The evaluative know-how of Chinese scholars : A contrastive corpus analysis of evaluative it patterns in research articles
Bingxin Wang,Naixing Wei
2017-01-01
Abstract:In recent years, evaluative it patterns have attracted broad attention in the literature. It is a prevalent language phenomenon in academic discourse (Biber et al., 1999; Hewings & Hewings, 2002; Peacock, 2011), and part of the defining code of research articles (RAs hereafter) (Williams, 2002). It allows writers to present their evaluation explicitly while giving them the appearance of generality and objectivity (Herriman, 2000) and is thus a powerful and effective construction for expressing attitudinal meanings. Evaluative it patterns have been explored across populations, genres and disciplines (e.g., Hewings & Hewings, 2002; Peacock, 2011; Zhang, 2015). Yet, scant attention is paid to the characteristic patterns and their characteristic meanings in academic texts. Characteristic patterns (CPs hereafter) refer to the high-frequency patterns in a specific set of texts, while characteristic meanings (CMs hereafter) are the meanings expressed by the CPs. CMs generally reveal the typical meanings and functions of the texts, i.e., “what is often said” in the texts (Hunston, 2011). Francis et al. (1998) proposes 9 high-frequency evaluative it patterns in general English texts, including it v-link ADJ to, it v-link ADJ that, it v-link ADJ wh-, it v-link ADJ for n that, it v-link ADJ of n that, it v-link ADJ to n that, it v-link ADJ for n to, it v-link ADJ of n to and it v-link ADJ v-ing. However, whether these patterns are CPs in academic texts or not and what are the CMs of it patterns remain unanswered. Besides, the majority of the existing literature focuses on the practices of native speakers, while how the patterns are used in non-native speaker writers’ academic texts, in Chinese scholars’ texts especially, and whether the usage of it patterns by Chinese scholars varies from that by Western scholars are still under-researched. We thus set out to explore how Chinese scholars use evaluative it patterns to express attitudinal meanings and compare their practices with those of Western scholars. The following research questions are addressed: (1) What are the characteristic evaluative it patterns and their characteristic meanings in academic texts? (2) What similarities and differences exist in the use of characteristic it patterns by Chinese scholars and Western scholars in terms of frequency and characteristic meanings?