In academic writing, L2 postgraduate (PG) writers often find negotiating a space for their own authorial voice challenging. In addition to overcome proficiency issues, it is difficult to appropriate discourse strategies to assert their own voices, display and evaluate knowledge. Focusing on PG writing, I adopt a case study approach in this paper to follow two Master of Arts (MA) Applied Linguistics students in a Hong Kong university. The case study examines their “journeys” searching for authorial voice within two semesters in their one-year postgraduate study. In this paper, I examine the academic context through the data collected in six rounds of group and individual semi-structured student interviews in two semesters. The student interview data is supplemented by eight individual semi-structured interviews of four MA course instructors. I then move on to discuss the discourse and lexicogrammatical features of the eight papers submitted by the two students. These written texts were analysed using APPRAISAL framework (Martin and White, 2005). I focus on ENGAGEMENT resources, investigating the writers sourcing of their own and other voices for (dis)alignment with readership. I also analyse the PG students’ written texts in terms of semantic profile and legitimation codes of specialization (Maton, 2009). The notions help us understand the shift of "the context-dependence and condensation of meaning of knowledge practices... over time" (Maton, 2013, p.8). The findings demonstrate the two student writers’ ability to contextualise the learnt theories explicit sourcing of their own voice and evaluating their objects of study. Meanwhile, the findings also reflect the two writers’ weaknesses in abstracting their experiences as condensed knowledge through strategies such as nominalisation. The implications can shed light on academic writing pedagogy and provide a clearer understanding of explicit lexicogrammatical resources PG writers may use to source, balance and evaluative their own and other authorial voices. References Martin, James & White, Peter. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

1. Legitimising
Knowers’
Multiple Voices
in L2
Postgraduate
Writing
A Case Study
CHEUNG Lok Ming Eric
Department of English
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
eric.lm.cheung@connect.polyu.hk

2. “Power is Struggle.”
Struggling for power through discourse
(Fairclough and Wodak, 1997) to become “like-
minded peers” in a society (Ivanic, 1998).

3. Motivations
• Previously focus on dynamic variation of evaluative lexis in
postgraduate written genres
• Doctorate longitudinal study on postgraduate student’s
identity construction – More than just text production
• Shell-shocked students
• Identity crisis in under new context
• Not proficiency/inadequacy issue anymore (Ivanic, 1998)
• Current study focus on the discourse strategies and
lexicogrammatical resources successful students’ use as
legitimate knower – deconstructing good models

4. Theoretical Background
• Identity and self(Clark and Ivanic, 1998)
• Stance and voice as registerial key (Hood, 2012; Hyland,
2005; Hunston, 2010)
• APPRAISAL (Martin and White, 2005)
• Discourse structure and code theory (Bernstein, 1990, 2000)
• Legitimation Code Theory (LCT) (Maton, 2000, 2009)

5. Knowledge Structures & Semantic
Gravity
Semantic Gravity Discourse Knowledge
structures
Learning
Weaker
Stronger
Vertical
Horizontal
Hierarchical
Horizontal
Cumulative
Segmented
(Maton, 2009, p.46)

6. Legitimisation of Specialisation Codes
ER+
ER-
SR- SR+
knowledge
relativist
elite
knower
(Maton, 2010, p.45)

7. Legitimisation of Specialisation Codes
ER+
ER-
SR- SR+
Science
Social
Sciences
Humanities
(Hood, 2011, p.125)
Analytical
observation
Testimonial
observations
Observer’s
visibility
Observer’s
invisibility

8. SG-, SD+
SG+, SD-
Legitimisation of Specialisation Codes
ER+
ER-
SR- SR+
Science
Social
Sciences
Humanities
(Hood, 2011, p.125)
Analytical
observation
Testimonial
observations
Observer’s
visibility
Observer’s
invisibility
Building of
knowledge
over time

9. Topology of Knowers’ Gaze
SubR+
IR- IR+
Social
Cultivated
(Maton, 2014)SubR-
Born
Trained

10. Lenses of Cultivated Knowers’ Gaze
TOR+
IDR- IDR+
Interpretative
Rhetorical
TOR-
Elitist
Novice
(Luckett et al., 2012)

11. Using SFL to understand LCT
• Transitivity analysis
• (Un)packing of
grammatical metaphor
• Appraisal analysis
• Focusing on Engagement
strategies for voice sourcing
• Explicit self-reference
• Interpersonal meaning
traversing the information
waves of theme-rheme (Adapted from karlmaton.com)

12. Knowers’ Processes
Process Types Examples N
Material Meanwhile, I, and other colleagues, teach preparation
courses for standardized tests…
86
Mental Understanding the meaning behind a text is difficult if we
don't understand the register…
101
Behavioural I will examine how the words are used in the
concordance…
27
Verbal I shall discuss the listening activities designed from the
top-down interpretation view…
45
Relational Although we are unable to decipher the intonation of the
comments…
29

13. APPRAISAL (Martin and White, 2005)
APPRAISAL
ENGAGEMENT
ATTITUDE
GRADUATION
monoglossic
heteroglossic
appreciation
judgement
force
focus
affect

14. ENGAGEMENT up-close
ENGAGEMENT
monoglossic
heteroglossic
expand
contract
disclaim
proclaim
entertain
attribute
acknowledge
distance
deny
counter
concur
pronounce
endorse

15. The Corpus (ALPC)
• 90 written texts from 30 students
• 170,000 words approx (still growing)
• Assignments including research-based papers, literature
reviews, commentaries (dissertations to be added)
• Transitivity analysis: how students represent themselves as
they are explicitly present in the writing
• Suggesting the types of gaze students may have towards
their objects of study

16. Knowers’ Processes
86
45
101
29 27
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Material Behavioural Mental Verbal Relational
Frequency

17. The Case Study: Flo
• From China – Non-native English speaker
• Had teaching experience – TOEFL private tutoring in China
• Enrolled in MA English Language Teaching;
• Did not opt for dissertation but performed constantly
outstanding in various coursework throughout
• Two high-graded assignments from same subject selected
from the corpus
• Active participant among the volunteers

18. The Assignments
• Both from “Second Language Teaching”
• Requirement: Summary, Synthesis, Evaluation
• Linking theories to practice
• Assignments:
• 1st: Research-based paper – Solutions to
avoid sentence fragments and run-ons
• 2nd: Literature review – Using listening
comprehension to teach oral English

19. Teacher Perspective
• Making the theories appliable for teachers’ further
development (Knowledge  Elite)
• Critical discussion is essential (Elitist lens)
• Assignment topics and arguments identified and justified with
literature and data
• Independence of student writers (developing cultivated
gaze with an elitist lens)
• Term papers over exams or quizzes
• Reflective of academic writing/genres
• Advancement of career and academic pursuit

20. Methods
Appraisal Analysis with
UAM CorpusTool
(O’Donnell, 2008)
Examining other
texts (readings,
lecture notes, etc.)
Student and
teacher interviews
(15-min each)

21. Construction of
Voice in Writing:
Flo
• Note taking as unpacking
device and basis of
integration
• Explicit self-mention to
recount on teaching
experience and evaluation
• Backgrounding other voices
using non-integral citations
• Foregrounding her own
critique or affiliating sources
with integral citations

22. APPRAISAL (Martin and White, 2005)
APPRAISAL
ENGAGEMENT
ATTITUDE
GRADUATION
monoglossic
heteroglossic
appreciation
judgement
force
focus
affect

23. ENGAGEMENT up-close
ENGAGEMENT
monoglossic
heteroglossic
expand
contract
disclaim
proclaim
entertain
attribute
acknowledge
distance
deny
counter
concur
pronounce
endorse

24. Voice Sourcing: ENGAGEMENT
Research Paper Literature Review
Feature N % N %
monoglossic 119 60.4 37 27.6
heteroglossic 78 39.6 97 72.4
Total 197 100.0 134 100.0

25. ENGAGEMENT in Research Paper
ENGAGEMENT
monoglossic (N=119; 60.4%)
heteroglossic
expand
contract
disclaim
proclaim
entertain
attribute
acknowledge
distance (N=0; 0%)
deny (n=1; 12.5%)
counter (n=7; 87.5%)
concur (n=0; 0%)
pronounce (n=1; 20%)
endorse (n=7; 80%)
Sentence fragments and run-on
sentences break the structural rule of
forming a correct sentence.
Fitzpatrick and Ruscica (2000)
once pointed out that
However; although; but
It is clear that
Syntactic variety can
hardly be achieved
This evaluation is, of course,
based on individual
teaching context
(N=78; 39.6%)
(N=13; 16.7%)
(N=65; 83.3%)
(N=8; 61.5%)
(N=5; 38.5%)
(N=42; 64.6%)
(N=23; 35.4%)
(N=23; 100%)They might
misunderstand
sentence variety
This research indicates
the strong relationship

26. ENGAGEMENT in Lit Review
ENGAGEMENT
monoglossic (N=37; 27.6%)
heteroglossic
expand
contract
disclaim
proclaim
entertain
attribute
acknowledge
distance (N=0; 0%)
deny (n=5; 45.5%)
counter (n=6; 54.5%)
concur (n=3; 33.3%)
pronounce (n=3; 33.3%)
endorse (n=3; 33.3%)
Spoken language is increasingly
demanded by learners in EFL
classroom…
Tavil (2010) points out…
It seems feasible…
However; although; but
Flowerdew and Miller
show…
I found…
Teaching speaking is not
just the matter of teaching
how to speak fluently and
accurately.
Contextural guesswork in top-
down model is commonly used
(N=97; 72.4%)
(N=20; 16.7%)
(N=77; 83.3%)
(N=11; 55%)
(N=9; 45%)
(N=43; 55.8%)
(N=34; 44.2%)
(N=34; 100%)

27. Semantic Profile/Wave
Time
SG-, SD+
SG+, SD-
High-stake
reading
High-stake
writing
Unpacking (e.g.
definitions, examples,
observation, lectures)
Congruent,
commonsense
knowledge
Repacking (e.g.
paraphrasing, framing
concepts, research papers)

28. Semantic Profile: Research Paper
Time
SG-, SD+
SG+, SD-
Unpacking terms,
e.g. sentence
variety; relating
problems to
literature
Summary of
study
Repeated un-/re-packing in each
section with personal experience
General education context:
identifying problems in student
TOEFL writing
Recontextualise problem and how the
solution operates in a wider context
||This study reveals ||that the students tended
to combine two simple sentences with
coordinating conjunction and a comma, ||or
add a semicolon between two independent
clauses, ||and even tried to expand the
sentence into a more complex one. ||
e.g. …while students’ performance in the independent
written task was of considerable problems, one of which
was the frequent emergence of sentence fragments and
run-on sentences.
e.g. This article has
investigated the teaching
approach of avoiding
sentence fragments and
run-on sentences to
address the problem of
lack of syntactic variety in
the independent written
task of TOEFL iBT.

29. Semantic Profile: Literature Review
Time
SG-, SD+
SG+, SD-
Unpacking with
note-taking
Paraphrasing by locating
similarities in literature
Repeated un-/re-packing in each
section with personal experience
Tavil (2010), Nunan (2002) notions
related to the role of listening in
spoken language
Benefits and challenges of top-
down processing
e.g. “Although grasping
actual content… it might
be difficult to realise the
goal…”
e.g. “… the bottom-up
processing (…) and top-
down interpretation
(…)(Nunan, 2002).”
e.g. “… a number of
contradictions and
inapplicabilities have
been revealed in the
practice of teaching…”

30. Minute-by-minute Variations
Time
SG-, SD+
SG+, SD-
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4

31. Teachers adopting the top-down model are encouraged to
think about whether the teaching materials help learners to
focus on top-down listening skills. In developing materials for
top-down processing, it is important to teach students to use
context and situation as prior knowledge of the topic to
comprehend the upcoming listening task (Nunan, 2002). …
Nunan (2002), for example, suggested that teachers can use
students’ speech which includes their own background
knowledge and personal experience as listening materials…
It seems [ent] feasible in classrooms where students’ level are
relatively similar, supported by Wilson (2003) while choosing
listening text [concede]. In my present TOEFL training course,
however [count], advanced-level students may find it so
easy to respond speech from less-advanced students. Thus,
the teaching and learning becomes inefficient. One possible
solution is that teachers can select speech from students of
higher level, which may benefit students of different levels.
High semantic density
awaiting the writer to
unpack.
Unpacking the concept
through scholarly works.
Concede-counter pairing:
contract the dialogic
space by saying the
approach is less feasible in
a certain context.
Realign with readership
with solutions.
Academic reader:
Cultivated: Elitist
(SubR-, IR+; TOR+, IDR+)
Teacher: Social
(SubR+, IR-)
Teacher: Social
Academic reader:
Cultivated: Rhetorical
(SubR-, IR+; TOR+, IDR-)

32. Align/Disalignment strategy
• [ent●(ack)● count ● grad] ^ app
• This approach sounds [ent] adoptable, but [count] in the
practice of question 6 in TOEFL speaking which includes
academic topics [grad], it is too difficult [app]...
• It seems [ent] feasible… supported by Wilson (2002) [ack]. In my
present TOEFL training course [grad], however [count],
advanced-level students may find it so easy [app]…

33. Evaluate as an “insider”: Flo
This approach sounds adoptable [app: val], but in the practice of
question 6 in TOEFL speaking which includes academic topics, it is
too difficult [app: comp] for students to discuss especially when
they do not acquire the knowledge [-jud: cap] of particular areas.
Usually, it is the teacher who plays a role in introducing the
background, but in the real test, such activity will not occur.
Therefore, brainstorming of the topic sometimes cannot help [-
app: val] to provide prior knowledge.

34. What the Successful Writer Tells Us
• Manipulate voice sources according to the task
nature
• Dynamic variation of knower’s gazes and voices
within single text instance
• Sensitive to language features achieving
appropriate voices
• Material processes as a researcher/teacher
• Mental as a commentator/critic
• Use (dis-)alignment strategies eloquently to
propose new ideas

35. “But I don’t wanna do research…”
• In reality, Flo disengages herself from further
research works – e.g. a dissertation
• Still assumes researcher and academic voice in
writing
• Currently employed as Teaching Assistant in an
international school
• Moving down from Elite Code (ER+, SR+) to
Knower Code (ER-, SR+) to contextualise her study
into practice

36. Thank You!