Voice construction in academic writing: The influence of disciplinary culture, writers' cultural background and rhetorical purposes




Mei-Hung Lin

Key Words

identity ; voice ; disciplinary authority ; academic writing ; research articles ; corpus analysis


Taiwan International ESP Journal

Volume or Term/Year and Month of Publication

9卷2期(2017 / 12 / 01)

Page #

84 - 112

Content Language


Chinese Abstract

Voice construction in academia is social, and involves weighing the complex interplay of various factors. This study explores the simultaneous influence of three social factors - disciplinary culture, writers' cultural background and rhetorical purpose - on writers' voice construction in writing research articles (RAs). Adopting a corpus-based approach and using Hyland's taxonomy of stance markers in analyzing RAs written by L1 and L2 writers in two disciplines, electrical engineering (EE) and applied linguistics (AL), results of quantitative analyses showed that disciplinary culture, among other factors, seems to play a dominant role in regulating academic writers' authorial presence. On the whole, writers in AL used stance markers much more frequently than writers in EE, while hedges occurred more than boosters in AL, but vice versa in EE. Also, the stance markers preferred by L1 and L2 writers were different. Finally, the high occurrence of boosters in conclusion sections of EE suggests a link between rhetorical purposes and authorial voice construction. An understanding of the various factors involved in voice construction could be of great pedagogical value since strategic management of self-representation conforming to disciplinary and general academic conventions could enhance the persuasiveness of RAs.

Topic Category 人文學 > 語言學
社會科學 > 教育學
  1. Abdi, R.(2002).Interpersonal metadiscourse: An indicator of interaction and identity.Discourse Studies,4,139-145.
  2. Abdollahzadeh, E.(2011).Poring over the findings: Interpersonal authorial engagement in applied linguistics papers.Journal of Pragmatics,43,288-297.
  3. Bazerman, C.(1988).Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science.Madison:University of Wisconsin Press.
  4. Burgess, A.,Ivanič, R.(2010).Writing and being written: Issues of identity across timescales.Written Communication,27(2),228-255.
  5. Cadman, K.(1997).Thesis writing for international students: A question of identity?.English for Specific Purposes,16(1),3-14.
  6. Charles, M.(2003)."This mystery": A corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in these from two contrasting disciplines.Journal of English for Academic Purposes,2,313-326.
  7. Dressen-Hammouda, D.(2008).From novice to disciplinary expert: Disciplinary identity and genre mastery.English for Specific Purposes,27,233-252.
  8. Dressen-Hammouda, D.(2014).Measuring the voice of disciplinarity in scientific writing: A longitudinal exploration of experienced writers in geology.English for Specific Purposes,34,14-25.
  9. Elbow, P.(ed.)(1994).Landmark essays on voice and writing.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  10. Gale, X. L.(1994).Conversing across cultural boundaries: Rewriting "self".Journal of Advanced Composition,14,455-462.
  11. Harwood, N.(2005)."I hoped to counteract the memory problem, but I made no impact whatsoever": Discussing methods in computing science using I.English for Specific Purposes,24,243-267.
  12. Harwood, N.(2005)."We do not seem to have a theory. The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap": Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing.Applied Linguistics,26(4),343-373.
  13. Helms-Park, R.,Stapleton, P.(2003).Questioning the importance of individualized voice in undergraduate L2 argumentative writing: An empirical study with pedagogical implications.Journal of Second Language Writing,12,245-265.
  14. Hirvela, A.,Belcher, D.(2001).Coming back to Voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers.Journal of Second Language Writing,10,83-106.
  15. Hu, G.,Cao, F.(2015).Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles.English for Specific Purposes,39,12-25.
  16. Hyland, K.(2000).Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing.London:Longman.
  17. Hyland, K.(2012).Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  18. Hyland, K.(2005).Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing.London:Continuum.
  19. Hyland, K.(2008).As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation.English for Specific Purposes,27(1),4-21.
  20. Hyland, K.(2002).Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing.Journal of Pragmatics,34,1091-1112.
  21. Hyland, K.(1998).Boosting, hedging, and the negotiation of academic knowledge.Text,18,349-382.
  22. Hyland, K.(2001).Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles.Written Communication,18,549-574.
  23. Hyland, K.(2010).Community and individuality: Performing identity in Applied Linguistics.Written Communication,27(2),159-188.
  24. Hyland, K.(2004).Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing.Journal of Second Language Writing,13,133-151.
  25. Hyland, K.(2001).Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles.English for Specific Purposes,20(3),207-226.
  26. Hyland, K.(ed.),Bondi, M.(ed.)(2006).Academic discourse across disciplines.Frankfurt:Peter Lang.
  27. Hyland, K.(ed.),Guinda, C.S.(ed.)(2012).Stance and voice in written academic genres.Basingstoke, UK:Palgrave Macmillan.
  28. Hyland, K.,Tse, P.(2004).Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal.Applied Linguistics,25(2),156-177.
  29. Ivanič, R.(1998).Writing and identity: The discoursal construction of identity in academic writing.Amsterdam:John Benjamins.
  30. Ivanič, R.,Camps, D.(2001).I am how I sound: Voice as self-representation in L2 writing.Journal of Second Language Writing,10,3-33.
  31. Kuhi, D.,Behnam, B.(2011).Generic variations and metadiscourse use in the writing of applied linguists: A comparative study and preliminary framework.Written Communication,28,97-141.
  32. Kuo, C-H.(1999).The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles.English for Specific Purposes,18(2),121-138.
  33. Martínez, I.(2005).Native and non-native writers' use of first person pronouns in different sections of biology research articles in English.Journal of Second Language Writing,14,174-190.
  34. Matsuda, P. K.(2001).Voice in Japanese written discourse: Implications for second language writing.Journal of Second Language Writing,10,35-53.
  35. Matsuda, P. K.,Tardy, C.(2007).Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review.English for Specific Purposes,26,235-249.
  36. McGrath, L.,Kuteeva, M.(2012).Stance and engagement in pure mathematics research articles: Linking discourse features to disciplinary practices.English for Specific Purposes,31,161-173.
  37. Milagros del Saz Rubio, M.(2011).A pragmatic approach to the macro-structure and metadiscoursal features of research article introductions in the field of Agricultural Sciences.English for Specific Purposes,30,258-271.
  38. Peacock, M.(2006).A cross-disciplinary comparison of boosting in research articles.Corpora,1,61-84.
  39. Prior, P.(2001).Voice in text, mind, and society: Sociohistoric accounts of discourse acquisition and use.Journal of Second Language Writing,10(1),55-81.
  40. Quellette, M.(2008).Weaving strands of writer identity: Self as author and the NNES "plagiarist".Journal of Second Language Writing,17,255-273.
  41. Ramanathan, V.,Atkinson, D.(1999).Individualism, academic writing and ESL writers.Journal of Second Language Writing,8(1),45-75.
  42. Ramanathan, V.,Kaplan, R.(1996).Audience and voice in current composition textbooks: Implications for L2 student-writers.Journal of Second Language Writing,5,21-34.
  43. Sheldon, E.(2009).From one I to another: Discursive construction of selfrepresentation in English and Castilian Spanish research articles.English for Specific Purposes,28,251-265.
  44. Shen, F.(1989).The classroom and the wider culture: Identity as a key to learning English composition.College Composition and Communication,40,459-466.
  45. Stapleton, P.(2002).Critiquing voice as a viable pedagogical tool in L2 writing: Returning the spotlight to ideas.Journal of Second Language Writing,11,177-190.
  46. Starfield, S.,Ravelli, L.(2006)."The writing of this thesis was a process that I could not explore with the positivistic detachment of the classical sociologist": Self and structure in New Humanities research theses.Journal of English for Academic Purposes,5,222-243.
  47. Tang, R.,John, S.(1999).The "I" in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing through the first person pronoun.English for Specific Purposes,18,S23-S29.
  48. Tardy, C.,Matsuda, P. K.(2009).The construction of author voice by editorial board members.Written Communication,26,32-52.