The linguistic resources used by academic writers to adopt a position and engage with readers, variously described as evaluation, stance and metadiscourse, have attracted considerable attention in recent years. A relatively overlooked means of expressing a stance, however, is through a Noun Complement structure, where a stance head noun takes a nominal complement clause. This pattern allows a writer to front-load attitude meanings and offers an explicit statement of evaluation of the proposition which follows (as in ‘The fact that science has a history is not an argument against the possibility of scientific truth’). In this article, we explore the frequencies, forms and functions of this structure in a corpus of 160 research articles across eight disciplines totalling 1.7 million words. Developing a new rhetorically based classification of stance nouns, we show that the structure is not only widely used to express author comment and evaluation, but that it exhibits considerable variation in the way that it is used to build knowledge across different disciplines.
ÄdelAGarretsonG (2006) Citation practices across the disciplines: The case of proficient student writing. Paper presented at the Academic and Professional Communication in the 21st Century: Genres, Rhetoric and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge. Proceedings of the 5th International AELFE Conference, September 13–15, Zaragoza.
2.
AkimotoM (1990) Deverbal nouns in grammar and discourse. Paper presented at the 17th International Systemics Congress, July 3–7, Stirling.
3.
AktasRNCortesV (2008) Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes7(1): 3–14.
BazermanC (1988) Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
6.
BecherTTrowlerP (2001) Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Culture of Disciplines. Buckingham: Open University Press.
7.
BergerPL (1963) Invitation to Sociology: A Humanistic Sociology. New York: Doubleday.
8.
BiberD (2006) University Language: A Corpus-based Study of Spoken and Written Registers, vol. 23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
9.
BiberDJohanssonSLeechG. (1999) Longman Grammar of Written and Spoken English. Harlow: Longman.
10.
ChafeWNicholsJ (1986) Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology (Advances in Discourse Processes). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
11.
CharlesM (2007) Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the Noun that pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes26(2): 203–218.
12.
CoxheadA (2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly34(2): 213–238.
13.
DescartesR (1958) The Philosophical Writings of Descartes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
14.
FløttumKDahlTKinnT (2006) Academic Voices: Across Languages and Disciplines. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
15.
FlowerdewJ (2003) Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes22(4): 329–346.
16.
FlowerdewJForestRW (2015) Signalling Nouns in English: A Corpus-based Discourse Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
FrancisG (1986) Anaphoric Nouns. Birmingham: English Language Research, University of Birmingham.
18.
FrancisG (1994) Labelling discourse: An aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion. In: CoulthardM (ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge, pp. 83–101.
GardnerDDaviesM (2013) A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics35(3): 305–327.
21.
HallidayMAKHasanR (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
22.
HallidayMAKMartinJR (1993) Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power. London: The Falmer Press.
23.
HallidayMAKMatthiessenCMIM (2013) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th edn.London: Taylor & Francis.
24.
HunstonSThompsonG (2000) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25.
HylandK (1999) Academic attribution: Citation and the construction of disciplinary knowledge. Applied Linguistics20(3): 341–367.
26.
HylandK (2004) Disciplinary Discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
27.
HylandK (2005) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies7(2): 173–192.
28.
HylandK (2012) Disciplinary Identities: Individuality and Community in Academic Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
HylandKGuindaC (2012) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
30.
HylandKTseP (2005) Evaluative that constructions: Signalling stance in research abstracts. Functions of Language12(1): 39–63.
31.
IvaničR (1991) Nouns in search of a context: A study of nouns with both open-and closed-system characteristics. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching29(2): 93–114.
32.
KuckartzU (2007) MAXQDA: Qualitative Data Analysis. Berlin: VERBI Software.
33.
LabovW (1972) Language in the Inner City: Studies in the Black English Vernacular. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.
34.
QuirkRCrystalD (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
35.
RamanathanVAtkinsonD (1999) Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing8(1): 45–75.
36.
SacksHSchegloffEAJeffersonG (1974) A simplest systematics for the organization of turn-taking for conversation. Language50: 696–735.
37.
SchmidH-J (2000) English Abstract Nouns as Conceptual Shells: From Corpus to Cognition. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
38.
SinclairJM (1988) Mirror for a text. Journal of English and Foreign Languages1: 15–44.
39.
SwalesJM (2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
40.
TadrosA (1993) The pragmatics of text averral and attribution in academic texts. In: HoeyM (ed.) Data, Description, Discourse. London: HarperCollins, pp. 98–114.
41.
TadrosA (1994) Predictive categories in expository text. In: CoulthardM (ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis. London: Routledge, pp. 69–82.
42.
TardyCM (2012) Current conceptions of voice. In: HylandKGuindaC (eds) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 34–48.
43.
ThompsonGHunstonS (2000) Evaluation: An introduction. In: HunstonSThompsonG (eds) Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–27.
44.
ThompsonWEHickeyJV (2011) Society in Focus: An Introduction to Sociology, 7th edn.Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
45.
WinterEO (1977) A clause-relational approach to English texts: A study of some predictive lexical items in written discourse. Instructional Science6(1): 1–92.
46.
WinterEO (1992) The notion of unspecific versus specific as one way of analysing the information of a fund-raising letter. In: MannWCThompsonSA (eds) Discourse Description: Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-raising Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 131–170.
