PERSUASION AND POLITENESS IN ACADEMIC TEXTS.

AN INTRODUCTION
M.SALA

Academic(relating to education, especially at college or university level)

discourse is a Textual realization of specialized discourse.

Specialized discourse is the specialist use of language in contexts which

are typical of a specialised community.

A specialised community is a community of discourse and practice made

up of experts and future experts in a given domain.
(Experts communication) the specialized discourse has and depends on
three necessary conditions:
-the type of user
-the domain of use
-the special application of the language in a given domain.

The users (the community)

members of a specialized community, experts or future experts in a
given domain. They have in common:
-they share an agreed set of purposes, common interests and
background knowledge
-they extend the group's knowledge through language-using
practices which are conventionalised
-they use standard channels of communication and participatory
mechanism among members (meeting, correspondance,
communication, newsletter)

Global communities are different than local communities.

-Global community refers to dispersed groups of people who have a
commitment to particular actions.
-Local community refers to people who regularly work together whose
common roles, purposes are influenced by the situational context.

Global community: dispersed(dispersi) group of like-minded(idee

 simili) individuals who have a commitment to particular actions or
discourses.
Example: society of stamps collectors who share an interest in the
stamps of a given country, they can be all over the world but what
is important is that they can communicate through the use of
textual genres which have recognizable structures and an
ambiguous terminology for outsiders.
Local community: people who regularly work together, whose
common sense, roles and purposes are influenced by their
situational context.

Novice(principiante) members are initiated through:

-analysis and teaching of written texts
-process of apprenticeship (tirocinio).

Experts in a given domain may address to:

other experts: to access(valutare), discuss, present or explain
domain-specific issues (questione) with a specialised terminology.
ex. Scientific exposition.
Future experts: to communicate specialized notions. ex. Scientific
instruction.
Other experts and future experts involve a specific use of language
and they are istances of specialized discourse.
Non-experts: it is not a specialized discourse, it provides
information in a way that is not typical and not appropriate. It
banalises concepts in order of reaching a lot of people. ex.
Scientific journalism.

The domain ( area of activity, interest or knowledge)

it is a circumscribed field of experience or actions, a set of notions
and concepts of a restricted area about which members develop
expertise (competenza).
It is an area of activity, interest, knowledge especially one of that
particular person, organizations deals with.
Specialized domain is any field of human experience which can be
dealt with inspecialized terms by experts.
Special applications of language
there are linguistic and rhetorical conventions which restrict (limitare)
how something can be said and they authorize the writer as someone
competent to say it.

Specialized discourse is conventionalised in terms of:

-textual meaning
-experiental (sperimentale) meaning
-interpersonal meaning

these three are rhetorical variables that characterize the realization of

specialised discourse.
Textual meaning: use of specific, recognizable genres, distinctive
styles, argumentative patterns and terminologies.
Experiental meaning: supporting a world-view and presupposing
specific ways to interpret the experience.
Interpersonal meaning: there's a specific face on the part of the
author and a relationship between author and his audience.

Specialized communication doesn't express:

– a restricted code
– a special language based on rules and symbols different from
general language
– micro-language devoid of richness of general language.

Specialized discourse must be:

-clear
-coincise (short, brief, with no unnecessarywords)
-unambiguous
-effective

and specialized discourse hings on distinctive features at:

-pragmatic level
-textual level
-syntactic level
-lexical level
Pragmatic features
specialized texts can be distinguished according to three main pragmatic
functions:
referential (aimed at informing) and it can be of two types:
-informative which is for experts, for example bank reports
-educational which is for future experts, for example academic
texts
persuasive (aimed at persuading and eliciting (estrarre) consensus)
(it is the main function of academic discourse)
and it can be of two types:
-argumentative which is for experts, for example academic papers
-promotional which is for non-experts, for example calls for papers
normative (aimed at imposing norms) and it can be of two types:
-prescriptive which is for experts, for example laws, status
-instructional which is for non-experts, for example manuals and
instuctions.

Textual features
it is very important for specialized discourse because it facilitates the
comprehension of the context. Conceptual coherence and clarity in the
presentation of information.
-Specialized genres conform to natural sequences, common to all kinds of
discourse, which are based on theme-rheme patterns(the first item
immediately suggests or implies the second)
-When there's no cognitive interdependence between the variuos pieces
of information, the conceptual units are typographically distinguishable
in order to identify the section where the relevant information is.
Informative material is organized into visually identifiable blocks.
-Markers of textual/conceptual coherence (for example thus, as a result,
therefore) or procedural coherence (for example when, after, while)
signal the reader the sequencing of information.
-cohesion markers (endophora, exophora), repetition, not substitution to
avoid ambiguity.
-textual mapping devices (above, below, in the previous/next section)

Syntactic (relating to syntax)features

specialized discourse is different from general discourse on a syntactic
level in quantitative terms.
Specialized discourse is clear, effective, unambiguous and concise.
The conciness causes a language with:
-omission of phrasal verbs (for example omission of articles, auxiliares,
prepositions)
-paratactic construction (not hypotatctic structure) the subordinates
are substituted by pre- or post modification.
-nominalizations (noun used instead of the corresponing verbs)
-simplified verbal system: it is favoured the passive, present tense for
expository types of texts, imperative, deartic construction.
Specialized discourse avoids personalization, interactive strategies and
the emphasis is on the content.

Lexical features
it is very important: referential precision- transparency-conciseness of
the level of lexis.
-referential precision: it is the direct cognitive correspondance between
a term and a concept. It can be of two types: using monoreferential
terms: neologisms or istances of linguistic conservatism , which are
devoid of conventional association. The other way is to avoid polysemous
expressions for example generic terms, synonimous, euphenisms, indirect
expressions.
-Linguistic trasparency: the surface form of an expression makes its
meaning immediately accessible.
Use of compound nouns: ex. sea+speak= seaspeak
-conciseness: espression of concepts in the shortest possible way:
acronymous and abbreviations or juxtaposition or premodification.

The result is a language:

-poor
-with repetitions
-avoid of emotional emphasis
NON SPECIALIZED SPECIALIZED
DISCOURSE DISCOURSE
VAGUE DETAILS (ex huge, CONCISENESS
not to strong) ,
USELESS DETAILS OMISSION OF PHRASAL
PHRASAL VERBS VERBS
USE OF QUESTIONS IT AVOIDS QUESTIONS
USE OF IMPERATIVES IT AVOIDS
POLYSEMOUS TERMS PERSONALIZATION
PERSONALIZATION (1st and IT AVOIDS EMPHASIS AND
2nd person) JUDGEMENT
REFERENTIAL PRECISION
MONOREFERENTIALITY
USE OF PASSIVES
REPETITIONS (TEXTUAL
COHESION)
TRANSPARENCY
(AFFIXATION
PREMODIFICATION)
USE OF METATEXTUAL
COMMENTS (footnotes)
ARGUMENTATIVE
ORGANIZATIONS( premises
-consequences)
IMPERATIVE
OMISSION OF
ADJECTIVES
OMISSION OF PHRASAL
VERBS( articles, auxiliaries,
prepositions)
PARATAXIS
PARATACTIC
CONSTRUCTION
NOMINALIZATIONS
PREMODIFICATION
JUXTAPOSITION
 COMPOUND-NOUN
ABBREVIATIONS
ACRONYMS
NEOLOGISM
REFERENTIAL PRECISION
AVOID OF GENERIC TERMS
AVOID OF POLYSEMOUS
TERMS, GENERIC TERMS,
SYNONIMS, EUPHENISM
DEONTIC FUNCTON
TEXT SCHEMATIZATION
ACADEMIC DISCOURSE
It is a textual realization of specialized discourse.
It is a variety used in the academic world.
It is a specialized discourse.
It communicates specialized knowledge, it is for specialized/specialising
audience (the academic community) which decodes the content.

The academic community: it is the specialized/specialising audience of

academic discourse. It includes: -experts(high domain expertise).(scolars,
teachers, practitioners, researcher)
- novices (principianti) (they will acquire
competences)( students, training experts)

The domain (settore)

academic discourse points to the community of reference (riferimento).
Scholarly communication can be divided in :
-hard knowledge sciences: they focus on emphirical truths. They are
analytical and they deal with quantifiable data. Discourse transmits the
truth, it presents experimental data and demonstrable generalisations.
For example natural sciences and technology: physics, biology.
-soft knowledge sciences: they deal with negotiable truths, they focus on
human behaviour. Discourse constructs the knowledge. For example
humanities and social sciences, linguists, philosophy, sociology.

Use of the language

the main purpose of scholarly communication is to make a clear, academic
point. At the textual level it is done in order of emphasizing relevance
(pertinenza) and clarity (chiarezza). Relevance is linked with only those
istances which are necessary and sufficient to support a claim.
Clarity depends on the physical, typographical structure of the text and
it depends on rhetorical organization of the material.

Swales 1983: prototypical (very typical of a group or type) argument

model whose name is CARS (it is the acronym of creating a research
space). Cars consists of three moves:
move 1: it has the purpose of etablishing a territory: the centrality
of a given topic
 move 2: establishing a niche(nicchia): authors signal a gap in the
existing literature.
Move 3: occupying the niche; authors outline the purpose of their
research, anticipating principal findings and indicating the structure
of the text.

Academic texts are different than general or specialized communication,.

Transition is signalled by metadiscursive markers in order to facilitate
transmission of meaning.

There are three different principles upon which rhetorical strategies

may depend.
Text orientation
level of informativeness
level of solidarity and cooperation

text orientation: different degrees of authorial involvement or

detachment. It can be of three types:
- knowledge oriented: the truth is presented as self.-evident or
that results from dynamics between different parts of the text.
Markers like: therefore-necessarily- thus-consequently.
-reader oriented: the truth is negotiated with the reader on the
basis of the shared knowledge between writer and audience through
epistemic modality markers as: it is clear, this will certainly lead to,
this does not necessarily imply, this could perhaps be taken as, as
we will see, I argue that.
-writer oriented: the value of a claim emerges from judgement and
evaluation expressed by the author, with polarized adverbs or
djectives such as wrong, right, correct, incorrect, strong, weak.
Level of informativeness: it depends on:
-degree of explicitness or implicitness
-linearity of the presentation or digression/redundancy
level of solidarity and cooperation: it depends on:
-inclusive strategies (questions, imperatives)
-exclusive strategies (passives)
-defensive strategies (anticipate possible criticism)
-assertive strategies (avoidance of mitigative strategies)
anglo-American cultures of native-speakers of English is:
reader oriented, explicit and linear
moving from conditions to consequences
from premises to conclusion

Features of the three types of text-orientation

knowledge orientation: the truth is presented as self-evident and

results from dynamics between parts.
Used with transition markers such as due to- because of-this
means-consequently- as a result. This markers show that the
meaning is necessarily reulting from such a combination. With
therefore-necessarily-thus-consequently.
Reader-orientation: the truth is negotiated with the reader on the
basis of the shared knowledge, between writer and audience. There
are expressions that include the reader in thge negotiation of
meaning: us-as we know. Or there are formulations like of course-
indeed- certainly-undoubtedly that can present the content as
certain and obvious for the reader.
Writer orientation: there are judgements and evaluation presented
by the reader. There are expressions of the writer about his
judgement or evaluation. For example unfortunately- correct-
superb- misleading or adjectives that express his behaviour or
evaluation.

Genres in academic communication

A genre is a class of communicative events, recognizable by community
members in which the language is employed in predictable ways and to
particular goals, situations, contents.
Genre is a class of communicative events, recognized by a community
with a particular lanuguage.
In academic discourse there are two groups of typical genres:
primary genres: they are for experts and they are intended for
publications or public speech events. They can be sub-divided into
-written genres: theses (tesi), essays, dissertations, research
 articles, abstracts (compendio)
-oral genres: conference presentation, plenary lectures, thesis
defendence (discussioni)
secondary genres: they are for novices and they have a pedagogical
and educational function. They can be subdivided into:
-written genres: lecture, notes, textsbooks
-oral genres: seminars, tutorials, lectures.

Besides primary and secondary genres, there are interstitial (also called
peripheral genres) genres which include evaluatuvemand promotional
texts.

The role of persuasion and the notion of academic worth

-Academic discourse wants to construe and transmit knowledge.
-Academic texts are meant to introduce novelty.
-Academisc discourse is a one-way communication: the audience can't
reply or criticize. this is overall presented in written genres but also in
oral, like conferences.
-Scholarly discourse has a marked gate-keeping function (terminological
competence)
-Academic discourse is a task oriented activity: advancement of
knowledge with a speculative purpose(new insights) and practical
purpose(provide basic notions for acquisition of concepts)

Academic value or worth: the degree of effectiveness and persuasiveness

depends on the alignment to well-established socio cultural criteria of
adequacy and acceptability. It is the sense of authority, credibility aqnd
disciplinary appeal both for researcher and the research. This principle is
necessary for community, agreement, persuasion and for the
advancement of knowledge and it hings on two concepts:
-the personal trustworthiness of the researcher: the author is someone
competent that transmits a content.
-the scientific value and soundness of the research: in order to present
the content of a coherent, clear, appropriate and polite way.
 SCHOLARLY VALUES AND THE EXPRESSION OF AFFILIATION

Persuasiveness (the ability to make other people believe something or do

what they ask) is directly related to:
-adherence to a set of agreed rules (which regulate activities of the
researcher: personal integrity).
-soundness of the research (scientific validity)

Role of scholars within academic community depends on the combination

of four functions:
Research function: academics are researcher; they create
knowledge.
Educational function: scholars are teachers and they transmit
knowledge.
Service fuction: scholars produce competences which are politically
and economically useful; they applicate knowledge.
Institutional function: academic are faculty staff members.

Research and educational function are distinctive for scholars role.

The credibility of a research/researcher is related to the textualization

of the qualities which govern and regulate activities and relationships in
the academic world. These values are scientific, personal, institutional
and textual:
scientific values: related to the research function and if they are
codified in a research project they allow it to be considered as
science. The fundamental values for scientific method are:
-objectivity: it is related to the approach between the researcher
and the object of the research which is expected to be emotionally
and rationally detatched.
-replicability: trh analysis is expected to be replicable in its
methodology.
-collegiability: relationship between researcher and the academic
world and the existing literature, implying indebtedness and the
collaborative and cumulative nature of the knowledge.
Other values are :
-impact: the impression made by a research project on the
community
-innovativeness: degree of originality and novelty of the research.
-interdisciplinarity: application of methodologies and insights from
different fields.
-relevance: the perceived utility and weightiness of research.
-authoritativeness: the degree of knowledge of literature and
competence in the field involved.
Personal values: they reflect the scholar's moral qualities
-integrity: a feature which encompasses (comprendere) honesty and
reliability.
-creativity: ability of the researcher to design new interesting ways
-humility and generosity: researcher minimize their personal worth
and show deference(rispetto), gratitude and praise(lode) towards
other members.
-autonomy: lack of constraints(costrizione)
-his/her status: position in the academic institution
-recognition: level of popularity
-compensation: the monetary aspects.
Institutional values: related to the service and institutional
functions. They concern the utilitarian and promotional aspects of a
project.
-accountability: conformity of the research to bureaucratic,
financil and strategic requirements.
-loyalty: affiliation and collaboration with colleagues.
-expendability: the research which produces competences
exploitable by the market.
-performance: values measure according to performance indicators.
-popularity: impact of the research on the public
-visibility: impact of the research on the media
textual values: the linguistic qualities:
-clarity: lack of ambiguity, transparency
-cohesion: textual structure and syntactical organization
-coherence: logicalorganizations
-style: formal quality of a text
-depth: precision, accuracy of the analysis
-politeness: face-work in terms of consistency (the concern for the
writer's face) and considerateness (the concernforthe reader's
 face).

Interstitial genres: not primary nor secondary group in academic

discourse.
Explicitly: scholars make an overt refence to themselves as affiliated
members.
Implicitly: the subject is relevant to the knowledge of community.

Identity and affiliation:

identity: it is a complex structure which combines factors that
characterize individuals as members of social communities or single
them out as individuals.
Affiliation: it is the link established by the author with groups or
traditions. It is the connection or involvement that someone or
something has with a political, religious etc organization.

Identity traits are related to :

institutional affiliation: authors are identified as members of a
given institution.
Disciplinary affiliation: authors are linked with a given research
domain or disciplinary community.
Subdisciplinary affiliation: authors are experts of methodologies
which are distinctive of a sub-discipline group. It links authors to a
recognizable school of thought.

Affiliation can be lexicalized in two ways:

pretextually or text-externally: sections which are external and
typographically separated in: -author's profile and –
acknowledgements.
Text-internally: indicating links with existing research through:
-citations and – bibliographical references.
Pretextually resources: framing self

the contributor's profile

authorial identity is represented by indication of the contributor's name
which is on a short profile in a footnote (in research articles) or in a
separate page (in textsbooks and monographs).

Author's identity is provided by pieces of information through:

-institutional information
-bio-bibliographical information
-contact information

institutional information: introducing self, informative function

revealing the author's professional self. The function is to provide
details about the author's professional status and his/her link with
recognizable institution.
ex. Reader in International Law, University of Cambridge.
There are details about the professional status and details
aboutthe institution.
Additional bio-bibliographical information: promoting self. The
function is to concern information about the author's career,
research, bibliography.
ex. he graduated from the University of South Florida etc.
There are details about author's career.
Contact information: interacting with the audience, social and
-interactional function, it reveals the author's cooperative self.
The function is to provide an indication about the surface mail
address of the author's academic institution or the author's e-mail
address.

There is no template or recognizable model for the contributor's profile:

the author is free to provide any type of information he/she wants.

Acknowledgement: the act of admitting or accepting that something is

true or the act of publicly thanking someone for something they have
done.
Acknowledgements: a short piece of writing at the beginning or at the
end of a book in which the writer thanks all the people who have helped
him or her.
Acknowledgements have a consensus-eliciting function: they showt he
author's indebtedness and they reveal his/her relationship with specific
academic menbers and the contributor's modesty and sense of
membership within the discipline.
ex. the authors wish to thank... for her comments.
With acknowledgements the writer implicitly establishes significant links
of co-responsability with the acknowledgees.
The purpose of expressing emotions (ex. Gratitude, humilty...):
-it mitigates the face-threatening potential of the text
-it creates the impression of a human, concrete, intimate experience

The acknowledgements template

there's a standard format with a restricted number of options.
Giannoni says that there's a loose template for this genre. There are
three moves and every move is then subdivided into two steps.

MOVE 1: ESTABLISHING ANCESTRY(stirpe)

step 1: pointingto parent texts or events considered source of
inspiration.
Step 2: thanking their agents.

MOVE 2: GIVING CREDIT

Step 1: acknowledging support from institutions or individuals
step2: claiming responsability for errors or omissions

MOVE 3: ANTICIPATING FUTURE INTEREST

step1: specyfing editorial developments
step 2: providing an address for correspondance

Personalization in acknowledgements
acknowledgements can be expressed in various ways:
Markedly personal: use of the first person singular (I, my, mine). It
manifests the author's persona and his/her personal emotions.
Unmarkedly personal: the author uses the plural (we, us, our) for
 reasons of modesty.
Unmarkedly impersonal: the author uses the third person or his/her
proper name to refer to himself/herself. This strategy conveys
detatchment.
Markedly impersonal: -through the use of passives: the object/
people acknowledged are tranformed into subjects.
-nominalization: using nouns insteadof the verbs to express
gratutude or represent the type of contribution.

èPersonal tones are used in acknowledging individuals and in claiming the

responsability for errors or flaws(imperfezioni).
Impersonal tones are used when it is mentioned leading member of an
institution or for financial support.

Acknowledgements can be:

explicit: the emotions of the author are openly verbalised,
through references to feelings of gratitude.
Implicit: there's no reference to feelings or emotions of
gratitude, it is mentioned the type of assistance and the
institutions/individuals.

Text internal resources: interacting with the community

co-autorship: the result of a joint effort by a group of scholars. Co
means joint (comune) and autorship is the profession of writing a book.
co-autorship is a resource used to emphasize the scholar's value and
relevence in a specific domain. Through co-autorship, scholars point to
nature of academic knowledge and imply affiliation to the same school of
thoughts.

Citations(reference to a book or author): it is a text-internal

resource used to trace and identify the affiliation of the author
within a given tradition. They are mentions to previous author's
claims lexicalized within the text.

Bibliographical reference: mentions of published texts relevant for

the current research, indicated in parentheses. Tehy provide full
 details. They aim to strenghten the author's credibility and testify
his/her competence in the literature.

Citations: a line taken from a book, speech, references to a book or

authors. It can have a rhetorical presentation and syntactic aspects.
Rhetorical presentation: it is expressed in terms, it is
intended to persuade, to impress. It can be: -direct: they introduce
the exact words of the author, represented in question
marks(virgolette) and introduced by reporting adverbs. With direct
citations you convey appreciation and accurateness.
- reported: they sintesize or paraphrase the meaning of the original
claim.
Syntactic aspects: the arrangements(disposizione) of words
and phrases to create well-formed sentences. They can be integral,
integrated and parnthetical.
-integral: self-standing statements taken from the original source
and reproduced integrally. The reporting writer substantiates
(comprovare) his/her claim. These claims are typographically
distinguishable.
-integrated: fragments of original texts integrated within the
reporting writer's claim in order to complete the meaning through a
wording.
-parenthetical: reported sentences separated from the main texts
(for example in brackets or in a footnote), whereby (in base a cui)
the writer reinforces the validity of expressed meaning.

-Bibliographical references provide full details, they aim to strenghten

the author's credibility and testify his/her competence in the literature.
They are at the end of the text and they provide info about the name of
the author. The title of text, year, place of publication.
SCIENTIFIC VALIITY. THE EXPRESSION OF STANCE.

Academic discourse is the process of argument(discussione), affiliation,

consensus-making of discourse community members.
Academic authors are expected to appear as experts and do so in a
linguistically predictable manner according to the ways they choose to:
-deal with the targeted audience
-approach the subject of the research

the combination of these two aspects is reflected in the : principle of

the authorial ethos(filosofia) or stance(presa di posizione):
– how the authors deal with the targete audience
– how the authors approach the subject of the research

Ethos is set of ideas and moral attitudes that are typical of a particular
ropu.
Authorial stance: opinion that is stated publicly
it refers to the author's textual persona and his orientation towards the
domain of expertise. The ways the writers project themselves into their
texts to communicate integruty snd credibility.
The writer's self image combines three aspects:
evidentiality: the degree of confidence, implicit in what is said. A
degree of credibility or evidence.
Relation: constructions of relationships with the audience.
Affect: the writer's assessment(valutazione) of information,
his/her judgement.

Example: as we all know x is clearly false.

As we all know: relation with the reader
clearly: a degree of credibility, evidence
false: judgement

These three variables (affect, relation, evidentiality) can be realized

through:
-reader-oriented orientation: expressing relation and evidentiality: the
author manifests solidarity towards the reader.
-writer-oriented orientation: expressing affect which reflects the
author's personal feelings. The author guides the reader.

Reader-oriented strategies: managing politeness and redressing

threatening acts. Persuasion involves:
-one's independent career to shared experience
-collectively to create knowledge through interacting with one's peer
-respect for collegues

-Knowledge is a collaborative and cumulative process, it requires a

discourse which is impersonal, unassertive and minimizing competition.
-All istances of knowledge have a face-threatening potential in which
they question beliefs or views.
They are two principles upon which academic discourse has to mediate.
In order of mitigating these threatening acts there are strategies,
defined reader-oriented or impersonal hedges motivated by the need to
appear polite, modest and cautious and the desire to anticipate potential
criticism. These strategies are: personalization (references to the
first/second person pronouns and appeal to the reader) or modalization
(markers of epistemic modality).

The lack of personalization is typical of specialized disourse

and it is distinctive of academic community. This contributes to the

image of a dehumanized language of science and dehumanized image
of the writer. In reality, personalization is a device (accorgimento)
for academic argumentation due to -the marked persuasive
character and -the need for community ratification. Personalization
mantains interaction with the readers and builds a convincing
argument.
Personalizing strategies are rhetorical resources used:
-to balance objective information and subjective perspective
-they can be referred to first and second person

First person strategies:

(ex. I disagree, I find something) they have an attributive function, they
present claims as the author's opinion, they present the author's
personal experience, they emphasize the role of the researcher. Making
the author's presence explicit can be a face-threatening act, expecially
if the first person is combined with evaluative, attitudinal and emotive
language.

Second person strategies:

(ex. If you will, consider...) they have a collaborative function, they direct
appeal to the reader's positive face, rhetorically including him/her in the
argumentation.

First person startegies: the use of first person(I), it has an attributive

function, the author personal experience is represented and it mitigates
the threat of a claim.
If the criticism is presented as a subjective interpretation, it is not
perceived as threatening. First person is used in narrative sections in
order to give a personal dimension to an abstract concept.

First person plural: (WE) for singular agents: the author rhetorica shares
the responsability and credit with other members of the academic
community. It has two functions:
-a reader-inclusive function. The author establishes a common ground
with the reader, there's an agreement, it implies a degree of inclusion
and cooperation and it requires an active role on the part of the reader.
-a reader-exclusive function: the reader refers only to himself, excluding
the audience of readers. The reader is not implied. However it is a
mitigating strategy, because the author shares the responsability and
credit wiuth other members of the academic community.

Second person interactional strategies: collaborative function

it can be:
-second person pronouns
-possessives
-direct appeal to the reader (use of imperative and questions)
second person pronouns and direct appeal to the reader are reader-in-
the-text strategies: they bring the reader into the discourse and they
enhance(migliorare) the sense of inclusion and cooperation
the use of second person : (possessives and second person
 pronouns):
-in conventional expressions (ex. 5as you will see) or in more
creative use with the purpose of exemplification
-discursive function: the referent is underspecified and ambiguous
and it doesn't point to the interlocutor but to any agent.
-persuasive function: they require that the rader imaginbes
hypothetical situations for exemplifications purposes.
Appeal to the reader: it is realized through:
-interrogative forms: they want to engage(attirare) the audience in
active reasoning. It can be textual function when they signal the
organization of the argument, facilitating the reading process.
Between textual function there are research questions which are
placed in the introductory sections of an article in order of
establishing a niche for the research.
It can be also evaluative function when it anticipates and responds
to objections or paradoxes and the author reveals his point of view.
It is composed by rhetorical questions(which have an obvious
answer) and open-ended questions (the answer is alrealdy implicit in
the section of the text that introduces them).
Imperative form: emphatic attention-seeking devices. It can be
conventional use or creative use.
-conventional use: it can be combined with textual function, they
are aimed at furthering the discussion of a given point. (ex. see-
note-consider)This conventional use can be divided in: citational
function or focalizing function. Citational function when imperatives
point to other texts or oither sections within the same texts.
Focalizing function when imperatives point to aspects that are
relevant to put the claims into perspective.
-creative use: and a more interactive function. They are used to
introduce a new line of argumentation or a different perspective.
(imagine-suppose)

First person strategies mitigate the possible threat to the reader's

negative face.
Second person strategies establish common ground with readership,
including the audience in the negotiation of meaning.
These two kinds of personalization can combine within the same section
of text.

First person singular: it is meant to give a subjective dimension to the

discussion, it is also meant to introduce or to evaluate conceptual
material.
First person plural: it is referred to community members, it has all
inclusive function.
Second person: for exemplification purposes.

Modalization and markers of evidentiality: (markers of

epistemic modality and negative or concessive modes of

argumentation).
The author expresses:
-confidence in the truth of the new information she/he is introducing.
-caution: uncertainty about the new knowledge introduced.

In order of balancing confidence and caution, there are rhetorical

resources:
markers of epistemic modality
negative, adversative and concessive modes of argumentation
relevance markers
these are strategies intended to increase or reduce the force of a claim,
to make it appropriate to interactive and rhetorical context.

Markers of epistemic modality

epistemic modality is expressed by certainty and uncertainty markers.
Certainty is expresssed by boosters(richiamo). They hinge on the
addresse's positive face. There's no possibility of negotiable
content: the possibility of criticism and objections is excluded. The
addressee is a community member so it is certain that he accepts
it: his acceptance is taken for granted. It is difficult to categorise
them:
-verbs: must, will, cannot, to be, to have
-certainty/necessity adverbs
 -adjectives: clear, obvious, necessary
the content of boosters sentences is certain, undisputble and
accepted as it hings on common or domain specific knowledge.
Uncertainty is expressed by hedges (copertura, dichiarazione vaga).
The content is represented as negotiable. Hedges hinge on the
presupposition of the addresse's negative face. There's an active
role of the addressee: the addresse has to require the engagement
and to accept the truth. Hedges are represented by:
-modal verbs (may,might)
-lexical verbs (suggest, seem)
-verbal expressions: be likely
-adverbs: probably, possibly
-adjectives: possible, probable
-phrasal forms: if clauses
-expressions that link and limit the truth value of a claim
-positive istances preceded by a negation have the aim to soften
assertiveness.
In the same section of text, there can be mitigating and reinforcing
resources.

Relevance markers
these are strategies meant to stress evidentiality, they signal the
significance of sections of texts and they emphasize the importance of a
given piece of information. It is compose by:
metadiscursive markers and markers of endophoric evaluation.
Metadiscursive markers: it is remarkable, it is important to see
that, what is crucial here, it would be interesting to consider, this
is significant, it is a worthwhile(interessante).
Markers of endophoric evaluation: they have a relevance
emphasizing function without having a metatextual character.
There are factive verbs (to confirm, prove, demonstrate, show),
adjectives like meaningful, useful, helpful and their corresponding
adverbial forms used to judge. Endophoric markers are meant to
enhance(migliorare) the perception of the scientific validity of the
research.
A relevance marking function is performed by:
-textual mapping(rilevamento) devices: they signal the organization of
the argumentation through discursive deitics pointing to other parts of
the text (es. Here, now, in the table below). The deitics show where the
information is to be found in the text.
-focaliziung expressions: expressions that give priority or focus on pieces
of information. (ex. In particular, especially). The focalizing expressions
add informative items useful to substantiate the contentof a claim.

Polemically comparative strategies: negative, concessive and adversative

modes of argumentation: the author anticipates, implies or concedes the
possibility of dispreferred interpretations. These strategies put a claim
into a critical perspective, they have the aim to make the author's
statement less threatening in its validity.
Negative construction: use of negation NOT which is use to falsify a
state of affairs, to refuse point of views.
Adversative and concessive constructions: there are subordinating
conjunctions (although, even if), conjunctive adverbs, conjunctions.

Modalization can be expressed in different ways:

markers of epistemic modality:
-boosters (certainty): of course, certainly, obviously, surely
obviously, therefore, unmitigate assertive construction: doesn't
mean, need to, can't interpret, indeed, to confirm, we allow, to
unveil(rilevare)
-hedges (uncertainty): can possibly, only, as to.., suggested, modal
verb might, non assertive verbs: to suggest,speculate, to believe, to
indicate, might, may, to appear, could, possibly, generally,
conceivably(probabilmente), possibly, allegedly(presumibilmente),
would be expected, may be, only, to same extent,
arguably(probabilmente), however.
Relevance markers:
-metadiscursive markers: it is remarkable, it is important to see
that, what is crucial, it would be interesting to consider, this is
significant, it is worthwhile, what is surprising, it is not completely
surprising, it is important to bear in mind
 -markers of endophoric evaluation: factive verbs: to confirm, to
prove, to show, to demonstrate, meaningful, useful, helpful, to
unveil, to discuss
negative, concessive and adversatives modes of argumentation: Not,
subordinating conjunctions, conjunctive verbs, conjunctions.

Markers of evidentiality are persuasive strategies used for scholarly

discourse, they allow the writer to present conceptual material in ways
that are acceptable and appealing to the reader. The most used
respources are hedges and comparative strategies which can guide the
reader into preferred interpretation without imposing them and they are
typical of soft sciences.
Emphatic strategies (relevance markers and boosters) are typical of
hard-knowledge sciences.
SCIENTIFIC VALUE. AUTHORIAL STANCE THROUGH WRITER-
ORIENTED STRATEGIES

Writers produce academic research:

-they position their claims in a dialogistic relationship with the already-
existing knowledge.
-they position their claims in an intertextual relationship with other
texts in a given domain.

Evaluation: a judgement about how good, useful or successful something

is.
Evaluation is a linguistuc resource which reflects the writer's viewpoint
and conveys agreement, importance or frustration in relation to existing
knowledge. Evaluation is a persuasive resource used to negotiate the
worth of the writer's research and to obtain ratification.
Evaluative acts can be:
-explicit acts: the writer presents his/her work as an expansion of the
existing literature and recognizing its validity.
-implicit acts: the authors question the validity of current knowledge and
he presents his/her work in contrastive terms.

Explicit evaluation:
writers present their research and they measure its value in relation to
currrent knowledge. Evaluation is expressed in positive terms, through
positive lexical items (strong, better, improvement), and positive
reporting verbs (prove, demonstrate, show). Positive evaluation performs
amodesty function (writers minimize praises lodi for themselves but they
maximise them for others). Writer signals community membership and
stress continuity with the previous research.
To gain community acceptance it is use a discursive tool that connects
the value of the writer's research to it.
The main goal of academic research is the concept of knowledge
advancement which embodies a form of criticism of the existing
literature and knowledge and it presupposes to fill the gap of the
previous research. In this case, writers choose a negative evaluative act
(simple explicit negative claims that are considered face-threatening for
interlocutors and in contrast with the modesty value. For this reason
criticism tends to be specific and limited to specific points.)

Implicit evaluation:
the author questions the validity of current knowledge and he presents
his/her work in contrastive terms.
Even if it is dificult to recognize evaluation in academic texts, it is
possible to retrieve(recuperare) some forms of evaluations:
-in the co-text(co-testo) from semantic elements (support or undermine
its precessor)
-from the cultural and disciplinary context (knowledge shared by the
whole academic community or school of thoughts.)

co-text: es. Adjective remarkable

-in relationship with negative items, it has a negative function
-in relation with positive items, it has a positive function.

Context:es. Adjective new

-a new book: new has no particular evaluative function, it means recent
-a new theory: new may imply a negative evaluation which means contrary
to established knowledge

Evaluation system
Exophoric evaluation: it is expressed when discussing previous knowledge.
The evaluation system is used by writers to ascribe(attribuire) a claim to
the original researcher or when they refer to existing knowledge.
Thompson/Yijun model 1991
verbs are divided in:
-positive meaning: they express the reporting writer's positive and
negative judgements.
-negative meaning: they express the reporting writer's positive and
negative judgements.
-neutral meaning: it expresses the author's behaviour interpretation. yhe
reporting writer interprets the reported author's attitude in stating
his/her claim.
hyland classification 1999
Reporting verbs are divided into attitudinal verbs and non factive verbs.
Attitudinal verbs correspond to positive and negative verbs of the
previous classification and are subdivided into:
-factive verbs: they signal the reporting writer's acceptance of the
reporte claim. Ex to show, prove, demonstrate.
-counter-factive verbs: they express disagreement with the original
claim. ex. To ignore, to understimate, x fails to.
Non factive verbs correspond to neutral verbs of the previous
classification. They attribute a given orientation and degree of
commitment to the cited author in expressing a claim. They are sub
divided in:
-positive: they signal cited author's engagement towards his/her
claim. To advocate, to argue, to claim
-critical: they signal the researcher's sceptical stance towards a
claim. Ex to condemn, to deny, to object
-tentative: they signal the original researcher's limited engagement
towards a claim. ex to assume, to believe, to think, to suggest.
-neutral: they are represented by discourse and research verbs. Ex
to discuss, to state, to comment, to analyse.

Non factive verbs convey elements of epistemic stance (the reliability of

the cited propositions) and style stance (the manner in which is
presented).
Positive and critical non factive verbs can be contextually disambiguated
and interpreted as carrying reporting writer's judgement.

Extended(ampliata) classification of evaluative acts.

From explicit acceptance to explicit rejection(rifiuto) evaluative acts can
be categorised as:
-positive
-neutral
-negative
positive evaluation: it can be subdivided into:
-factive: expressing explicit agreement
-non factive: expressing implicit agreement
neutral evaluation: it can be subdivided in:
 -stylistic: expressing style stance
-tentative: expressing tentativeness
negative evaluation: it can be subdivided in:
-critical: expressing implicit disagreement
-couter-factive: expressing explicit disagreement

Positive evaluation: factive: expressing explicit agreement

This category consists of strategies which directly assert (affermare)
the worth of previous knowledge. They explicitly express the writer's
acceptance and value judgement of propositions according to categories
like GOOD-RIGHT-EXPECTED.
Verbs: to demonstrate, to prove, to recognize, to show
adverbs: aptly(in modo appropriato), rightly, correctly, perfectly, well,
fortunately
adjectives: excellent, crucial, useful, valuable, indispensable, powerful,
srong, central, main, essential, fundamental, indisputable.
Expressions neutralizing negative meaning: cannot be
understimated(sottostimato), should not be doubted

Positive evaluation: non factive: implicit agreement, indirectly

formulated
not directly assertive strategies, reporting writer's position towards the
attributed proposition expressed in terms of RELIABILITY,
CREDIBILITY, LOGICAL CONSISTENCY(coerenza). Cited author's value
and commitment: x argues, as observed by, according to x), claim's
impact on the community and its relation to shares knowledge (x is
generally considered as, according to the traditional view, it is recognized
that)
verbs: to advocate(sostenere), argue, claim, note, consider, present,
mantain
adverbs: thus(di conseguenza), properly, accordingly, conceivably,
consequently, adequately, persuasively.
Adjectives: innovative, seminal(determinante), relevant, original, helpful,
important, inventivem, influential.
Expressions that sanction the value of a claim: as note by, as observed
by, according to.

Neutral evaluation: stylitic, style stance used by writers to refere

to aspects relevant to rhetorical, argumentative, organizational and
stylistic strategies.
They are formulations that signal WHEVER and HOW pieces of work are
organised in scholarly communication.
These strategies express the reporting writer's assessment(valutazione)
in terms of CLARITY and INTELLIGIBILITY.
Verbs: to comment, to analyse, to cite, to opt for, to describe, to
synthesize
adverbs: orderly, schematically, in detail, at lengh, clearly, in a clear way
adjectives: linear, clear, organised, complex, well-argumented, simplified,
articulated.

Neutral evaluation: tentative: tentativeness

the reporting writer interprets or presupposes the intentions of the
original author or the possible truth- conditional value of a claim,
expresisng his/her attitude in terms of POSSIBILITY.
Verbs: to assume,to suggets, to believe, to think, to seem.
Adverbs: arguably(discutibilmente), possibly, probably, likely, supposely,
tentatively
adjectives: possible, probable, tentative
modal verbs and verbal forms: may, might, could, would, be likely, to
seem, to appear
markers of tentativeness have an hedging function; their purpose is to
mitigate the reporting writer's assertiveness about the truth of a
reported proposition.

Negative evaluation: critical: implicit disagreement

they reflect the reporting writer's non-alignment towards a reported
claim. The distance is presented in terms of UNRELALIBILITY of the
original proposition, the reporting academics focus their judgement on
lack of reliability, coherence or expectedness (prevedibilità).
Verbs: to condemn, to deny, to object, to reject
adverbs: questionably, hardly, scarcely, unfortunately, curiously
adjectives: debatable(discutibile), improbable, doubtful, weak, unclear,
too+ adjective
hypothetical and conditional construction: if....
It is a very important persuasive resource in academic communication.

Negative evaluation: conuter factive: explicit disagreement

rhetorical strategies which are directly assertive. The reporting writer
encodes(codificare) rejection of or disagreement with the existing claims
representes as BAD- WRONG- UNEXPECTED.
Verbs:to fail to(mancare), to ignore, to understimate, to overstimate
adverbs: wrongly, amazingly, ironically, confusingly, inadequately
adjectives: wrong, erraneous, unimportant, irrelevant, useless,
tuzzy(approssimativo), misleading(falso)
positive formulations preceded by negative forms: not clear, not relevant,
it does not demonstrate
counter factice formulationd falsify the validity of the reported claim,
they are face-threatening and they are reserved for major objections.
Counter factive formulations havea persuasive tool.

Different evaluation strategies can be found in the same text.

Concluding remarks on variation

scholarly discourse is not a humogeneous entity and the different use of
strategies is influenced by interacting factors (culture, discipline,
linguistic identity) and idiosyncratic(caratteristico): personal style,
status and editorial instructions.

Culture
each culture has its communicative practices, historically transmitted
and conventionaly shared views on reality, values and roles.
Culture:
-high context culture: the communication is highly context-dependent
andbased on shared knowledge. It is typical of Oriental cultures: Middle
East, Africa, Asia, South Africa)
-low context cultures: the mass of information is in the explicit code and
the meaning is wholly(intero) lexicalized.(Western Europa and North
America)

In scholarly communication other factors are important:

-language constraints((costrizione)
-dominant patterns of ideation
-conventional attitudes to text and users
the interaction between these three elements produces styles which are
remarkably different.

Western culture is different from Eastern culture.

Western culture is direct, assertive and explicit verbal styles. It
emphasizes individual contribution.
Eastern culture stresses collaboration rather than competition through
an affective style dominated by vague and defensive formulations.

Language
the native language of the writer is a relevant factor for rhetorical
variation.
English: uncontested position of lingua franca: a vehicular language that
allows users of different languages to communicate.
ELF: English as Lingua Franca is considered a variety of standard English
which does not assume adherence to all anglo communication conventions
but is aimed at rhetorical clarity, comprehensibility and at persuasion.

Disciplinary domain
it is a very important concept to explain rhetorical variation.
Academic domains are reflected by cultural and linguistic systems that
reflect ideological orientation and knowledge-making practices.
Academic domain have bodies of knowledge, standard images of inquiry
and set of conventions (how to organize research and communicate
meanings for expressing collegiality, resolving difficulties and avoiding
disagreement.)
Hard knowledge (sciences) Soft knowledge (sciences)
Objective and detatched, presentation of They hinge on personal projection to construct a
information, they minimize
presence in the text
the authorial credible persona.
Tehy invoke an intelligent and interactive reader.
They discuss conceptual material in a non-
threatening way and persuasive way
long. Complex sentences.
They use citations

Personal style, professional status and editorial instruments

-Personal style: it may depend on a lot of factors (culture, education,
charachter traits): experts may take the liberty to diverge from
standardized patterns using discursive strategies.
-professional status: it can be used to obtain community recognition.
-editorial instructions: norms that impose limitations to persoanlization,
text organization and text lengh.