Volume 45, Issue 2

This study compares the move structure and metadiscourse features of the results and discussion sections in English research articles and MA theses in applied linguistics. We collected 31 results and discussion sections in English research articles by expert writers and 31 MA theses in English by Chinese students. The quantitative analysis found notable differences in opening and closing moves, move frequency, move sequence, and the distribution of metadiscourse markers across moves. For example, M3S2 ( comparing results with literature ) and M3S3 ( accounting for results ) occurred more frequently in research articles. Frame markers occurred more frequently across M2 ( reporting results ) in MA theses. We also employed the qualitative approach to demonstrate the differences between these seemingly similar genres based on the textual analysis of data. The following possible reasons behind the differences were identified: the writing requirements, purposes, the writers’ prior learning and writing experience, English proficiency, and genre knowledge as well as the audiences. The findings not only provide insights into the interaction between move and metadiscourse, but also have implications for the learning and teaching of academic writing.

This study investigates the interactional functions and properties of formulation sequences in Chinese criminal courtroom using the methods of Conversation Analysis. The data corpus for this study are audio recordings of five criminal trials heard in China. I show that (i) in response to opaque answers in the prior turn, the examiner tendentiously formulates the prior description to highlight the implication or inferences, for his or her pragmatic purpose; (ii) the examiner clarifies, redevelops the gist, makes something explicit that was previously implicit in the prior turn; or (iii) shifts the focus of the prior turn to make explicit a presumptive and damaging inference, in hostile examination, or to highlight favorable information in cooperative questioning. A key linguistic property of formulations is that they are preceded by turn initial discourse markers, which serves to indicate the examiner’s neutrality and credibility. Moreover, closed polar questions or tag questions in formulations are used by examiners to invite aligning and positive responses.

This paper explores ways in which the strategic use of discursive and generic conventions has the potential to create a non-existent pathology and mislead the public. This case study compares and examines datasets of different genres (newspaper issue reports, online videos, and Wikipedia pages) dealing with a condition considered as an actual illness (Sluggish Cognitive Tempo, SCT), and another (Motivational Deficiency Disorder, MoDeD), invented as a spoof to raise awareness about disease mongering, overdiagnosis, and medicalization. We evince common language strategies that, irrespective of the genre, can be employed in media discourse, both in the name of genuine medical information and in pursuit of more ethically questionable ends. The methodological tools provided by Critical Discourse Analysis are applied to both the authentic and the hoax texts in order to investigate the media representations of SCT and MoDeD, juxtaposing the ways in which both are framed conceptually, defined linguistically, and popularized to lay audiences. The findings indicate the existence of a common repertoire of lexical-phraseological, rhetorical and discursive patterns that typify the popularization of medicalized statuses and combine to increase the persuasiveness and authority of overdiagnosis, ultimately advancing the case for medicalization with the public at large.

Critical comments have shown to figure prominently in determining the fate of manuscripts submitted to reputable journals. While various studies have explored different facets of this evaluative genre, there has been limited examination in the context of second language and disciplinary writing. Using a discourse analytic approach, this study analyzed a corpus of 160 reviewers’ reports on submissions by Iranian nonnative writers in applied linguistics (AL) and engineering. The aim was to compare how reviewers employ different categories of critical comments to prompt writers to revise their submissions. The findings revealed that reviewers, regardless of discipline, more frequently commented on language-use issues than content-related issues. Among language-use comments, issues pertaining to lexical and syntactical usage of English were more prominent than concerns about discourse and rhetoric. The analysis also indicated consistent patterns in the reviewers’ reports regarding discourse organization and the balance between positive and negative feedback. These findings are discussed in terms of their practical implications for novice and nonnative researchers in the examined fields, offering insights into the rhetorical and disciplinary norms governing peer reviews and the linguistic choices made by reviewers to guide authors throughout the review process. Increased awareness of these issues can facilitate more effective responses to reviewers’ feedback.

Linguistics and discourse studies have recently started treating fictional interactions as data worth analyzing in their own right, rather than incomplete representations of naturally occurring conversations. Aligning with advances in research on the use of language in fiction, this study addresses the functions of characters’ conversational practices in fictional works from an interactional perspective. By applying conversation analysis and membership categorization analysis to a sitcom series, this study explores how characters’ repair operation, membership categorization, and attribute ascription contribute to the construction and revelation of those characters (i.e., fictional characterization). Three patterns are illustrated: (1) a character engages in implicit categorization to account for trouble after operating repair; (2) a character’s changes of turn design in multiple repair operations show the character’s orientation toward an attribute of the other character; and (3) a character gives up repair operation and shows an orientation toward other characters’ attributes through implying negative assessment of them. The findings suggest that conversation analysis and membership categorization analysis are beneficial for research on fictional characterization. This study also discusses the reflexive and mutually constitutive relationship between the interactional participants’ characters and their conversational practices.

Despite the inherently multimodal nature of the courtroom, studies of multimodality in forensic linguistics have been scarce. This study uses the stance triangle and ideological square concepts and the assumption that recurrent gestures serve as stance-taking resources to analyze conflicting embodied stances taken by the prosecutor and defense attorney in their opening remarks during the State of Minnesota v. Derek Michael Chauvin 2021 trial. Statistical results reveal that the prosecutor predominantly uses modal gestures to display a strongly aggravated oppositional stance and attempts to be more persuasive, while the defense attorney favors performative gestures. The analysis of the interplay between the verbal and gestural resources suggests that recurrent gestures such as open hand prone or supine, open hand held with vertical palms, index finger extended, and precision grip have a threefold indexical realization: prototypical, argumentative, and stance-taking. The findings contribute to a more complete understanding of persuasion in the courtroom.