Evaluative expressions in analystical arguments
aspects of appraisal in assigned English language essays
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v2.i1.105Keywords:
Evaluation, Appraisal, Argumentation, Claims, Discourse AnalysisAbstract
Evaluative language is widely recognised as contributing to the quality of written argumentation, although investigation in this area is more prevalent in professional academic writing (e.g. Hunston, 1989 and Hyland, 2002) than in student texts. This study investigates evaluative expressions in argumentative essays written by first-year undergraduates in the discipline of English Language at the National University of Singapore. Aspects of the Appraisal framework, especially the engagement system, were used to analyse the evaluative expressions in the stages of argumentation outlined by Callaghan and Rothery (1988). The analysis revealed that high-rated and low-rated essays differ in the frequency of the use of the stages of Thesis and Reiteration to construct more or less effective arguments. Also, within the stages, evaluative expressions contributed to arguments that are more or less persuasive.
References
Allison, D. (1995) Assertions and alternatives: helping ESL undergraduates extend their choices in academic writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (1): 1–15.
Callaghan, M. and Rothery, J. (1988) Teaching Factual Writing: a genre-based approach. Report of the Disadvantaged Schools Program Literacy Project. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.
Coffin, C. (2004) Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: the role of argument in IELTS tests. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 229–46.
Connor, U. (1990) Linguistic/ rhetorical measures for international persuasive student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 24: 67–87.
Crammond, J. G. (1998) The uses and complexity of argument structures in expert and student persuasive writing. Written Communication 15 (2): 230–68.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1988) A consideration of the meaning of ‘discuss’ in examination questions. In P. C. Robinson (ed.) Academic Writing: process and product 35–47. (ELT Documents 129) Hong Kong: Modern English Publications and The British Council.
Eggins, S. (1994) An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Pinter.
Hunston, S. (1989) Evaluation in experimental research articles. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Birmingham.
Hunston, S. (2000) Evaluation and the planes of discourse: status and value in persuasive texts. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse 176–208. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds) (2000) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2002) What do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 259–557.
Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997) Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6 (2): 183–205.
Johns, A. M. (1995) Teaching classroom and authentic genres: initiating students into academic cultures and discourses. In D. Belcher and G. Braine (eds) Academic Writing in a Second Language: essays on research and pedagogy 277–93. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lea, M. R. and Street, B. (1999) Writing as academic literacies: understanding textual practices in higher education. In C. N. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds) Writing: texts, processes and practices 62–83. London: Longman.
Love, A. (1999) Framing claims: an examination of one feature of undergraduate writing in Zimbabwe. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 25 (1–2): 71–85.
Martin, J. R. (1989) Factual Writing: exploring and challenging social reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R. (2000) Beyond exchange: appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse 142–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mauranen, A. and Bondi, M. (2003) Editorial. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2: 269–71.
O’Brien, T. (1995) Rhetorical structure analysis and the case of the inaccurate, incoherent source-hopper. Applied Linguistics 6 (4): 442–82.
Reid, J. and Kroll, B. (1995) Designing and assessing effective classroom writing assignments for NES and ESL students. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (1): 17–41.
Teruo, H. (1996) American and Japanese high school students’ rhetorical patterns in writing English persuasive compositions. Unpublished PhD thesis, National University of Singapore.
Thompson, G. (2001) Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22: 58–78.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958) The Use of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H. and Krabbe, E. C. W., et al. (1996) Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
White, P. (1998) Telling media tales: the news story as rhetoric. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney.
White, P. (2002) The language of attitude, arguability and interpersonal positioning. Retrieved June 2002. http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/index.html
White, P. (2003) Beyond modality and hedging: a dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23(2): 259–84.
Yang, R. and Allison, D. (2004) Research articles in applied linguistics: structures from a functional perspective. English for Specific Purposes 23(3): 264–79.
Callaghan, M. and Rothery, J. (1988) Teaching Factual Writing: a genre-based approach. Report of the Disadvantaged Schools Program Literacy Project. Sydney: Metropolitan East Disadvantaged Schools Program.
Coffin, C. (2004) Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: the role of argument in IELTS tests. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 3: 229–46.
Connor, U. (1990) Linguistic/ rhetorical measures for international persuasive student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 24: 67–87.
Crammond, J. G. (1998) The uses and complexity of argument structures in expert and student persuasive writing. Written Communication 15 (2): 230–68.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1988) A consideration of the meaning of ‘discuss’ in examination questions. In P. C. Robinson (ed.) Academic Writing: process and product 35–47. (ELT Documents 129) Hong Kong: Modern English Publications and The British Council.
Eggins, S. (1994) An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Pinter.
Hunston, S. (1989) Evaluation in experimental research articles. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Birmingham.
Hunston, S. (2000) Evaluation and the planes of discourse: status and value in persuasive texts. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse 176–208. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hunston, S. and Thompson, G. (eds) (2000) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2002) What do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 259–557.
Hyland, K. and Milton, J. (1997) Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6 (2): 183–205.
Johns, A. M. (1995) Teaching classroom and authentic genres: initiating students into academic cultures and discourses. In D. Belcher and G. Braine (eds) Academic Writing in a Second Language: essays on research and pedagogy 277–93. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Lea, M. R. and Street, B. (1999) Writing as academic literacies: understanding textual practices in higher education. In C. N. Candlin and K. Hyland (eds) Writing: texts, processes and practices 62–83. London: Longman.
Love, A. (1999) Framing claims: an examination of one feature of undergraduate writing in Zimbabwe. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics 25 (1–2): 71–85.
Martin, J. R. (1989) Factual Writing: exploring and challenging social reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R. (2000) Beyond exchange: appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunston and G. Thompson (eds) Evaluation in Text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse 142–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mauranen, A. and Bondi, M. (2003) Editorial. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 2: 269–71.
O’Brien, T. (1995) Rhetorical structure analysis and the case of the inaccurate, incoherent source-hopper. Applied Linguistics 6 (4): 442–82.
Reid, J. and Kroll, B. (1995) Designing and assessing effective classroom writing assignments for NES and ESL students. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (1): 17–41.
Teruo, H. (1996) American and Japanese high school students’ rhetorical patterns in writing English persuasive compositions. Unpublished PhD thesis, National University of Singapore.
Thompson, G. (2001) Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22: 58–78.
Toulmin, S. E. (1958) The Use of Argument. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Henkemans, F. S., Blair, J. A., Johnson, R. H. and Krabbe, E. C. W., et al. (1996) Fundamentals of Argumentation Theory: a handbook of historical backgrounds and contemporary developments. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
White, P. (1998) Telling media tales: the news story as rhetoric. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney.
White, P. (2002) The language of attitude, arguability and interpersonal positioning. Retrieved June 2002. http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/index.html
White, P. (2003) Beyond modality and hedging: a dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23(2): 259–84.
Yang, R. and Allison, D. (2004) Research articles in applied linguistics: structures from a functional perspective. English for Specific Purposes 23(3): 264–79.
Published
2007-02-17
Issue
Section
Articles
License
Equinox Publishing Ltd.
How to Cite
Mei, W. S., & Allison, D. (2007). Evaluative expressions in analystical arguments: aspects of appraisal in assigned English language essays. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 2(1), 105-127. https://doi.org/10.1558/japl.v2.i1.105
