Evaluative stance in academic arguments

Abstract This study explores the possible interplay between the rhetorical functions of the introduction section in applied linguistics research articles and the linguistic structuring of its argument through the use of that -clause that expresses evaluative meanings. To this end, article introductions were analyzed in terms of the formal/functional coding of that -clauses. The findings highlight that complement clauses are frequently used for the epistemic evaluation of current/previous research. Of note, however, is that nuanced differences in the writers’ intended purposes give rise to variations in the use of that -clause parameters, particularly those concerning verbal entities that evaluate the author’s claims, as opposed to those reviewing previous research findings and/or attributing an evaluation to distinct sources. The study concludes that tactful structuring of academic arguments hinges on the skilled exploitation of function-dependent variations associated with the evaluative components of that -clauses.