A Comparative Study On Three-word Stance Bundles In Applied Linguistics’ Academic Writing

A considerable number of studies on lexical bundles have been conducted by linguists in recent years, but a limited number of them focus on stance bundle, a particular type of lexical bundle related to "personal feelings, attitudes, value judgments, or assessments (Biber et al.,1999:966)". By looking at the empirical studies on stance bundles, it can be seen that there are several controversies over either the terminology and classification or the criteria for frequency cut-offs, occurrences and bundle cutting borders on them.This thesis investigates the stance bundles used by expert English writers and advanced Chinese L2learners in Applied Linguistics’academic writing. Based on Biber and his colleagues (Biber et al.,1999; Biber, Conrad&Cortes,2004)’ theoretical framework, the present study identifies and describes61target stance bundles in RA corpus characterized by the academic writings of expert English writers. Then, they are compared with those identified in MAT corpus characterized by academic writings of advanced Chinese L2learners. The results can be concluded as follows:1)12out of61target stance bundles occur over150times/mw,5occur100to149times/mw, and44occur50to99times/mw. They can be structurally divided into VP fragment, AP fragment, NP fragment, and anticipatory it fragment, and functionally categorized into epistemic stance bundles expressing certainty or uncertainty, and attitudinal/modality stance bundles expressing obligation/directive, intention/prediction or ability/possibility. A strong relationship between the structural categories and functional categories is discovered. Particularly, most epistemic stance bundles used to express certainty are VP fragments, while epistemic stance bundles used to express uncertainty are composed of VP, AP and NP fragments. Most obligation/directive stance bundles are VP and AP fragments, while most ability/possibility stance bundles are VP and NP fragments. None of these stance bundles use personal pronouns.2) Advanced Chinese L2learners in Applied Linguistics exploit most of the target stance bundles in their academic writing, but there are distinctive differences in the frequencies of these stance bundles. Expert English writers in RA corpus are characterized by using VP fragment and AP fragment more frequently than advanced Chinese L2learners in MAT corpus in general. Beyond those, there is evidence that epistemic stance bundles used to express certainty seem to be the primary focus of both expert English writers and advanced Chinese L2learners, while the expression of obligation has been constantly seen in Chinese learners’ writing.3) Advanced Chinese L2learners are relatively less innovative in their expression of stance, being repetitive and redundant in the use of certain structures. These overused structures are to some extent greatly affected by their Chinese equivalence. They also lack interaction with readers in their academic writing since they are too certain and impersonal to demonstrate their awareness and acknowledgment of their perspectives. This may result in their difficulties in developing their conceptions.The study concludes that the stance bundles should be paid more attention to by advanced Chinese L2learners if they intend to write accurately and achieve better communication. It is also advisable for teachers to raise students’ awareness of stance bundles in their academic writing, and provide samples of more acceptable usages.