A review of research on authorial evaluation in English academic writing: A methodological perspective

Abstract

Evaluation is pervasive in academic writing, and the past decades have witnessed a proliferation of research on writer's authorial evaluation in English academic writing. However, there is a lack of systematic review on evaluation research so far in the literature. To address this gap, this review aims to outline the major strands of research on authorial evaluation in English academic writing as well as the major methodological approaches adopted in the field of applied linguistics over the past twenty years, and to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the methodological approaches in revealing the matter. The review identified four broad strands of literature in terms of the analytical framework applied (if any): the stance strand, the metadiscourse strand, the appraisal strand, and the voice strand. Then three major methodological approaches, namely the corpus-based approach, the in-depth textual approach, and the ethnographic approach, were identified and discussed with regard to their respective strengths and drawbacks in exploring evaluative meanings in English academic writing. Implications from this review were further discussed, and methodological directions for future research were pointed out.