“The results might not fully represent…”: Negation in the limitations sections of doctoral theses by Chinese and American students

References

American Psychological Association. 2020. Publication manual of the American psychological association: The official guide to APA style. Washington, DC: American Psychological Assocation.Search in Google Scholar

Anthony, Laurence. 2017. AntFileConverter (Version 1.2.1) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software.Search in Google Scholar

Apotheloz, Denis, Pierre-Yves Brandt & Gustavo Quiroz. 1993. The function of negation in argumentation. Journal of Pragmatics 19(1). 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(93)90068-Z.Search in Google Scholar

Badenhorst, Cecile, Brittany Amell, James Burford & Karen Peirce. 2021. Re-imagining doctoral writing. Colorado: The WAC Clearinghouse.10.37514/INT-B.2021.1343Search in Google Scholar

Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan. 1999. Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Brutus, Stephane, Aguinis Herman & Wassmer Ulrich. 2013. Self-reported limitations and future directions in scholarly reports: Analysis and recommendations. Journal of Management 39(1). 48–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206312455245.Search in Google Scholar

Brutus, Stephane & Kris Duniewicz. 2012. The many heels of Achilles: An analysis of self-reported limitations in leadership research. The Leadership Quarterly 23(1). 202–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.11.015.Search in Google Scholar

Bunton, David. 2005. The structure of PhD conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(3). 207–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004.Search in Google Scholar

Cadman, Kate. 2002. English for academic possibilities: The research proposal as a contested site in postgraduate genre pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 1(2). 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00015-2.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Chenghui & Lawrence Jun Zhang. 2017. An intercultural analysis of the use of hedging by Chinese and Anglophone academic English writers. Applied Linguistics 8(1). 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-2009.Search in Google Scholar

Chung, T. 2022. Writing with attitude: A learner corpus study of APPRAISAL resources of Vietnamese and Khmer’s L2 English writing [Doctoral dissertation, University of Queensland]. UQ eSpace. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6235-6625.Search in Google Scholar

Cicchetti, Domenic. 1994. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment 6(4). 284–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284.Search in Google Scholar

Coffin, Caroline & Kieran O’ Halloran. 2006. The role of appraisal and corpora in detecting covert evaluation. Functions of Language 13. 77–110. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.13.1.04cof.Search in Google Scholar

Dahl, Osten. 2010. Typology of negation. In Laurence Horn (ed.), The expression of negation, 9–38. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110219302.9Search in Google Scholar

Don, Alexanne. 2017. Negation as part of the engagement framework: Explorations in the territory disclaim: Deny. Occasional Papers Del CeSLiC. https://doi.org/10.6092/unibo/amsacta/5545.Search in Google Scholar

Dong, Jihua & Feng K. Jiang. 2019. Construing evaluation through patterns: Register-specific variations of the introductory it pattern. Australian Journal of Linguistics 39(1). 32–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2019.1542932.Search in Google Scholar

Fuoli, Matteo. 2018. A step-wise method for annotating appraisal. Functions of Language 25(2). 229–258. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15016.fuo.Search in Google Scholar

Gabrielatos, Costas & Anna Marchi. 2012. Keyness: Appropriate metrics and practical issues. Paper presented at the corpus-assisted discourse studies international conference, University of Bologna, 13–14 September.Search in Google Scholar

Geng, Yifan & Sue Wharton. 2016. Evaluative language in discussion sections of doctoral theses: Similarities and differences between L1 Chinese and L1 English writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 22. 80–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.01.001.Search in Google Scholar

Geng, Yifan & Sue Wharton. 2019. How do thesis writers evaluate their own and others’ findings? An appraisal analysis and a pedagogical intervention. English for Specific Purposes 56. 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2019.06.002.Search in Google Scholar

Goodman, Steven, Jesse Berlin, Suzanne Fletcher & Robert Fletcher. 1994. Manuscript quality before and after peer review and editing at Annals of Internal Medicine. Annals of Internal Medicine 121(1). 11–21. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-121-1-199407010-00003.Search in Google Scholar

Halliday, Michael. 1994. An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Herriman, Jennifer. 2019. Don’t get me wrong! Negation in argumentative writing by Swedish and British students and professional writers. Nordic Journal of English Studies 8(3). 117–140. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.200.Search in Google Scholar

Hinkel, Eli. 1997. Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics 27(3). 361–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(96)00040-9.Search in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan. 2004. Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic writing. Sydney: University of Technology PhD dissertation.Search in Google Scholar

Hood, Susan. 2010. Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230274662Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guangwei & Feng Cao. 2011. Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics 43. 2795–2809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007.Search in Google Scholar

Hu, Guangwei & Guihua Wang. 2014. Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 14(1). 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.11.001.Search in Google Scholar

Hunston, Susan. 2011. Corpus approaches to evaluation: Phraseology and evaluative language. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203841686Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2004. Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005a. Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken. 2005b. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2). 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & Feng K. Jiang. 2021. ‘Our striking results demonstrate …’: Persuasion and the growth of academic hype. Journal of Pragmatics 182. 189–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.06.018.Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, Ken & John Milton. 1997. Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6(2). 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3.Search in Google Scholar

Ioannidis, John. 2007. Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 60(4). 324–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.011.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Feng. 2015. Nominal stance construction in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20. 90–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.07.002.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Feng. 2022. Metadiscursive nouns: Interaction and persuation in disciplinary writing. New York: Routledge.10.4324/b22893Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Feng & Ken Hyland. 2015. The fact that’: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse Studies 17(5). 529–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615590719.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Feng & Ken Hyland. 2022. “The datasets do not agree”: Negation in research abstracts. English for Specific Purposes 68. 60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2022.06.003.Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Feng & Xiaohao Ma. 2018. ‘As we can see’: Reader engagement in PhD candidature confirmation reports. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 35. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.05.003.Search in Google Scholar

Koutsantoni, Dimitra. 2006. Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses: Advanced academic literacy and relations of power. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5(1). 19–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.002.Search in Google Scholar

Krumboltz, John. 2002. Award for distinguished professional contributions to knowledge. American Psychologist 57(11). 928–940. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.56.11.975.Search in Google Scholar

Lam, Suet Ling & Peter Crosthwaite. 2018. Appraisal resources in L1 and L2 argumentative essays: A contrastive learner corpus-informed study of evaluative stance. Journal of Corpora and Discourse Studies 1(1). 8–35. https://doi.org/10.18573/jcads.1.Search in Google Scholar

Lan, Xiao-yan. 2011. Evaluation strategies in English academic book reviews: An attitude analysis from the appraisal theory perspective. Shandong Foreign Language Teaching Journal 2. 13–220.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, James Robert & David Rose. 2003. Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Martin, James Robert & Peter White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Search in Google Scholar

Miestamo, Matti. 2005. Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective. Berlin: De Gruyter.10.1515/9783110197631Search in Google Scholar

Morante, Roser & Eduardo Blanco. 2021. Recent advances in processing negation. Natural Language Engineering 27(2). 121–130. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324920000534.Search in Google Scholar

Negroni, M. M. G. 2009. Negación y descalificación: A propósito de la negación metalingüística [denial and disqualification: Regarding metalinguistic negation]. Revista Ciências & Letras 45. 61–82.Search in Google Scholar

Nolke, Henning. 2017. Linguistic polyphony: The scandinavian approach: ScaPoLine. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9789004341531Search in Google Scholar

O’Donnell, Mick. 2019. CorpusTool (version 3.3). Retrieved 28 Jan 2020, from. http://www.corpustool.com/download.html.Search in Google Scholar

Pagano, Adriana. 2002. Negatives in written text. In Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), Advances in written text analysis, 250–265. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Peng, Kaiping & Richard E. Nisbett. 1999. Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction. American Psychologist 54(9). 741–754. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.54.9.741.Search in Google Scholar

Prior, Paul. 1995. Redefining the task: An ethnographic examination of writing and response in graduate seminars. In Diane Belcher & George Braine (eds.), Academic writing in a Second Language: Essays on research and pedagogy, 47–82. Norwood: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Puhan, Milo, Elie Akl, Dianne Bryant, Feng Xie, Giovanni Apolone & Gerben ter Riet. 2012. Discussing study limitations in reports of biomedical studies-the need for more transparency. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes 10(1). 23. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-10-23.Search in Google Scholar

Rayson, Paul. 2016. Log-likelihood and effect size calculator [Computer Software]. Available at: http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/llwizard.html.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Shuyi & Peter Crosthwaite. 2022a. “Establish a niche” via negation: A corpus-based study of negation within the move 2 sections of PhD thesis introductions. Open Linguistics 8(1). 189–208. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-0190.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Shuyi & Peter Crosthwaite. 2022b. “The findings might not be generalizable”: Investigating negation in the limitations sections of PhD theses across disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 59. 101155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101155.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Shuyi, Feng K. Jiang & Yanhua Liu. 2024. “Maybe, but probably not”: A cross-disciplinary study of negation in three minute thesis presentations. English for Specific Purposes 74. 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.02.001.Search in Google Scholar

Sun, Shuyi & Wei Xiao. 2023. Active or descriptive: Textual activity and its dynamic changes of Ph.D. theses across disciplines. Glottometrics 55. 44–58. https://doi.org/10.53482/2023_55_411.Search in Google Scholar

Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Swales, John & Christine Feak. 2012. Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.10.3998/mpub.2173936Search in Google Scholar

Theofanidis, Dimitrios & Antigoni Fountouki. 2018. Limitations and delimitations in the research process. Perioperative Nursing-Quarterly Scientific 7(3). 155–163.Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, Paul. 2005. Points of focus and position: Intertextual reference in PhD theses. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4(4). 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.07.006.Search in Google Scholar

Tribble, Christopher. 2017. ELFA vs. Genre: A new paradigm war in EAP writing instruction. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 25. 30–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.10.003.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Jiling, Yuxiang Zhang & Daohua Jiang. 2017. Cultivation of English competence of English majors from CEFR perspective. Journal of Huaibei Normal University 38(1). 140–144.Search in Google Scholar

Xiao, Wei & Shuyi Sun. 2020. Dynamic lexical features of PhD theses across disciplines: A text mining approach. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 27(2). 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2018.1531618.Search in Google Scholar

Xie, Jianping. 2016. Direct or indirect? Critical or uncritical? Evaluation in Chinese English-major MA thesis literature reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 23. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.05.001.Search in Google Scholar

Xie, Tianzhen. 2005. Which language to write in? Doctorate dissertation on foreign language and literature and the norms governing doctorate dissertation writing. Foreign Languages in China 5. 43–47.Search in Google Scholar

Xu, Xiaoyu & Hilary Nesi. 2019. Differences in engagement: A comparison of the strategies used by British and Chinese research article writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 38. 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.02.003.Search in Google Scholar

Yang, Ruiying & Desmond Allison. 2003. Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes 22(4). 365–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1.Search in Google Scholar