Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article examines how writer’s voice is constructed in argumentative essays written at the pre-university level. The study focusses on the student writers’ control over evaluative resources that influence the realization of voice in the high-scoring and low-scoring scripts. Using the APPRAISAL system in Systemic Functional Linguistics, the study shows how voice is construed through APPRAISAL theory in the high-scoring and low-scoring general paper essays, respectively. The differences between the two categories of essays can be seen in the application of ENGAGEMENT, ATTITUDE, and GRADUATION resources. Findings indicated that the high scoring essays used richer ENGAGEMENT and ATTITUDE resources to accomplish more mature and sophisticated argumentative voices. These opportunities to make full use of the APPRAISAL resources were missed by the low-scoring students in their argumentative writing. The findings are pedagogically useful for writing teachers who find the notion of voice too abstract to teach but accept its significance in producing a good essay.

Keywords

Academic writing APPRAISAL theory pre-university students voice construction argumentative essays

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barton

(1993) Evidentials, argumentation, and epistemological stance. College English 55(7): 745–69.

Coffin

(2006) Historical Discourse: The Language of Time, Cause and Evaluation. London: Continuum.

Derewianka

(2007) Using Appraisal theory to track interpersonal development in adolescent academic writing. In: McCabe

O’Donnell

Whittaker

(eds) Advances in Language and Education. London: Continuum, 142–65.

Hanauer

(2015) Measuring voice in poetry written by second language learners. Written Communication 32(1): 66–86.

Hornberger

Vaish

(2009) Multilingual language policy and school linguistic practice: globalization and English-language teaching in India, Singapore and South Africa. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education 39(3): 305–20.

Hood

(2004) Appraising research: taking a stance in academic writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Technology Sydney, Ultimo, New South Wales.

Hyland

(2005) Representing readers in writing: student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education 16(4): 363–77.

Lancaster

(2014) Exploring valued patterns of stance in upper-level student writing in the disciplines. Written Communication 31(1): 27–57.

Lee

Deakin

(2016) Interactions in L1 and L2 undergraduate student writing: interactional metadiscourse in successful and less-successful argumentative essays. Journal of Second Language Writing 33: 21–34.

10.

Liu

Thompson

(2009) Attitude in students’ argumentative writing: a contrastive perspective. University of Reading Language Studies Working Papers 1: 3–15.

11.

Martin

White

PRR

(2005) The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

12.

Martin

Rose

(2007) Working with Discourse: Meaning beyond the Clause. London: Continuum.

13.

Matsuda

Tardy

(2007) Voice in academic writing: the rhetorical construction of the author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes 26(2): 235–49.

14.

Miller

Mitchell

Pessoa

(2014) Valued voices: students’ use of engagement in argumentative history writing. Linguistics and Education 26: 107–20.

15.

North

(2005) Disciplinary variation in the use of theme in undergraduate essays. Applied Linguistics 26(3): 431–52.

16.

O’Hallaron

Schleppegrell

(2016) Voice in children’s science arguments: aligning assessment criteria with genre and discipline. Assessing Writing 30: 63–73.

17.

Ryshina-Pankova

(2014) Exploring academic argumentation in course-related blogs through engagement. In: Thompson

Alba-Juez

(eds) Evaluation in Context. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 281–302.

18.

Soliday

(2004) Reading student writing with anthropologists: stance and judgment in college writing. College Composition and Communication 56(1): 72–93.

19.

Tang

(2009) A dialogic account of authority in academic writing. In: Charles

Pecorari

Hunston

(eds) Academic Writing: At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse. London: Continuum, 170–88.

20.

Thompson

(1991) Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers. Applied Linguistics 12(4): 365–82.

21.

(2006) Creating a contrastive rhetorical stance: investigating the strategy of problematization in students’ argumentation. RELC Journal 37(3): 329–53.

Pre-university Students’ Voice Construction in Argumentative Essays

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References