A Comparative Study On Appraisal Resources In Literature Reviews Of English Master Theses By NSC And NSE Writers

With the fast expansion of English discourse community in recent years,the mastery of academic English writing has become an essential challenge for researchers.In academic research articles,due to the critical nature of literature review(LR),the proper utilization of evaluative language can help the author clarify the gap existing in the previous research and justify the necessity of current research.Under the frame of J.R Martin's Appraisal Theory,the present study examines the way appraisal resources used in LR writing in master theses by Native-Speaker–of-Chinese(NSC)writers and Native-Speaker-ofEnglish(NSE)writers,trying to answer the following two research questions: First,what are the similarities and differences between the appraisal resources distributed by NSC and NSE writers in their LR writing? Second,what are the possible reasons behind these similarities and differences? A combined research method of both quantitative and qualitative approaches is adopted in the current research,which is realized by two self-built corpora and case analysis.Together there are 23 English LRs in master theses chosen and then annotated with the help of UAM corpus tool.The study has the following findings.First,the distribution of the three subsystems under the appraisal frame is similar for the two corpora: Attitude takes the highest amount,followed by Engagement and then Graduation.However,more appraisal resources were found in the NSC corpus than the NSE corpus,since different numbers of LRs are included in the two corpora and the writing perspectives of the two groups vary.Secondly,under Attitude,only few Judgment resources were found in the NSC corpus.Both groups use Appreciation most frequently but with different focuses.NSC writers tend to value the contribution of the previous research,especially their usefulness,while NSE writers also concerned about the organization of the research and their connections with the others.Thirdly,NSC writers adopt less proportion of Engagement than their NSE counterparts,which may indicate that they have less reader awareness.And within Engagement,both groups adopt Hetero-glossic resources to give the voices for others,and NSC writers grant more authority to the previous researchers by employing more Distance.Finally,two groups of writers differ in ways of expressions.NSC writers tend to be more indirect in expressing evaluative meanings,especially when it comes to the negative attitude and disagreement.Also,compared to the NSE writers,NSC writers only have limited ways of expressions.The findings suggest that in LR writing,researchers in both language communities use appraisal resources to evaluate the previous research,but because of insufficient academic English knowledge,a different cultural background,and inadequate lexical proficiency,NSC writers perform differently from their NSE counterparts.With limited understanding of academic English writing and a different cultural background,NSC writers may not express their evaluation with the same value focus in an explicit way.And with an insufficient lexical proficiency,the evaluative expressions by NSC writers are much less diverse.Therefore,the present research implies that for teaching academic English writing in China,the relevant academic English knowledge should be introduced,cross-cultural thinking skills should be cultivated,and a higher lexical proficiency should be focused.Though with certain limitation,the present study displays the appraisal resource used in literature review writing by writers from two language communities and hopefully could shed light on academic English teaching and learning in China.