“Figure 2 shows that …”: Evidentiality in Chinese graduate students’ research articles

IF 3.1 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Zhongqing He, Haowen Zhou
{"title":"“Figure 2 shows that …”: Evidentiality in Chinese graduate students’ research articles","authors":"Zhongqing He,&nbsp;Haowen Zhou","doi":"10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Evidentiality is an important interpersonal resource in academic discourse, indicating sources of information and authorial commitment to propositions. Compared to other interpersonal resources in academic writing, however, evidentiality is an understudied area. In particular, much is unknown about the possible similarities/differences between student writers and expert writers in their use of evidentiality in research articles (RAs). The present study, adopting a systemic functional linguistics perspective, reports a corpus-based comparative examination of evidentiality in Chinese graduate students' coursework RAs and expert writers' published RAs. The study's aim is to discern the extent to which Chinese graduate students differ from expert writers in their use of evidentiality in English RAs in four disciplines: mathematics, physics, metallurgy, and materials science. The results showed that Chinese graduate students, as English as a foreign language (EFL) writers, use significantly more evidentials in their RAs than expert writers and their repertoire of evidentials is relatively limited. Chinese graduate students also show strong preferences for certain types and realizations of evidentiality and thus display less variety and flexibility in their use of evidentials in their RAs. This study provides evidence for the relationship between writers' writing skills and language proficiency and their use of evidentiality in RAs, and may contribute to our understanding of evidentiality in academic discourse.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47717,"journal":{"name":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","volume":"75 ","pages":"Article 101507"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of English for Academic Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1475158525000384","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evidentiality is an important interpersonal resource in academic discourse, indicating sources of information and authorial commitment to propositions. Compared to other interpersonal resources in academic writing, however, evidentiality is an understudied area. In particular, much is unknown about the possible similarities/differences between student writers and expert writers in their use of evidentiality in research articles (RAs). The present study, adopting a systemic functional linguistics perspective, reports a corpus-based comparative examination of evidentiality in Chinese graduate students' coursework RAs and expert writers' published RAs. The study's aim is to discern the extent to which Chinese graduate students differ from expert writers in their use of evidentiality in English RAs in four disciplines: mathematics, physics, metallurgy, and materials science. The results showed that Chinese graduate students, as English as a foreign language (EFL) writers, use significantly more evidentials in their RAs than expert writers and their repertoire of evidentials is relatively limited. Chinese graduate students also show strong preferences for certain types and realizations of evidentiality and thus display less variety and flexibility in their use of evidentials in their RAs. This study provides evidence for the relationship between writers' writing skills and language proficiency and their use of evidentiality in RAs, and may contribute to our understanding of evidentiality in academic discourse.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
13.30%
发文量
81
审稿时长
57 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of English for Academic Purposes provides a forum for the dissemination of information and views which enables practitioners of and researchers in EAP to keep current with developments in their field and to contribute to its continued updating. JEAP publishes articles, book reviews, conference reports, and academic exchanges in the linguistic, sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic description of English as it occurs in the contexts of academic study and scholarly exchange itself.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信