英语论文网

us described as anevaluation-loaded genre with huge interpersonal stakes.
........

2.2 Previous Studies on Academic Book Reviews
Since 1970s, the academic discourse began to attract constant interests fromscholars. However, before the mid-1980s academic discourse studies were onlycarried out from the perspectives of anthropology, psychology, sociology, etc. ratherthan from the perspective of linguistics. It was not until late 1980s that three dominantlinguistic approaches, genre analysis (Swales, 1990), multi-dimensional analysis(Biber et al., 2002) and systemic functional linguistic approach, were employed in theanalysis of academic discourse (Jiang Yajun & Zhao Gang, 2006). Since 1990s,academic book reviews began to attract more and more attention from linguists.Motta-Roth (1995) and Hyland (2000) makes the earliest contributions to its linguisticstudy.The earliest studies on ABRs were mainly on the generic structure. Motta-Roth(1995) might be the first scholar who makes a genre analysis of the discourseorganization of sixty academic book reviews in linguistics, economics, and chemistry,published in 1990 as part of an attempt to map down the repertoire of academicgenres and summarized four rhetorical moves (introducing the book, outlining thebook, highlighting parts of the book, and providing closing evaluation of the book)and their constituent steps. She also conducts a cross-disciplinary analysis of the fourmoves, and the findings shows that book reviews have regularities in informationform, function, and content, and also some variations in terms of how reviewersrealize evaluation and description moves across disciplinary boundaries.Based on rhetorical moves of book reviews identified by Motta-Roth (1995),Junqueira (2013) chooses 10 applied linguistic book reviews from a Brazilian journal(RBLA) and 10 from an international English-medium journal (AL) respectively andmade a contrastive analysis of the rhetorical patterns and finds that there exists acyclical pattern between Move 2 (“Outlining the book”) and Move 3 (“Highlightingparts of the book”). The article also conducts a deep analysis of Move 4 (providingclosing evaluation of the book), finds out that most BP book reviewers justrecommend the books without mentioning any shortcomings of the books while mostEnglish book reviews recommend the book only after showing the limitations, whichindicates that BP book reviews on applied linguistics may be less critical than theirEnglish counterparts.
.........

Chapter Three Theoretical Framework..... 16
3.1 The Background of Appraisal Theory........... 16
3.2 The Framework of Martin’s Appraisal Theory ...... 17
3.2.1 The System of Attitude ..... 18
3.2.2 The System of Engagement ....... 21
3.2.3 The System of Graduation ......... 23
Chapter 4 Methodology.... 25
4.1 Data collection .......... 25
4.2 Research Method and Procedure ......... 27
Chapter 5 A Contrastive Analysis of Appraisal Resources .......... 29
5.1 The Contrastive Distribution of Appraisal Resources in General..... 29
5.2 A Contrastive Analysis of Attitude Resources ....... 30
5.3 A Contrastive Analysis of Engagement Resources ......... 39
5.4 The Contrastive Analysis of Graduation Resources ....... 46

Chapter 4 Methodology

This chapter comprises two parts. The first part mainly concerns some factorsw