Our purpose in this research is to quantitatively analyse how the communication of managerial knowledge is realised in research articles written by experienced writers for publication and those produced by graduate students as a course grade requirement. Specifically, we look at the ways these writers construct their authorial identities (textually conveyed in ‘voice’). To do so, we combine Hyland’s (2008) interactional model of voice with Lehman's (2018) and Lehman and Sułkowski's (2021) conceptualisation of ‘writer identity.’
The study results reveal important differences with regard to the expression of interaction in written discourse, with novices employing more interpersonal features to involve readers and experienced authors making linguistic choices to establish authority in their texts. We show that the use of interpersonal metadiscourse renders academic texts more accessible, reader engaging and interesting. This enables us to work towards the development of more effective writing instruction which is particularly relevant for English for Academic Purposes pedagogy.
Keywords: discourse analysis, management writing, writer identity, reader inclusion
Alonso Belmonte, M I. (2009). Positioning the reader: A study on the use of ineractive textual patterns in English written newspaper editorials and articles of opinion. English Text Construction, 21(1), 48-69.
AntConc (version 3.5.8), available at: https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/
Benwell B. & Stokoe, E. (2006). Discourse and Identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Castelló, M., Iñesta, A., Pardo, M., Liesa, E., & Martínez-Fernández, R. (2012). Tutoring the
end-of studies dissertation: Helping psychology students find their academic voice when revising academic texts. Higher Education, 63(1), 97–115.
Cheung, L-Y. & Lau, L. (2020) Authorial voice in academic writing: A comparative study of journal articles in English Literature and Computer Science. Ibérica, 39, 215-242.
Côté, J. E., & Levine, C. G. (2002). Identity formation, agency, and culture: A social psychological synthesis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Darvin, R. & Norton, B. (2019). Collaborative writing, academic socialization, and the negotiation of identity. In H. Pejman & K. Hyland (Eds), Novice Writers and Scholarly Publication Authors, Mentors, Gatekeepers (pp. 177-194). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Dressen-Hammouda, D. (2014). Measuring the voice of disciplinarity in scientific writing: A longitudinal exploration of experienced writers in geology. English for Specific Purposes, 34, 14–25.
Flowerdew, J., & Wang, S. (2015). Identity in Academic Discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 35, 81-99.
Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2014). Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres / book review. Ibérica, 27, 217-234.
Fu, X. & Hyland, K. 2014. Interaction in two journalistic genres: A study of interactional metadiscourse. English Text Construction, 7(1), 122-144.
Gilmore, S., Harding, N., Helin, J. & Pullen, A. (2019). Writing differently. Management Learning, 50, 3-10.
Grey, C. & Sinclair, A. (2006). Writing differently. Organization, 13, 443-453.
Hambrick, D. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50, 1346-1352.
Handley, K., Sturdy, A., Fincham, R., & Clark, T. (2006). Within and Beyond Communities of Practice: Making Sense of Learning Through Participation, Identity and Practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 641-653.
Hirvela, A. & D. Belcher (2001). Coming back to voice: The multiple voices and identities of mature multilingual writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 83-106.
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2006). Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education, 16(4), 363-377.
Hyland, K. (2008a). Disciplinary voices: Interactiond in reseach writing. English Text Construction, 1(1): 5-22.
Hyland, K. (2008b) Academic clusters: text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18, 41-62.
Hyland, K. & Sancho Guinda, C. (Eds.) (2012). Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hyland, K. (2016a). Teaching and Researching Writing (3rd edition). NY/London: Routledge.
Hyland, K. (2016b). Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58-69.
Ivanič, R., & Camps, D. (2001). I am how I sound: Voice as self-representation in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 3–33.
Kiriakos, C. M. & Tienari, J. (2018). Academic writing as love. Management Learning, 49(3), 263–277.
Lehman, I. M. (2018). Authorial presence in English academic texts: A comparative study of student writing across cultures and disciplines. Peter Lang. <https://doi.org/10.3726/b14175>
Lehman I. M., & Sułkowski, Ł. (2021). Representation of voice in English essays of nonnative students of business. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 58(2), 168-181. <https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2020.1712221>
Liang, M.-Y. (2013). Rethinking authenticity: Voice and feedback in media discourse. Computers and Composition, 30(3), 157–179.
Matsuda, P. K. (2001). Voice in Japanese written discourse: Implication for second language Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 35-53.
Matsuda, P. K. (2015). Identity in written discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. English for Specific Purposes, 35, 140-159.
Matsuda, P. K., & Tardy, C. M. (2007).Voice in academic writing: The rhetorical construction of author identity in blind manuscript review. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 235–249.
Morton, J. & Storch, N. (2019). Developing an authorial voice in PhD multilingual student writing: The reader’s perspective. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43, 15-23.
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2010). Attitude markers in business management research articles: a crosscultural corpus-driven approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19, 50–72.
Myers, G. (1989). Writing Biology: texts in the Social Construction of Scientific Knowledge. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Myers, G. (1991). Lexical cohesion and specialized knowledge in science and polular science texts. Discourse Processes, 14(1), 1-26.
Pullen, A., Helin, J. & Harding, N. (Eds). (2020) Writing differently. Series: Dialogues in critical management studies, vol. 4. Bingley, West Yorkshire: Emerald.
Prior, P. (2001). Voices in text, mind, and society: Sociohistoric accounts of discourse acquisition and use. Journal of Second Language Writing, 10, 55–81.
Roeser, R. P., Nasir, N. S. (2006). Self and Identity Processes in School Motivation, Learning, and Achievement. New York: Routledge.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Takino, M. (2020). Power in International Business Communication and Linguistic Competence: Analyzing the Experiences of Nonnative Business People Who Use English as a Business Lingua Franca (BELF). International Journal of Business Communication, 57(4), 517–544.
Tardy, C. M. (2012a). Current conceptions of voice. In: Hyland, K, Carmen, S.G. (Eds.), Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres (pp.34 – 51). London: Palgrave Macmillan,
Tardy, C.M. (2012b). Voice Construction, Assessment, and Extra-Textual Identity. Research in the Teaching of English, 47(1), 64-99.
Tardy, C. M. & Matsuda, P. K. (2009). The construction of author voice in editorial board members. Written Communication, 26(1), 32-52.
Tourish, D. (2020). The triumph of nonsense in management studies. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 19(1), 99–109.
Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice and social learning systems. Sage Journals, 7(2), 225–246.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the Mind: A Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Yeh, S. (1998). Validation of a scheme for assessing argumentative writing of middle school students. Assessing Writing, 5, 123-150.
Yoon H-J, Römer U. (2020). Quantifying Disciplinary Voices: An Automated Approach to Interactional Metadiscourse in Successful Student Writing. Written Communication, 37(2), 208-244.
Copyright (c) 2022 Iga Lehman, Katarzyna Cybulska-Gómez de Celis, Łukasz Sułkowski
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.