Research on negation has generally explored the cross-linguistic similarities and differences of a host of widely spoken languages with little attention to its nuances within academic genres and disciplines. Accordingly, and given the co-articulation of negation with various interpersonal and evaluative resources, this study examined appraisal subsystems in 360 research articles on astrophysics, chemistry, geology, psychology, linguistics, and political science (60 papers from each discipline) published between 2018 and 2020. Comparative analyses of appraisal resources revealed significantly greater employment of total engagement and graduation, acknowledge, concede, counter, denial, distance, entertain, pronounce, justifying, affect, judgment, positive polarity of attitude, force, and softening devices in soft disciplines. However, hard sciences allowed denser employment of appreciation, neutral polarity of attitude, and sharpening resources. The results of the text/pragmatic analysis of denial further indicated a stronger preference for disalignment, cautious detachment, and unfulfilled expectations functions in soft sciences and varying negation patterns across both subcorpora. The line-by-line annotations revealed either the independent use of denial markers or their co-articulation with other appraisal options. An important implication of this study is awareness-raising about the rhetorical conventions of maintaining an authorial stance and promoting a sense of disciplinary community.
Read full abstract