2007. № 26. P. 235–249.
Peng J. E. Authorial voice constructed in citation in literature reviews of doctoral theses: Variations across training contexts // Journal of English forAcademic Purposes. 2019. № 37. P. 11–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.001
Resnik D. B., Elliott K. C. The ethical challenges of socially responsible science // Accountability in research. 2016. № 23(1). P. 31–46.
Sanz R. L. The construction of the author’s voice in academic writing: The interplay of cultural and disciplinary factors. Text & Talk. 2011. № 31(2). P. 173–193.
Tardy C. Current conceptions of voice // K. Hyland, C. S. Guinda (Eds.) Stance and voice in written academic genres. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. P. 34–48.
Thompson G., Hunston S. Evaluation: An introduction // Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse / Ed. by S. Hunston, G. Thompson. Oxford University Press, 2000.P. 1–27.
Xie J. A review of research on authorial evaluation in English academic writing: A methodological perspective // Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 2020. № 47. P. 1–20.
References
Arutyunova N. D. Aksiologiya v mekhanizmakh zhizni i yazyka [Axiology in the mechanisms of life and language]. Problemy strukturnoy linguistiki [Issues of Structural Linguistics]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1984, pp. 5–23. (In Russ.)
Bazhenova E. A. Nauchnyy tekst v aspekte politekstual’nosti [Scientific Text in the Aspect of Politextuality]. Perm, Perm State University Press, 2001. 269 p. (In Russ.)
Baranov A. N. Aksiologicheskie strategii v strukture yazyka (paremiologiya i leksika) [Axiological strategies in language structure (paremiology and lexicon)]. Voprosy yasykoznaniya [Topics in the Study of Language], 1989, issue 3, pp. 74–90. (In Russ.)
Belyaeva L. N., Chernyavskaya V. E. Dokazatel’naya lingvistika: metod v kognitivnoy paradigme [Evidence-based linguistics: Methods in cognitive paradigm]. Voprosy cognitivnoy lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 2016, issue 3, pp. 77–84. doi 10.20916/1812-3228-2016-3-77-84. (In Russ.)
Volf E. M. Funktsional’naya semantika otsenki [Functional Semantics of Evaluation]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1985. 228 p. (In Russ.)
Danilevskaya N. V. Cheredovanie starogo i novogo znaniya kak mekhanizm razvertyvaniya nauchnogo teksta (aksiologicheskiy aspect). Avtoref. diss. d-ra filol. nauk [Interchange of old and new knowledge in scientific text production (axiological aspect). Dr. philol. sci. diss.]. Yekaterinburg. 2006. 47 p. (In Russ.)
Dokuchaev I. I. Tsennost’ i ekzistentsiya [Value and Existence]. St. Petersburg, Nauka Publ., 2009. 595 p. (In Russ.)
Ivin A. L. Osnovaniya logiki otsenok [Foundations of the Logic of Evaluation]. Мoscow, Lomonosov Moscow State University Press, 1970. 230 p. (In Russ.)
Leont’ev D. A. Psikhologiya smysla: Priroda, stroenie i dinamika smyslovoy real’nosti [The Psychology of Sense: Nature, Structure, and the Dynamics of Semantic Reality]. 3rd ed. Мoscow, Smysl Publ., 2003. 511 p. (In Russ.)
Molodychenko E. N. Ob operatsionalizatsii kategorii ‘tsennost’ v tekstovom i diskursivnom analize [The concept of value in textual and discourse analysis: Towards linguistic axiology]. Vestnik Moskovskogo gorodskogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. Seriya «Filologiya. Teoriya yazyka. Yazykovoe obrazovanie» [MCU Journal of Philology. Theory of Linguistics. Linguistic Education], 2015a, issue 3, pp. 90–97. (In Russ.)
Molodychenko E. N. Aksiologiya diskursa konsyumerizma: o roli yazykovoy otsenki v zhanre layfstayl [Axiological dimension in the discourse of consumerism: The role of evaluative language in the lifestyle genre]. Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Filologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philology], 2015b, issue 6(38), pp. 55–66. doi 10.17223/19986645/38/5. (In Russ.)
Molodychenko E. N. Tsennosti i otsenka v diskurse konsyumerisma [Values and evaluation in discourse of consumerism: A pragmalinguistic analysis]. Vestnik Severnogo Arkticheskogo Federal’nogo Universiteta [Vestnik of Northern (Arctic) Federal University], 2016, issue 3, pp. 122–130. doi 10.17238/issn2227-6564.2016.3.122. (In Russ.)
Molodychenko E. Metasemioticheskie proekty i layfstayl-media: diskursivnye mekhanizmy prevrashcheniya predmetov potrebleniya v resursy vyrazheniya identichnosti [Metasemiotic projects and lifestyle media: Formulating commodities as resources for identity enactment]. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 2020, vol. 24, issue 1, pp. 117–136. doi 10.22363/2687-0088-2020-24-1-117-136. (In Russ.)
Nefedov S. T. Var'irovanie otsenki v kommunikativnykh praktikakh nauchnogo diskursa [The variety of evaluation in communicative practices of academic discourse]. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta. Yazyk i literatura [Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature], 2021, vol. 18, issue 4, pp. 760–778. doi 10.21638/spbu09.2021.408. (In Russ.)
Nefedov S. T., Сhernyavskaya V. E. Kontekst v lingvisticheskom analize: pragmaticheskaya i diskursivno-analiticheskaya perspektiva [Context in linguistics: pragmatic and discourse analytical dimensions]. Vestnik Tomskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Filologiya [Tomsk State University Journal of Philology], 2020, issue 63, pp. 83-97. doi 10.17223/19986645/63/5 (In Russ.)
Serebrennikova E. F. Etnosemiometriya kak sposob lingvisticheskogo aksiologicheskogo analiza [Ethnosemiometry as a method of linguistic analysis]. Lingvistika i aksiologiya [Linguistics and Axiology: collective monograph]. Мoscow, Tezaurus Publ., 2011, pp. 7–48. (In Russ.)
Chernyavskaya V. E. Nauchnyy diskurs: Vydvizhenie rezul’tata kak kommunikativnaya i yazykvaya problema [Scientific Discourse: Proposing a Result as a Communicative and Linguistic Problem]. Мoscow, URSS Publ., 2017. 144 p. (In Russ.)
Chernyavskaya V. E. Diskursivnyy analiz i korpusnye metody: neobkhodimoe dokazatel’noe zveno? Ob”yasnitel’nye vozmozhnosti kachestvennogo i kolichestvennogo podkhodov [Missing evidence-based link? Towards qualitative and quantitative approaches in language studies]. Voprosy Kognitivnoy Lingvistiki [Issues of Cognitive Linguistics], 2018, issue 2, pp. 31–37. doi: 10.20916/1812-3228-2018-2-31-37. (In Russ.)
Chernyavskaya V. E. Tekst i Social’nyi Kontekst [Text and Social Context]. Moscow, URSS Publ., 2021. 208 p. (In Russ.)
Aull B., Bandarage D., Miller M. R. Generality in student and expert epistemic stance: A corpus analysis of first-year, upper-level, and published academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2017, issue 26, pp. 29–41. (In Eng.)
Biber D. Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2006, issue 5, pp. 97–116. (In Eng.)
Biber D., Finegan E. Styles of stance In English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 1989, issue 9, pp. 93–124. doi 10.1515/text.1.1989.9.1.93. (In Eng.)
Bondi M. Voice in textbooks: Between exposition and argument. Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. Ed. by K. Hyland, & C. S. Guinda. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan. 2012.101-115. (In Eng.)
Bondi M. Changing voices: Authorial voice in abstracts. Abstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change. Ed. by M. Bondi, & R. L. Sanz. Berlin, Peter Lang. 2014. pp. 243–270. (In Eng.)
Chang P., Schleppegrell M. Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing: Making the linguistic resources explicit for L2 writers in the social sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2011, issue 10 (3), pp. 140–151. (In Eng.)
Conrad S., Biber D. Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Ed. by S. Hunston, & G. Thompson. UK, Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 57–73. (In Eng.)
Crompton P. Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes, 1997, issue 16 (4), pp. 271–287. (In Eng.)
Gillaerts P. Shifting metadiscourse: Looking for diachrony in the abstract genre. Abstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change. Ed. by M. Bondi, & R. L. Sanz. Berlin, Peter Lang. 2014, pp. 271–287. (In Eng.)
Gray B., Biber, D. Current conceptions of stance. Stance and Voice in Written Genres. Ed. by K. Hyland, & C. S. Guinda. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 15–33. (In Eng.)
Gross A. G., Chesley P. Hedging, stance and voice in medical research articles. Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London, Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 85–100. (In Eng.)
Halliday M. A. K. Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London, Edward Arnold, 1978. 256 p. (In Eng.)
Hood S. Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. XI, 227 p. (In Eng.)
Hu G. W., Cao F. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 2011, issue 43, pp. 2795–2809. (In Eng.)
Hunston S., Thompson G. (Eds.) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. UK, Oxford University Press. 2000. xii, 225 p. (In Eng.)
Hyland K. Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness, 2000, issue 9(4), pp. 179–197. (In Eng.)
Hyland K., Diani G. Introduction: Academic evaluation and review genres. Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings. Ed. by K. Hyland, G. Diani. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 2009, pp. 1–14. (In Eng.)
Hyland K., Guinda C. S. (Eds.) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan. 2012. XVI, 263 p. (In Eng.)
Lewin B. A. Hedging: An exploratory study of authors’ and readers’ identification of ‘toning down’ in scientific texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2005, issue 4(2), pp. 163–178. (In Eng.)
Martin J. R., Rose D. Working with Discourse. London/NY, Continuum. 2007. (In Eng.)
Martin J. R., & White P. R. The Language of Evaluation. NY, Palgrave Macmillan. 2005. 278 p. (In Eng.)
Matsuda P. K., & Tardy C. M. Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 2007, issue 26, pp. 235–249. (In Eng.)
Peng J. E. Authorial voice constructed in citation in literature reviews of doctoral theses: Variations across training contexts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2019, issue 37, pp. 11–21. doi 10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.001. (In Eng.)
Resnik D. B., Elliott K. C. The ethical challenges of socially responsible science. Accountability in Research, 2016, issue 23(1), pp. 31–46. (In Eng.)
Sanz R. L. The construction of the author’s voice in academic writing: The interplay of cultural and disciplinary factors. Text & Talk, 2011, issue 31(2), pp. 173–193. (In Eng.)
Tardy C. Current conceptions of voice. Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. Ed. by K. Hyland, C. S. Guinda. Basingstoke, UK, Palgrave Macmillan, 2012, pp. 34–48. (In Eng.)
Thompson G., Hunston S. Evaluation: An introduction. Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Ed. by S. Hunston, & G. Thompson. Oxford University Press, 2000, pp. 1–27. (In Eng.)
Xie J. A review of research on authorial evaluation In English academic writing: A methodological perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2020, issue 47, pp. 1–20. (In Eng.)
