Evaluative Stance in L1 and L2 Argumentative Essays: A Corpus-Based Comparison

Academic writing is often perceived as objective and impersonal; however, writers strategically use language to convey evaluative stance and engage readers. While much research has focused on stance in expert academic genres, relatively less is known about how student writers—particularly those using English as a foreign language—employ stance markers in their academic texts. This study investigates the use of stance features, including hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions, in argumentative essays written by British university students (L1) and Korean EFL students (L2). Adopting a corpus-based approach, the analysis focuses on the frequency and distribution of stance markers across the two groups, with particular attention to L2 writers' proficiency levels. The results show that L2 writers, especially those at lower proficiency levels, tend to use more boosters and self-mentions but fewer hedges than their L1 counterparts. In contrast, higher-proficiency L2 students demonstrate increased use of hedging devices and a noticeable reduction in self-mention, patterns that more closely resemble native-speaker usage. These findings highlight the complex interplay between language proficiency and rhetorical choice in academic writing and reveal distinctive stance-taking conventions in L2 learner texts. The study underscores the importance of explicit instruction in stance and voice in EFL writing pedagogy to help learners develop a more nuanced and context-appropriate academic voice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Forum for Linguistic Studies
Published
2025-04-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.30564/fls.v7i4.9029
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
15.18
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Evaluative Stance in L1 and L2 Argumentative Essays: A Corpus-Based Comparison

Chanhee Kim
1 citations
Forum for Linguistic Studies
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
15.18
article

Evaluative Stance in L1 and L2 Argumentative Essays: A Corpus-Based Comparison

Chanhee Kim
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Academic writing is often perceived as objective and impersonal; however, writers strategically use language to convey evaluative stance and engage readers. While much research has focused on stance in expert academic genres, relatively less is known about how student writers—particularly those using English as a foreign language—employ stance markers in their academic texts. This study investigates the use of stance features, including hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions, in argumentative essays written by British university students (L1) and Korean EFL students (L2). Adopting a corpus-based approach, the analysis focuses on the frequency and distribution of stance markers across the two groups, with particular attention to L2 writers' proficiency levels. The results show that L2 writers, especially those at lower proficiency levels, tend to use more boosters and self-mentions but fewer hedges than their L1 counterparts. In contrast, higher-proficiency L2 students demonstrate increased use of hedging devices and a noticeable reduction in self-mention, patterns that more closely resemble native-speaker usage. These findings highlight the complex interplay between language proficiency and rhetorical choice in academic writing and reveal distinctive stance-taking conventions in L2 learner texts. The study underscores the importance of explicit instruction in stance and voice in EFL writing pedagogy to help learners develop a more nuanced and context-appropriate academic voice.

Forum for Linguistic Studies
Hannam University (KR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 2%
Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
15.18
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.