Self-Mention and Engagement Mechanisms of (Negative) Evaluation in Linguistics Academic Reviews: A Diachronic Insight
Abstract
The paper is a small-scale exploratory study of self-mention and engagement markers in the reviews published in a reputable Serbian academic journal "South Slavic Philologist" during the 1920s. Using Hyland’s (2005a; 2005b) classification, we identified context-prominent mechanisms of author self-reference and reader inclusion in fifteen academic reviews of diverse disciplinary contributions. The reviewers explicitly present their assessments and position their claims as expertise-based and unarguable. Readers are invited to participate, pose questions and consult other sources in the field just to reach the same conclusions the authors had reached previously. The dialogue the reviewers initiate with readers serves to point out shared values or expertise that leads to the impression that readers and reviewers also share (negative) perspectives on the matters the reviewed material raises. The findings might indicate some of the stylistic preferences of academic communication (in this journal) at the time.
References
Dontcheva-Navratilova, O. (2021). Engaging with the Reader in Research Articles in English: Variation across Disciplines and Linguacultural Backgrounds. English for Specific Purposes, 63, 18–32.
Fagan, A. & Martín, P. M. (2002–2003). Competing for a Research Space: The Criticism of One’s Own Scientific Community. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos, 9–10, 139–150.
Groom, N. (2009). Phraseology and Epistemology in Academic Book Reviews: A Corpus-Driven Analysis of Two Humanities Disciplines. In: K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (122–139). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Harwood, N. (2005). ‘Nowhere Has Anyone Attempted… In This Article I Aim to Do Just That’: A Corpus-Based Study of Self-Promotional I and We in Academic Writing across Four Disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1207–1231.
Hunston, S. (2022). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (2001a). Bringing in the Reader: Addressee Features in Academic Articles. Written Communication, 18(4), 549–574.
Hyland, K. (2001b). Humble Servants of the Discipline? Self-Mention in Research Articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207–226.
Hyland, K. (2002a). Authority and Invisibility: Authorial Identity in Academic Writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091–1112.
Hyland, K. (2002b). Directives: Argument and Engagement in Academic Writing. Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 215–239.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2005b). Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192.
Hyland, K. (2007). Different Strokes for Different Folks: Disciplinary Variation in Academic Writing. In: K. Fløttum (Ed.), Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse (89–108). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Hyland, K. & Diani, G. (2009). Introduction: Academic Evaluation and Review Genres. In: K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (1–14). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hyland, K. & Jiang (Kevin), F. (2019). Academic Discourse and Global Publishing: Disciplinary Persuasion in Changing Times. London and New York: Routledge.
Junqueira, L. (2013). A Genre-Based Investigation of Applied Linguistics Book Reviews in English and Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 203–213.
Koester, A. (2010). Building Small Specialised Corpora. In: A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (66–79). London: Routledge.
Li, Z. (2021). Authorial Presence in Research Article Abstracts: A Diachronic Investigation of the Use of First Person Pronouns. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51. Retrieved from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1475158521000217
McGrath, L. & Kuteeva, M. (2012). Stance and Engagement in Pure Mathematics Research Articles: Linking Discourse Features to Disciplinary Practices. English for Specific Purposes, 31(3), 161–173.
Moreno Fernández, A. I. & Suárez, L. (2009). Academic Book Reviews in English and Spanish: Critical Comments and Rhetorical Structure. In: K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (161–178). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Moreno Fernández, A. I. & Suárez, L. (2011). Academic Book Reviews of Literature in English and Spanish: Writers’ Visibility and Invisibility Strategies for Expressing Critical Comments. In: F. Salager-Meyer & B. A. Lewin (Eds.), Crossed Words: Criticism in Scholarly Writing (225–256). Bern: Peter Lang.
Petrić, B. (2010). Prikazi knjiga u Srpskom arhivu i Vojnosanitetskom pregledu: Istorijska perspektiva. Scripta Medica, 41 (2), 94–96.
Petrić, B. (2011). Scholarly Criticism in a Small Academic Community: A Diachronic Study of Book Reviews in the Oldest Serbian Scholarly Journal. In: F. Salager-Meyer & B. A. Lewin (Еds.), Crossed Words: Criticism in Scholarly Writing (309–337). Bern: Peter Lang.
Salager-Meyer, F. (1998). The Rationale Behind Academic Conflict: From Outright Criticism to Contextual “Niche” Creation. UNESCO-ALSED-LSP, 21(2), 4–23.
Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., Pabón Berbesí, M. (2007a). Collegiality, Critique and the Construction of Scientific Argumentation in Medical Book Reviews: A Diachronic Approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(10), 1758–1774.
Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., Pabón, M. (2007b). The Prosecutor and the Defendant: Contrasting Critical Voices in French- and English-Written Academic Book Reviews. In: K. Fløttum (Ed.), Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse (109–128). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., Zambrano, N. (2003). The Scimitar, the Dagger and the Glove: Intercultural Differences in the Rhetoric of Criticism in Spanish, French and English Medical Discourse (1930–1995). English for Specific Purposes, 22(3), 223–247.
Shaw, P. (2009). The Lexis and Grammar of Explicit Evaluation in Academic Book Reviews, 1913 and 1993. In: K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (217–235). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Swales, J. M. et al. (1998). Consider This: The Role of Imperatives in Scholarly Writing. Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 97–121.
Tang, R. & John S. (1999). The ‘I’ in Identity: Exploring Writer Identity in Student Academic Writing through the First Person Pronoun. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), S23–S39.
Tse, P. & Hyland, K. (2006a). Gender and Discipline: Exploring Metadiscourse Variation in Academic Book Reviews. In: K. Hyland & M. Bondi (Eds.), Academic Discourse Across Disciplines (177–202). Bern: Peter Lang.
Tse, P. & Hyland, K. (2006b). ‘So What is the Problem This Book Addresses?’: Interactions in Academic Book Reviews. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 26(6), 767–790.
Драгићевић, Р. (2013). О српској славистици на почетку XX века из перспективе прве књиге Јужнословенског филолога. Јужнословенски филолог, 69, 33–48.
Стојановић, Љ. и Белић, А. (1913). Поводом покретања „Јужнословенског филолога”. Јужнословенски филолог, 1 (1–2), 1–3.
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at: