非英文母語之博士班學生對於學術研究寫作中之作者立場表述之概念認識

Foreign language writers face challenges in presenting an effective authorial stance, often compromising their ability to present their academic arguments. A better understanding of these writers‘ conceptions of what is effective in an authorial stance can inform pedagogy and enable us to address those conceptions that influence learning and performance. The study recruited ten advanced doctoral students in social sciences to answer questions related to authorial voice in academic writing (what it means, how it can be expressed) and make judgments about the effectiveness of published introductions to research reports centered on the strength of authorial voice. Introductions were chosen from two journal articles in different fields and re-cast into two versions, one assertive, and the other, tentative. Participants chose the version they preferred based on their academic training and expectation. 5 participants were divided in their judgments toward the two introductions while 3 rated the assertive versions, regardless of fields, more convincing. The other 2 were uncertain in their responses. Top-down content analysis of the interviews and report revealed that of 20 reactions to the two introductions, 11 identified the assertive versions as more convincing and professional, while only 5 preferred the tentative versions. Great variation was found in the perspectives with which participants interpreted authorial stance, involving discursive, rhetorical, linguistic, conceptual, pragmatic, and semantic angles. Conditions that affected the judgments included participants‘ familiarity and connection with the topic and the rhetorical purpose of each paragraph. The results support other studies reporting that recognizing and controlling language resources for expressing authorial stance is a great challenge, even for advanced writers, who often do not have clear criteria for judging authorial voice or metalanguage for discussing features of voice.