Stance expressions in legal academic discourse: A corpus-based analysis of legal journals

Abstract Unveiling public ideologies and values patterns in legal academic discourse, stance serves not only as an effective method for writers to convey their legal values and knowledge, but also as a crucial reference for readers to perceive legal academic texts. This study employs a corpus-based analysis to examine stance expressions in legal academic discourse. Utilizing three self-compiled corpora that encompass articles from the Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Artificial Intelligence and Law, and Regulation & Governance, Hyland’s stance analysis framework is applied to conduct a comparative analysis of hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions across the journals. This study reveals the nature of cautiousness and emphasis on the value of legal academic discourse, as well as writing values and disciplinary themes articulated within varied contexts. This research addresses a gap in stance analysis concerning legal academic writing, offering valuable insights for both writers and readers in understanding and shaping public perceptions of legal knowledge.