The presentation focuses on one case in my PhD study on his development of evaluative stance throughout his one-year MA study, as reflected in his proposal and dissertation. The introductions of both texts, as research warrants, are the focus of the analysis, informed by Appraisal system under systemic functional linguistics.

1. Investigating the Emergence and
Development of Evaluative Stance and
Voice in Postgraduate Research Proposals
And Dissertations
Eric Cheung
UTS-PolyU
99173041@student.uts.edu.au
1

2. My Life Around Academic Writing
• Had extensive paper
marking experience
• Started research on
evaluative meaning in
postgraduate writing in 2012
• Now writing academically
about academic writing
2

3. Initial Questions
• How to be ‘critical’?
• What is ‘voice’ in academic writing?
– How does student writers’ ‘voice’ emerge?
– How is it related to ‘stance’?
– How is ‘voice’ and ‘stance’ expressed in linguistic
terms?
• How does ‘voice’ develop through time?
– How do ‘voice’ and ‘stance’ differ between the text
which sets out to do something (e.g. proposals) and
the text reporting what has been done (e.g.
dissertations, research articles, etc.)?
3

4. 4

5. Voice and Stance: Linguistic Perspective
• The individuality of voice has a close relation
with the concept of stance, as a result of
“personal feelings and assessments” (Hyland,
2008).
– Hyland refers stance and voice to the linguistic
resources writers draw on to show their
understanding of both the local context of the
here-and-now interaction and the broader
constraints of the wider community which
influence that interaction (social and dialogic)
5

6. Voice and Stance in SFL
• Located within the realm of interpersonal
meaning (Hood, 2012, p. 52)
• Two perspectives on ‘voice’
– Dialogic space
– Registerial role that is enacted in the choices of
APPRAISAL
6

7. Stance and Voice from SFL Perspective
7
sub-selections of evaluative options within
text; patterns of use of evaluative options
within a given 'key’
reconfiguration of the probabilities of the
occurrence of particular evaluative meaning-
making options or for the co-occurrence
of options
(Martin and White,
2005; Hood, 2012)

8. Research Questions
• How do students deploy APPRAISAL resources in
their proposal and dissertation introductions?
• What changes are evident in
– Management of APPRAISAL resources over time
– Students’ self-positioning in relation to their object of
study and to other contributions to knowledge in the
field
• How do these findings enhance the
understanding of the development trajectories in
postgraduate writing and thus inform Advanced
EAP pedagogy?
8

9. Introduction: Research Warrant
• “A discursive context in which writers both
describe and persuade” (Hood, 2010, p. 6)
• Comprised by a series of descriptions and
evaluative reports to construct a ‘macro-
genre’ (Typically with…)
– Description of the object of study
– Descriptive report of the other research
– Description of the writer’s study
9

10. My Focus Today: Stu
• Research topic: rhetorical questions in
speeches by the 2012 US presidential election
campaign candidates
• Pilot study included in his proposal; also an
additional phase of remarks in both texts
• Focus on discourse strategies that negotiate
interpersonal meaning; repertoire may
develop
10

11. • Identifying the APPRAISAL resources
– Inscribed and invoked ATTITUDE
– Construction of voice and stance through ATTITUDE
and GRADUATION distribution
• Comparing the evaluative patterning between
Stu’s proposal and dissertation
– Major changes
– Brief discussion of the ‘remark’ phase
11

12. Data
• 3 NNES Pg Appl Ling students (2013-2014)
• Intros (Research Warrant) of proposals and
dissertations
Analysis
• Discourse analytic approach
• APPRAISAL resources (manually coded)
Findings
• Distribution of APPRAISAL for evaluative stance and
key
• Development of stance and voice from proposals to
dissertations
12

13. APPRAISAL system
• Categorisation of
discourse semantic
resources construing
interpersonal
meaning
• Lexico-grammatical
realisations will also
be discussed
wherever necessary
13

14. APPRECIATION
• REACTION
– our interest in appreciating the beauty of rhetoric.
[+REACTION: QUALITY]
• COMPOSITION
– Were there clear [+COMPOSITION] correlations between
types of question and pragmatic functions in the use
of rhetorical questions?
• VALUATION
– the most substantial [+VALUATION] rhetorical means
14

15. JUDGEMENT
• Only resources representing CAPACITY are
present in the proposal
– Having a solid understanding of different
rhetorical devices and to apply them skillfully in
speaking and writing will improve one’s ability to
communicate as well as his/her persuasiveness of
messages significantly.
• Other subtypes include NORMALITY, TENACITY,
VERACITY and PROPRIETY
15

16. AFFECT
• Least deployed among all ATTITUDE resources
• Subtypes include HAPPINESS, SATISFACTION,
SECURITY and INCLINATION
• Main AFFECT is +INCLINATION
– a great reliance on various rhetorical strategies
– a valuable opportunity to stimulate our interest
• One instance of -SATISFACTION
– to criticize the others in a more direct way
16

17. GRADUATION system
17

18. Amplifying ATTITUDE through
GRADUATION
• Pre-modifying ATTITUDE
– the more [+FORCE: INTENSIFICATION] carefully-
planned and written-as-spoken political speeches
– having a solid [+FOCUS: AUTHENTICITY]
understanding of different rhetorical devices
• Infusing
– improve one’s ability to communicate as well as
his/her persuasiveness of messages significantly
18

19. Invoking ATTITUDE through GRADUATION
• Further to the previous work, this study reviews
also Obama’s use of RQs as an additional
perspective and a continuation so as to enrich
the comprehensiveness of the understanding
of rhetorical questions in political context
19

20. Distribution of inscribed and invoked
ATTITUDE in the introduction
• Description of the object of study
– Densely coded with inscribed ATTITUDE, which is
often intensified with GRADUATION
• Report on other research in the field
– ATTITUDE is predominantly invoked through
GRADUATION; sporadic encoding of inscribed
ATTITUDE
• Description of the writer’s own study
– Predominantly invoked ATTITUDE with upgrading
GRADUATION 20

21. The Role of Higher Level Periodicity
• HyperThemes: prominent point of departure
– Often construing the generalised field and
interpersonal meaning
– Predictive of what is to come in the unfolding
phase
– Propagates evaluative meaning across the phase
• HyperNew: consolidate/distillate meanings
21

22. • Each paragraph starts with
an assessment over the
field to be discussed
• The evaluative meaning
radiates across the phase,
either picked up by
graded experiential
meanings, or
accumulating with the
inscribed ATTITUDE
instances
• Some phases consolidates
the meanings expanded in
the phase as HyperNew,
often with attitudinal
meaning encoded
22

23. HYPERTHEME
Rhetoric – the art of persuasive speaking is a particularly
important skill in different professions,
since having a solid understanding of different
rhetorical devices and to apply them skillfully in
speaking and writing will improve one’s ability to
communicate as well as his/her persuasiveness of
messages significantly…
HYPERNEW
it provides us not only with diverse rhetorical resources to
study in, but also a valuable opportunity to stimulate our
interest in appreciating the beauty of rhetoric.
23

24. Evaluative Prosody
• Prosody of domination: explicit coding of
ATTITUDE in the prominent textual location to
spread the value across the phase
• Prosody of saturation: dense coding of
inscribed and invoked ATTITUDE
• Prosody of intensification: reliance on highly
charged attitudinal choices
• The prosodic patterns can be combined for
greater strength; can be disrupted through
concessive (e.g. but, however, only, etc.)
24

25. Kinds of voice in academic writing
• Observer: oriented towards the object of
study; can use a full palette of APPRAISAL
resources
• Critic: oriented towards field of research;
evaluating based on comparative differences –
mainly instantiated through invoked ATTITUDE
• Participant: expressed from the field of the
object of study, projected by observer voice;
unrestricted choice of ATTITUDE (not present in
Stu’s introductions)
25

26. Rhetoric – the art of persuasive speaking is a particularly
important skill in different professions, since having a solid
understanding of different rhetorical devices and to apply
them skillfully in speaking and writing will improve one’s
ability to communicate as well as his/her persuasiveness of
messages significantly. As political speeches, especially those
delivered to the public at large in election campaigns, are
primarily designed for politicians to motivate followers or gain
power through their style of speaking (refs…) with a great
reliance on various rhetorical strategies (ref), it provides us not
only with diverse rhetorical resources to study in, but also a
valuable opportunity to stimulate our interest in appreciating
the beauty of rhetoric.
Description of the Object of Study
26

27. HYPERTHEME
Rhetoric – the art of persuasive speaking is a particularly
important skill in different professions,
since having a solid understanding of different
rhetorical devices and to apply them skillfully in
speaking and writing will improve one’s ability to
communicate as well as his/her persuasiveness of
messages significantly…
HYPERNEW
it provides us not only with diverse rhetorical resources to
study in, but also a valuable opportunity to stimulate our
interest in appreciating the beauty of rhetoric.
27

28. Description of the Object of Study
• Prosody of saturation + intensification +
domination
• Expressed with an observer voice
– The writer “manipulate the intensity of
expressions of evaluation” (Hood, 2010, p. 76)
• Stance consistently positive and ‘loud’
– Undisrupted by concessives
– Strengthened with GRADUATION amplifying ATTITUDE
28

29. Report on Other Research
In the area of political discourse, scholars and researche[r]s have
been interested in analyzing different rhetorical devices […] in
political speeches (refs…). Many of these studies however applied
either a relatively broader perspective by analyzing several
rhetorical devices at the same time (ref…) or studied more
specifically in one of these strategies, e.g. metaphor (ref…), but
rarely in the case of the rhetorical question, especially in the US
presidential election campaign, which is supposedly perceived as
the most debated and most attention-driving election in the
democracy world. Therefore, this study serves as an update to
previous studies of the rhetorical question, particularly selected
from the more carefully-planned and written-as-spoken political
speeches between the two candidates in the 2012 US presidential
election campaign. 29

30. Report on Other Research
• Prosody of domination
• Expressed with a critic voice
– Appraising other contributions of knowledge in
the field
– Mainly invoked ATTITUDE
– Alternates with observer voice appraising the
object of study comparatively
• Evaluative meaning flows from HyperTheme
until the concessive ‘but’ occurs
– And accumulates across the phase
– Construes less dichotomising stance 30

31. Findings up to this Point…
• Stu’s introduction mirrors the published research
article introductions
– Distinctive phases that present the fields of research
and the object of study
– Strong and consistent stance emerged in support of
the significance of the research (not problematising it)
• Establishes a basis how to identify the development
of stance and voice in his dissertation
– The strategies Stu chooses to foreground his
assessment
– The focus of evaluation the writer chooses to
emphasise
31

32. DEVELOPMENT OF STANCE AND
VOICE
32

33. Comparing the Two Intro Texts
• The introductions in the proposal and
dissertation are largely similar to the proposal
introduction
– Clear boundaries among stages
– Same description of the object of study
– Same review of literature stage
– Similar attitudinal coding
33

34. Distribution of inscribed and invoked
ATTITUDE in the introduction
• Description of the object of study
– Densely coded with inscribed ATTITUDE, which is
often intensified with GRADUATION
• Report on other research in the field
– ATTITUDE is predominantly invoked through
GRADUATION; sporadic encoding of inscribed
ATTITUDE
• Description of the writer’s own study
– Predominantly invoked ATTITUDE with upgrading
GRADUATION 34

35. But…
• The dissertation introduction
– Has a more refined description of the object of
study (from political speech to rhetorical
strategies)
– The pilot study is not presented; the Transition
stage introduces the organisation of the
dissertation instead
– The ‘remark’ phase is oriented towards the
‘interesting’ aspects of the object of study (both
started with ‘what is… that’
35

36. ‘Remark’ Phase in the Proposal
What is noteworthy here is that the focus of this
study is not on comparing the use of rhetorical
questions between the two candidates or the
two parties in America […] In addition,
modifications of the RQ classification in my
previous work (as in section 3.2) may have to
[be made] if a considerable number of President
Obama’s rhetorical questions function
differently from the existing one […]
36

37. ‘Remark’ phase in the dissertation
What is more interesting is that since the two
candidates were significantly different in terms of
their political image, campaign strategy and style of
speaking, these differences enable us to elucidate
politicians' use of rhetorical questions from a
broader perspective. In Romney's case, [...] Obama,
on the other hand, […] Generally speaking, the use
of rhetorical questions afford them a useful means
to engage in verbal indirectness moves, which allow
them to take cover under the rhetorical questions
and avoid directly engaging in face-threatening acts
(Habwe, 2010).
37

38. Summary
– Shifts the focus of persuasion from construing a
meticulous research (proposal) towards a research
as both applicable and interesting (dissertation)
– Sheds light upon how the writer constructs a
consistent and persuasive research warrant
through patterns of interpersonal meanings
(also textual and ideational meanings)
38

39. Moving Forward
• Investigating the variations across Ss writers
– Reflecting individual writers’ preferences over
foregrounding what kind of evaluative construct
for his/her research warrant
• Interpreting the findings
– ENGAGEMENT adding an extra layer for construction
of stance and voice
• In what ways and by what degree the writers invite or
reject alternative propositions
• How much the writers are ‘engaged in’ their own
evaluation
– Implications to academic writing pedagogy
39

40. Major References
Hood, S. 2012, ‘Voice and Stance as Appraisal:
Persuading and Positioning in Research Writing
Across Intellectual Fields’, in K. Hyland & C. S.
Guinda (eds), Stance and Voice in Written Academic
Genres, Palgrave Macmillan, Hampshire, UK. pp. 51-
68.
Martin, J. R. & White, P. R. R. 2005, The Language of
Evaluation: Appraisal in English, Palgrave
Macmillan, Hampshire, UK.

41. THANK YOU VERY MUCH!
Eric Cheung email: 99173041@student.uts.edu.au
By Steve Macone
41