Ivan Grigoriev, Svetlana Rubtsova

DOI Number
First page
Last page


The paper compares two corpora of Russian and English research articles in dentistry to identify differences between texts as regards evaluative language and other language tools to pursue politeness strategies. Positive politeness strategies are understood as a part of the positive evaluation process having the pragmatic function not to offence each other’s desire to be approved of. The study aims to define the politeness strategies that are most commonly used in Russian and English medical journals and to focus on the possible reasons for differences in Russian and Anglo-Saxon academic writing cultures that underlie the choice of politeness strategies. The analysis of the data shows that Russian research articles rarely employ politeness strategies if compared to their English counterpart preferring negative politeness strategies to positive ones. This study also provides some methodological advice for developing a syllabus in academic writing. Conclusions made on the basis of two compared corpora can also provide insights into both translation and contrastive studies.


politeness strategies, evaluation, discursive pragmatics, corpus, mitigation devices

Full Text:



Alba-Juez, L., Thompson, G. 2014. The many faces and phases of evaluation. Alba-Juez, L. Thompson, G. (eds.), Evaluation in context. John Benjamins Publishing Co, 3-27.

Biber, D. 2006. Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 97-116.

Bloch, J. 2003. Creating materials for teaching evaluation in academic writing: using letters to the editor in L2 composition courses. English for specific purposes, 22, 347-354.

Brown P., Levinson, S. C. 1987. Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.

Diani, G. 2009. Reporting and evaluation in English book review articles: A cross-disciplinary study. Hyland, K. et al. (eds), Academic Evaluation.

Fortanet, I. 2008. Evaluative language in peer review referee reports. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 27-37.

Giannoni, D. S. 2005. Negative evaluation in academic discourse. A Comparison of English and Italian research articles. Linguistica e Filologia, 20, 71-99.

Gil-Salom, L., Soler-Monreal, C. 2009. Interacting with the Reader: Politeness Strategies in Engineering Research Article Discussions. IJES, Special Issue, 175-189.

Halliday, M. A. K. 1994. An Introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

Harwood, N. 2005. ‘We do not seem to have a theory. The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap’: Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 26/3, 343-375. doi:10.1093/applin/ami012

Hood, S. 2010. Appraising research: evaluation in academic writing, Palgrave Macmillan.

Hyland, K. 1996. Writing without conviction: Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 433-454.

Hyland, K. 2000. Disciplinary discourses: Social interaction in academic writing. London: Longman.

Hyland, K. 2016. Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31, 58-69.

Hyland, K., Diani, G. (eds.), 2009. Academic Evaluation. Review genres in university settings. Palgrave Macmillan.

Itakura, H. 2013. Hedging praise in English and Japanese book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 45, 131-148.

Itakura, H., Tsui, A. B. M. 2011. Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1366–1379.

Kunyarut, G. 2014. Politeness strategies in Thai graduate research paper discussions: Implications for second/foreign language academic writing. English Language Teaching, 7(11), 159-167.

Martinez, I. A. 2001. Impersonality in the research article as revealed by analysis of the transitivity structure. English for specific purposes, 20, 227-247.

Mauranen, A. 2002. “A Good Question”. Expressing evaluation in academic speech. In: Domain-specific English. Textual practices across communities and classrooms. Cortese, G., Riley, P. (eds), Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 115-140.

Mauranen, A. 2003. Editorial. Evaluative language use in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 269-271.

Moreno, A. I., Suárez, L. 2008. A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 15-26.

Myers, G.A. 1989. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1-35.

Navarro, F. 2016. The critical act as a pragmatic unit for studying academic conflict. A methodological framework. Salager-Meyer, F., Lewin B. A. (eds.) Crossed words: Criticism in scholarly writing, 23-55.

Principle, P. 2000. Negative evaluation in academic discourse. 71-100.

Salager-Meyer, F., Lewin, B. 2011. (eds.), Crossed words: criticism in scholarly writing, Peter Lang AG, International Academic Publishers, Bern.

Shaw, P. 2003. Evaluation and promotion across languages. Journal of English for Academic purposes, 2, 343-357.

Shchemeleva, I. 2015. The Janus moment in EAP: revisiting the past and building the Future. Proceedings of the 2013 BALEAP conference. Reading. Garnet education, 179-187.

Shchemeleva, I. 2019. ‘It seems plausible to maintain that…’: Clusters of epistemic stance expressions in written academic ELF texts. ESP Today, 7(1), 24-43.

Thompson, G., Hunston, S. 2000. Evaluation: an introduction. Hunston, S., Thompson, G. (eds.), Evaluation in text: authorial stance and the construction of discourse. 1-27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tusting, K., McCulloch, S., Bhatt, I., Hamilton, M., Barton, D. 2019. Academic writing: The dynamics of knowledge creation. London; New York: Routledge.

Vassileva, I. 2001. Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 83-102.

Vold, E. T. 2006. Epistemic modality markers in research articles: a cross-linguistic and cross disciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 61-87.

Walko, Z. 2007. EFL research articles through the lens of pragmatic politeness. WoPalP, 1, 1-16.

Yakhontova, T. 2002. ‘Selling’ or ‘telling’: the issue of cultural variation in research genres. Flowerdew J. (ed.), Academic discourse, 216-232. London: Longman.

Yakhontova, T. 2006. Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic

discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 153–167.

Yang, A., Zheng, S., Ge, G. 2015. Epistemic modality in English-medium medical research articles: A systemic functional perspective. English for Specific Purposes, 38, 1-10.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)
ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)