Metadiscursive clauses controlled by nouns and adjectives in linguistics research papers
Vol.18,No.1(2025)
Discourse and Interaction
This study attempted to investigate the metadiscursive function of stance complement clauses in linguistics research papers, analysing the most common metadiscursive nouns and adjectives. To this aim, twenty research papers published in two indexed journals – the Journal of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and Discourse and Interaction (DI) were analysed using Biber’s (2006a) taxonomy of lexico-grammatical stance devices. The findings indicated that academics prefer epistemic nouns to attitude and communication nouns in the selected corpus, yet evaluation adjectives are preferred to epistemic adjectives in the corpus under study. Moreover, the study tries to analyse the distribution of stance complement clauses and the IMRD structure of a linguistics research paper with the highest incidence of stance complement clauses controlled by nouns and adjectives in the Results section.
academic discourse; linguistics research paper; stance complement clauses controlled by nouns and adjectives; metadiscursive nouns and adjectives; IMRD structure
Zuzana Kozacikova
Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra
Zuzana Kozáčiková is Assistant Professor at the Department of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts, Constantine the Philosopher University in Nitra, Slovakia. She specialises in syntax and discourse studies, focusing mainly on academic discourse – the use of hedging and modality and other means of text cohesion. She is the author of several journal articles and textbooks published in Slovakia and abroad and has presented her research outcomes at international conference meetings and workshops. She is co-editor of the linguistics journal Topics in Linguistics.
Anthony, L. (2019). AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer software]. Waseda University.http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Leech, G. (2002). Longman student grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.
Biber, D. (2006a). University language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. John Benjamins.
Biber, D. (2006b). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.001
Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2016). Cross-cultural variation in the use of hedges and boosters in academic discourse. Prague Journal of English Studies, 5(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/10.1515/pjes-2016-0009
Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2018). Intercultural and interdisciplinary variation in the use of epistemic lexical verbs in linguistics and economics research articles. Linguistica Pragensia, 28(2), 154–167.
Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2021). Engaging with the reader in research articles in English: Variation across disciplines and linguacultural backgrounds. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 18–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.02.003
Flowerdew, J. (2003). Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.10.001
Francis, G., Hunston, S., & Manning, E. (1998). Collins COBUILD grammar patterns 2: Nouns and adjectives. HarperCollins.
Charles, M. (2007). Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the noun that pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.004
Hyland, K. (2010). Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 116–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2005). Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that in abstracts. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 123–139. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. K. (2016). Change of attitude? A diachronic study of stance. Written Communication, 33(3), 251–274. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088316650399
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2017a). The fact that: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 529–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615590719
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2017b). Metadiscursive nouns: Interaction and cohesion in abstract moves. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.001
Jiang, F. K. (2017). Stance and voice in academic writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(1), 86–107. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.1.04jia
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2019). Academic discourse and global publishing: Disciplinary persuasion in changing times. Routledge.
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2021). “The goal of this analysis...”: Changing patterns of metadiscursive nouns in disciplinary writing. Lingua, 252, Article 103017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.103017
Kaatari, H. (2013). Adjectival complementation: Genre variation and meaning. May 2013 Conference Paper: ICAME 34, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Kim, C., & Crosthwaite, P. (2019). Disciplinary differences in the use of evaluative that: Expression of stance via that-clauses in business and medicine. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 41, Article 100775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100775
Kozáčiková, Z. (2021). Stance complement clauses controlled by verbs in academic research papers. Topics in Linguistics, 22(1), 16–26. https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2021-0002
Lin, L., & Evans, S. (2011). Structural patterns in empirical research articles: A cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes, 31, 150–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.10.002
Liu, Q., & Deng, L. (2017). A genre-based study of shell noun use in the Nbethat construction in popular and professional science articles. English for Specific Purposes, 48, 32–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.002
Mindt, H. (2011). Adjective complementation: An empirical analysis of adjectives followed by that-clauses. John Benjamins.
Parkinson, J. (2013). Adopting academic values: Student use of that-complement clauses in academic writing. System, 41, 428–442.
Posteguillo, S. (1999). The schematic structure of computer science research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 139–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00001-5
Schmid, H. J. (2000). English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to cognition. De Gruyter Mouton. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110808704
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Walková, M. (2019). A three-dimensional model of personal self-mention in research papers. English for Specific Purposes, 53, 60–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.09.003
Warchał, K. (2015). Certainty and doubt in academic discourse: Epistemic modality markers in English and Polish linguistics articles. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego.
Wu, B., & Paltridge, B. (2021). Stance expressions in academic writing: A corpus-based comparison of Chinese students’ MA dissertations and PhD theses. Lingua, 253, Article 103071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103071
Zou, H., & Hyland, K. (2022). How the medium shapes the message: Stance in two forms of book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 193, 269–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/jpragma.2022.03.023
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright © 2025 Zuzana Kozacikova