Evaluative expressions in analystical arguments

Abstract

Evaluative language is widely recognised as contributing to the quality of written argumentation, although investigation in this area is more prevalent in professional academic writing (e.g. Hunston, 1989 and Hyland, 2002) than in student texts. This study investigates evaluative expressions in argumentative essays written by first-year undergraduates in the discipline of English Language at the National University of Singapore. Aspects of the Appraisal framework, especially the engagement system, were used to analyse the evaluative expressions in the stages of argumentation outlined by Callaghan and Rothery (1988). The analysis revealed that high-rated and low-rated essays differ in the frequency of the use of the stages of Thesis and Reiteration to construct more or less effective arguments. Also, within the stages, evaluative expressions contributed to arguments that are more or less persuasive.

Using the Appraisal framework to analyze source use in essays: a case study of engagement and dialogism in two undergraduate students’ writing

“…However, novice writers have been found to approach the topic of an argument as if their opinion were the sole (correct) one, resulting in a "constriction of negotiation of space" (Mei & Allison, 2005). In the act of forming an argument in an academic text, student writers need to be able to identify their position on a topic as part of an established discussion.…”

“…To illustrate, other studies also use the context of high-and low-grade essays to look for patterns in texts. In general, students make their arguments too assertive (Mei & Allison, 2005) without evidence to justify their claims (Allison, 1995;Lee, 2010), and this is particularly true of those receiving lower grades regardless of L1 or L2 English backgrounds. They may also not employ modals in an effective manner (Hyland, 1994) for graduation of claims such as must versus may.…”