Expressing an authorial stance in research articles: metadiscursive strategies for establishing interpersonal relations

Abstract

This article focuses on the means for expressing an authorial stance in academic discourse. Specifically, twenty Russian language-based research articles from Kazakhstan journals are analyzed to reveal the most frequent ways of taking an authorial stance. Both quantitative and qualitative analyses are used to highlight patterns of authorial positioning. The results suggest that the most typical ways of showing such a stance are evaluation, certainty, and uncertainty. Uncertainty markers are found to be the most pervasive, whereas the least frequent of the three are certainty devices. These findings show that authors tend to express a cautious stance to propositions and addressees, more than a categorical voice. Uncertainty meanings include possibility and evidentiality of propositions, whereas certainty is mainly represented by evidence-based and commonly accepted knowledge devices that provide credibility for research. Evaluation features the meanings of importance and necessity, which characterize the authors as researchers seeking problematic issues to investigate. Moreover, the cognitive and positive attitude to the propositional content and readers prevails over emotional and negative evaluations. The use of the identified metadiscourse markers is a powerful rhetorical strategy for highlighting the authorial stance and enhancing credibility and validity of the research. We hope our findings will assist novice writers to understand how metadiscourse markers can help them achieve greater visibility in the text to emphasize their contribution.