中国英语专业学习者形容词型式评价取向研究
|
摘要
本研究采用语料库驱动的研究方法调查了国内英语专业学生议论文写作中形容词型式的评价取向。调查的形容词型式为形容词和小句的组合，即小句类形容词型式。本研究的主要内容有二：1）国内英语专业学习者议论文写作中形容词型式使用的分布特征。从型式类型上比较了中国英语专业学习者与本族语者、中水平学习者与高水平学习者之间的差异。2）国内英语专业学习者议论文写作中形容词型式的评价取向特征。从评价意义类型上比较中国英语专业学习者与本族语者、中水平学习者与高水平学习者之间的差异。
研究语料选自《中国英语专业学生写作语料库》中2005-2006年的四、八级写作。其中，四、八级写作者分别定义为中、高水平学习者。为了进行对比，本研究选取英美大学生写作语料库LOCNESS中议论文为参照语料。同时，结合型式语法和评价语言理论的最新研究发现，建立了基于参数（评价意义）分析的研究框架。
本研究发现，总体上，中国英语专业学习者议论文写作中存在过少使用小句类形容词型式的倾向。这种倾向主要归因于形容词型式ADJ1to-inf和It v-link ADJ wh。但相反的是，学习者写作中还存在过度使用形容词型式It v-link ADJ for n to-inf的倾向。随后，本研究对具体形容词型式中采用的首选形容词和使用错误进行了分析。研究发现，与中水平学习者相比，高水平学习者使用的形容词型式中首选形容词接近母语者的选择。对形容词型式的错误分析则发现，错误不能简单分为语际错误或语内错误，而应归为“型式效应错误”。
另外，本研究采用多变量分析法证实了基于参数的评价方式可以用来预测或诊断形容词型式使用者的水平差异。不同的形容词型式中，使用者存在不同的评价取向。此外，研究还调查了评价取向的发展模型和评价归向性。研究发现，评价取向与使用者水平之间存在线性的发展模型。同时，学习者和本族语者在评价意义选择上存在“积极归向”，而在“困难”这一评价意义选择中则为“消极归向”。
本研究的理论意义有三：1）从型式出发建立了基于参数的评价意义分析框架；2）重新审视并拓展了型式语法；3）探索了中、高水平学习者的错误根源。就实践意义而言，本研究为今后的评价意义研究提供了多变量分析的范例，从理论和实践上分析了型式语法教学的必要性及其具体实施要点。
This thesis reports a study that investigated the use of adjective patterns followedby a clause by Chinese EFL learners in written English. The purpose of the study is tofind to what extent the evaluative meanings could predict the use of adjective patterns,thus enhancing our understanding of the use of the adjective patterns and thefunctions of the evaluative language as well as yielding some insights into theacquisition of the interlanguage.
The data selected for the present study were composed of thee parts, namely,year-two students’ writings (the intermediate learners) in the national Written EnglishTest for English Majors (Band4,2005-2006), year-four students’ writings (theadvanced learners) in the national Written English Test for English Majors (Band8,2005-2006), and the argumentative writings of the native speakers in LOCNESS(Louvain Corpus of English Essays). The researcher conducted a quantitative study inanalyzing the data at hand, and made a parameter-based examination of the evaluativeorientations encapsulated in the adjective patterns, with the latter supplementing theformer. The analysis generated the following findings:
Compared with the native speakers, the use of the adjective patterns was foundunder-represented in Chinese EFL learners’ argumentative writings compared with theperformance of the native speakers. This may be accounted for by the underuse of thepatterns ADJ1to-inf and It v-link ADJ wh. Conversely, the pattern It v-link ADJ for nto-inf was over-represented in both learner groups, while there seemed to be noremarkable difference in the patterns of ADJ1that and ADJ1wh. It is notable that noinstance of the pattern ADJ-ing was found in the learner corpora. As to the pattern Itv-link ADJ to-inf, the intermediate-level English learners tended to overuse it while itwas the other way around for the advanced-level English learners. For the last patternIt v-link ADJ that left, a underuse tendency was found in the data of the intermediatewhile there was no significant difference in the data of the advanced.
With respect to the preferred adjectives used, the advanced-level English learnersperformed better than the intermediate in that more preferred adjectives used werealike to those by the native speakers. Furthermore, it is not surprising to find moreerrors in the corpus of the intermediate-level English learners than in the corpus of theadvanced-level English learners. But it is not so straightforward to categorize theseerrors into interlingual or intralingual types. In fact, most of the errors learnerscommitted were induced by the phraseology effects.
As to the predictability of the evaluative meanings, only four adjective patternswere taken into account due to their salient occurrences and their estimation indifferentiating the population, i.e. ADJ1to-inf, It v-link ADJ to, It v-link ADJ for sbto-inf, and It v-link ADJ that. The results indicate that evaluative meanings could actas the predicating factors of the selection of ADJ patterns. In different patterns,different parameters (evaluative meanings) serve as the vane of proficiency levels. Inother words, learners at different stages of language learning may tend to beassociated with some particular evaluative meanings.
Furthermore, both developmental patterns and polarity of evaluative meaningswere also investigated in the present study. The results indicate that the developmentpatterns of evaluation could be elicited from the adjective patterns. In terms of thepolarity of evaluative meanings, both Chinese learners and the native speakers had a“bias towards positive items”. But, it is also pointed out that another direction biaswas present with the adjective patterns that meet the evaluative meaning of“Difficulty”.
Both theoretical and practical implications can be found in the present study.Theoretically, some of the findings of L2learners’ evaluation have developed thecurrent theories of evaluation and reevaluated the Pattern Grammar approach, whileothers have contributed to the theory of error analysis from a lexico-grammarperspective. Practically, some discussions concerning the multivariate analysis and theimplementation of the Pattern Grammar approach are significant in language researchand language teaching.
研究语料选自《中国英语专业学生写作语料库》中2005-2006年的四、八级写作。其中，四、八级写作者分别定义为中、高水平学习者。为了进行对比，本研究选取英美大学生写作语料库LOCNESS中议论文为参照语料。同时，结合型式语法和评价语言理论的最新研究发现，建立了基于参数（评价意义）分析的研究框架。
本研究发现，总体上，中国英语专业学习者议论文写作中存在过少使用小句类形容词型式的倾向。这种倾向主要归因于形容词型式ADJ1to-inf和It v-link ADJ wh。但相反的是，学习者写作中还存在过度使用形容词型式It v-link ADJ for n to-inf的倾向。随后，本研究对具体形容词型式中采用的首选形容词和使用错误进行了分析。研究发现，与中水平学习者相比，高水平学习者使用的形容词型式中首选形容词接近母语者的选择。对形容词型式的错误分析则发现，错误不能简单分为语际错误或语内错误，而应归为“型式效应错误”。
另外，本研究采用多变量分析法证实了基于参数的评价方式可以用来预测或诊断形容词型式使用者的水平差异。不同的形容词型式中，使用者存在不同的评价取向。此外，研究还调查了评价取向的发展模型和评价归向性。研究发现，评价取向与使用者水平之间存在线性的发展模型。同时，学习者和本族语者在评价意义选择上存在“积极归向”，而在“困难”这一评价意义选择中则为“消极归向”。
本研究的理论意义有三：1）从型式出发建立了基于参数的评价意义分析框架；2）重新审视并拓展了型式语法；3）探索了中、高水平学习者的错误根源。就实践意义而言，本研究为今后的评价意义研究提供了多变量分析的范例，从理论和实践上分析了型式语法教学的必要性及其具体实施要点。
This thesis reports a study that investigated the use of adjective patterns followedby a clause by Chinese EFL learners in written English. The purpose of the study is tofind to what extent the evaluative meanings could predict the use of adjective patterns,thus enhancing our understanding of the use of the adjective patterns and thefunctions of the evaluative language as well as yielding some insights into theacquisition of the interlanguage.
The data selected for the present study were composed of thee parts, namely,year-two students’ writings (the intermediate learners) in the national Written EnglishTest for English Majors (Band4,2005-2006), year-four students’ writings (theadvanced learners) in the national Written English Test for English Majors (Band8,2005-2006), and the argumentative writings of the native speakers in LOCNESS(Louvain Corpus of English Essays). The researcher conducted a quantitative study inanalyzing the data at hand, and made a parameter-based examination of the evaluativeorientations encapsulated in the adjective patterns, with the latter supplementing theformer. The analysis generated the following findings:
Compared with the native speakers, the use of the adjective patterns was foundunder-represented in Chinese EFL learners’ argumentative writings compared with theperformance of the native speakers. This may be accounted for by the underuse of thepatterns ADJ1to-inf and It v-link ADJ wh. Conversely, the pattern It v-link ADJ for nto-inf was over-represented in both learner groups, while there seemed to be noremarkable difference in the patterns of ADJ1that and ADJ1wh. It is notable that noinstance of the pattern ADJ-ing was found in the learner corpora. As to the pattern Itv-link ADJ to-inf, the intermediate-level English learners tended to overuse it while itwas the other way around for the advanced-level English learners. For the last patternIt v-link ADJ that left, a underuse tendency was found in the data of the intermediatewhile there was no significant difference in the data of the advanced.
With respect to the preferred adjectives used, the advanced-level English learnersperformed better than the intermediate in that more preferred adjectives used werealike to those by the native speakers. Furthermore, it is not surprising to find moreerrors in the corpus of the intermediate-level English learners than in the corpus of theadvanced-level English learners. But it is not so straightforward to categorize theseerrors into interlingual or intralingual types. In fact, most of the errors learnerscommitted were induced by the phraseology effects.
As to the predictability of the evaluative meanings, only four adjective patternswere taken into account due to their salient occurrences and their estimation indifferentiating the population, i.e. ADJ1to-inf, It v-link ADJ to, It v-link ADJ for sbto-inf, and It v-link ADJ that. The results indicate that evaluative meanings could actas the predicating factors of the selection of ADJ patterns. In different patterns,different parameters (evaluative meanings) serve as the vane of proficiency levels. Inother words, learners at different stages of language learning may tend to beassociated with some particular evaluative meanings.
Furthermore, both developmental patterns and polarity of evaluative meaningswere also investigated in the present study. The results indicate that the developmentpatterns of evaluation could be elicited from the adjective patterns. In terms of thepolarity of evaluative meanings, both Chinese learners and the native speakers had a“bias towards positive items”. But, it is also pointed out that another direction biaswas present with the adjective patterns that meet the evaluative meaning of“Difficulty”.
Both theoretical and practical implications can be found in the present study.Theoretically, some of the findings of L2learners’ evaluation have developed thecurrent theories of evaluation and reevaluated the Pattern Grammar approach, whileothers have contributed to the theory of error analysis from a lexico-grammarperspective. Practically, some discussions concerning the multivariate analysis and theimplementation of the Pattern Grammar approach are significant in language researchand language teaching.
引文
Anderson, L. B.(1986) Evidentials, paths of change and mental maps: typologicallyregular asymmetries. In Chafe, W.&J. Nichols (Eds.), Evidentiality: theLinguistic Coding of Epistemology (pp.273-312). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Baayen, R. H.(2008). Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction toStatistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bednarek, M.(2006). Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a NewspaperCorpus. London: Continuum.
Belin, A.(2006). How do you Like it?: Likes and Dislikes in Native Speaker andAdvanced Learner Spoken English. Universite Catholique de Louvain:Unpublished MA dissertation.
Besnier, N.(1993). Reported speech and affect on Nukulaelae Atoll. In J.H. Hill&J.T.Irvine (Eds.), Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse (pp.161-181).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D.(1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Biber, D.&E. Finegan (1988). Adverbial stance types in English. DiscourseProcesses,11:1-34.
Biber, D. et al.(1998). Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S.&E. Finegan.(1999) LongmanGrammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Biber, D.(2006). University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Writtenregisters. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Blasius, J.&M. Greenacre (1998).(Eds.) Visualization of Categorical Data. London:Academic Press.
Carver, Robert&Jane Gradwohl Nash.(2012). Doing Data Analysis with SPSSVersion18. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Chafe, W.&J. Nichols (1986).(Eds.), Evidentiality: the Linguistic Coding ofEpistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Chomsky, N.(1988). Generative Grammar: Its Basis, Development and Prospects.Kyoto: Kyoto University of Foreign Studies.
Connor, U.(2003) Changing currents in contrastive rhetoric: Implications for teachingand research. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the Dynamics of Second LanguageWriting (pp.218-241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conrad, S.&D. Biber (2000). Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. InS. Hunston&G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and theConstruction of Discourse (pp.56–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cowie, A. P.(Ed.).(1998). Phraseology: Theory, analysis, applications. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Crismore, A.&R. Farnsworth (1990). Metadiscourse in popular and professionalscience discourse. In W. Nash (Ed.) The Writing Scholar: Studies in AcademicDiscourse (pp.118–136). London: Sage.
De Cock, S.(2011). Preferred patterns of use of positive and negative evaluativeadjectives in native and learner speech: an ELT perspective. In A.Frankenberg-Garcia, L. Flowerdew&G. Aston (Eds.), New Trends in Corporaand Language Learning (pp.198-212). London: Continuum.
Divjak, D. S.&St. Th. Gries (2006). Ways of trying in Russian: clustering behavioralprofiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,2(1):23-60.
Doyle, P.(2005). Replicating corpus-based linguistics: investigating lexical networksin text. In Proceedings from Corpus Linguistics. University of Birmingham.Retrieved at: www.corpus. bham.ac.uk/conference/proceedings.shml.
Dunning, T.(1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence.Computational Linguistics,19(1):61–74.
Ellis, R.(2003). Task Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Ellis, R.&G. P. Barkhuizen (2004). Analysing Learner Language. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Fillmore, C. J., J. Ruppenhofer,&C. F. Baker.(2004). FrameNet and Representingthe Link between Semantic and Syntactic Relations. In Huang, C. R.&W.Lenders (Eds.), Computational Linguistics and Beyond (pp.19-59). Taipei:Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Firth, J. R.1957. A synopsis of linguistic theory,1930–1955. In Studies in LinguisticAnalysis (pp.1-32), reprinted in Selected Papers of J R Firth1952-59, F. Palmer(ed.),(pp.168–205). London: Longman.
Francis, G.(1993). A corpus-driven approach to grammar: principles, methods andexamples. In M. Baker et al.(Eds.), Text and Technology: In honour of JohnSinclair (pp.137–156). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Francis, G.(1995) Corpus-driven grammar and its relevance to the learning of Englishin a cross-cultural situation. In A. Pakir (Ed.), English in Education:Multicultural perspectives (pp.114-186). Singapore: Unipress.
Francis, G., Hunston, S.&E. Manning.(1996). Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns1: Verbs. London: HarperCollins.
Francis, G., Hunston, S.&E. Manning.(1998). Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns2: Nouns and Adjectives. London: HarperCollins.
Goldberg, A.(2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization inLanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grabe, W.(2001). Notes towards a theory of second language writing. In T. Silva&P.K. Matsuda (Eds.), On Second Language Writing (pp.39-58). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
Granger, S.&P. Rayson (1998). Automatic profiling of learner texts. In S. Granger(Ed.), Learner English on Computer (pp.119–31). London: Longman.
Gries, St.Th.(2003). Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study ofParticle Placement. London: Continuum.
Gries, St. Th.(2009a). Quantitative Corpus Linguistics with R. London and New York:Routledge.
Gries, St. Th.(2009b). Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Groom, N.(2005). Pattern and meaning across genres and disciplines: An exploratorystudy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,4:257-277.
Halliday, M. A. K.(1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan (1989). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K.&C. Matthiessen.(2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar.3rdedition. London: Arnold.
Hasan, R.(1987). The grammarian’s dream: lexis as most delicate grammar. In M. A.K. Halliday and R. P. Fawcett (Eds.), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics,vol.1(pp.184-211). London: Pinter.
Hoey, M.(1997a). Lexical problems for the language learner (and the hint of a textualsolution). In Proceedings of the5th Latin American ESP Colloquium, Merida,Venezuela.
Hoey, M.(1997b). From concordance to text structure: New uses for computercorpora. In Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B.&P.J. Melia (Eds.), PALC97:Proceedings of Practical Applications in Language Corpora Conference(pp.2-23). ód: University of ó d.
Hoey, M.(2004). The textual priming of lexis. In Aston, G., S., Bernardini&D.Stewart (Eds.), Corpora and Language Learners (pp.21-44). Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins.
Hoey, M.(2005). Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London:Routledge.
Hornby, A. S.(1975). A Guide to Patterns and Usage in English.2ndEdition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Hoye, L.(1997). Adverbs and Modality in English. London/New York: Longman.
Huddleston, R.&G. K. Pullum.(2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the EnglishLanguage. Cambridge: CUP.
Hunston, S.(1989). Evaluation in Experimental Research Articles. University ofBirmingham: Unpublished PhD thesis.
Hunston, S.(2002). Pattern grammar, language teaching, and linguistic variation:Applications of a corpus-driven grammar. In Reppen, R., S. M. Fitzmaurice&D.Biber (Eds.), Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation (pp.167-186).Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hunston, S.(2003). Lexis, wordform and complementation pattern: A corpus study.Functions of Language,10:31–60.
Hunston, S.(2004). Counting the uncountable: problems of identifying evaluation in atext and in a corpus. In Partington, A., Morley, J. and L. Haarman (eds). Corporaand Discourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp.157-188.
Hunston, S.(2008). Starting with the small words: Patterns, lexis and semanticsequences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,13:271-295.
Hunston, S.(2011). Corpus Approaches to Evaluation: Phraseology and EvaluativeLanguage. Oxon: Routledge.
Hunston, S.&J. Sinclair (2000). A local grammar of evaluation. In S. Hunston&G.Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse (pp.74-101). Oxford: Oxford University Press.pp..
Hunston, S. and G. Thompson (Eds.)(2000). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance andthe Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K.(2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Hyland, K.(2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London:Continuum.
Hyland, K.(2009). Corpus informed discourse analysis: The case of academicengagement. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari&S. Hunston (Eds.), Academic Writing:At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse (pp.110–128). London: Continuum.
Hyland, K.&P. Tse (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal.Applied Linguistics,25:156–176.
Hyland, K.&P. Tse (2005). Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that inabstracts. English for Specific Purposes,24:123–139.
Johns, A.M.(1990). L1composition theories: Implications for developing theories ofL2composition. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insightsfor the Classroom (pp.24-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B.&P. Nation (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2writtenproduction. Applied Linguistics,16(3):307-322.
Lee, D. Y. W.(2001). Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: clarifying theconcepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning andTechnology,5(3):37-72.
Leech, G.(1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. In Svartvik, J.(Ed.),Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium82(pp.125-148). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lemke, J. L.(1992). Interpersonal meaning in discourse: value orientations. In M.Davies&L. Ravelli (Eds.), Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory andPractice (pp.82–194). London: Pinter.
Lemke, J. L.(1998). Resources for attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientations in textsemantics. Functions of Language,5(1):33–56.
Liu, B.(2010). Sentiment analysis and subjectivity. In N. Indurkhya&F. J. Damerau(Eds.), Handbook of Natural Language Processing,2ndedition (pp.627–665).Boca Raton: Chapman&Hall.
Lewis, M.(1993). The Lexical Approach: The State of ELT and a Way Forward. Hove:LTP.
Long, M.(2002). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In C.Doughty&M. Long (Eds.) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition(pp.487-535). Oxford: Blackwell.
Long, M.H. and G. Crooks (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design.TESOL Quarterly,26(1):27-56.
Lyons, J.(1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, J. R.(2000). Beyond exchange: appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunstonand G. Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and theConstruction of Discourse (pp.143-175). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R.(2003). Introduction: special issue on Appraisal. Text,23:171-181.
Martin, J. R. and P. White (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English.London: Palgrave.
Marco, M. J.(1999). The Phraseology and Meanings of the Pattern “Be Adjectiveto-Infinitive”. La Linguistique,35(2):47-60.
Mauranen, A.(2002).“A good question”: Expressing evaluation in academic speech.In G. Cortese&P. Riley (Eds.), Domain-specific English: Textual Practicesacross Communities and Classrooms (pp.115-140). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
McEnery, T.&A. Wilson (2001). Corpus Linguistics.2ndedition. Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.
McEnery, T.&A. Hardie.(2012). Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Neff, J.(2006). A rhetorical analysis approach to English for academic purposes.Revista de Lingu sticay Lenguas Aplicadas,1:63-72.
Nishina, Y.(2007). A corpus-driven approach to genre analysis: The reinvestigation ofacademic, newspaper and literary texts. Empirical Language Research,1:1-36.
Nishina, Y.(2011). Evaluative Meanings and Disciplinary Values: A Corpus-basedStudy of Adjective Patterns in Research Articles in Applied Linguistics andBusiness Studies. University of Birmingham: Unpublished PhD Dissertation.
Oakes, M.(1998). Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UniversityPress.
O’Keeffe, A., M., McCarthy&R. Carter (2007). From Corpus to Classroom:Language use and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Palmer, F.R.(1990). Modality and the English Modals. New York: Longman.
Palmer, F.R.(2001). Mood and Modality.2ndedition. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Partington, A.(1998). Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English LanguageResearch and Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Quirk R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech,&J. Svartvik.(1985). A Comprehensive Grammarof the English Language. London: Longman.
Renouf, A.&J. Sinclair (1991). Collocational frameworks in English. In K. Aijmer,&B. Altenberg (Eds.), English Corpus Linguistics (pp.128-143). New York:Longman.
R mer, U.(2005a). A phraseology-driven approach to identifying evaluation in a bookreview corpus. Retrieved at http://ute-roemer.de
R mer, U.(2005b).“This seems somewhat counterintuitive, though...” Negativeevaluation in linguistic book reviews by male and female authors. In E.Tognini-Bonelli&G. D.L. Camiciotti (Eds.), Strategies in Academic Discourse.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
R mer, U.(2008). Identification impossible? A corpus approach to realisations ofevaluative meaning in academic writing. Functions of Language,15(1):115-130.
Samson, C.(2006). A corpus-based study of evaluative adjectives in economicsdiscourse. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication,49(3):236-245.
Sinclair, J.(1991). Corpus Concordance Collocation. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Sinclair, J.(1996). The search for units of meaning. Textus,9(1):75-106.
Sinclair, J.(2004). Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London:Routledge.
Skehan, P.(1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Stubbs, M.(1996). Text and Corpus Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stubbs, M.(2001). Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford:Blackwell.
Stubbs, M.(2002). Two quantitative methods of studying phraseology in English.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,7,215–244.
Stubbs, M.(2009). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics.Applied Linguistics,30:115–137.
Swales, J. M.&A. Burke (2003).“It’s really fascinating work”: Differences inevaluative adjectives across academic registers. In P. Leistyna&C. F. Meyer(Eds.), Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use (pp.1–18). NewYork: Rodopi.
Tabata, T.(2006). A statistical approach to style and discourse in inaugural addressesof U.S. presidents: Correspondence analysis of high frequency words. TheInstitute of Statistical Mathematics Cooperative Research Report,190:47-58.
Teubert, W.(2008). Sinclair, pattern grammar and the question of hatred.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,12:223-247.
Thompson, G.(2001). Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with thereader. Applied Linguistics,22:58–78.
Thompson, G. and S. Hunston (2000). Evaluation: an introduction. In S. Hunston&G.Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse (pp.1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, G.&S. Hunston (Eds.)(2006). System and corpus: Exploring connections.London: Equinox.
Ting, Y. R.(2007). Text memorization and imitation: The practices of successfulChinese learners of English. System,35:271-280.
Tognini-Bonelli, E.(2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tucker, G. H.(1998). The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic FunctionalApproach to Lexis. London: Cassell.
Turney, P. D.(2002). Thumbs up or thunbs down? Semantic orientation applied tounsupervised classification of reviews. Proceedings of the40th Annual Meetingof the Association for Computational Linguistics(417–424). Philadelphia, July2002.
Vande Kopple, W.J.(1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. CollegeComposition and Communication,36:82-93.
Weigle, S.C.(2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H. G.(1989). Knowledge of language and ability for use. AppliedLinguistics,10(2):128-37.
Widdowson, H. G.(2004). Text, Context, Pretext. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wray, A.(2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Wulff, S.(2003). A multifactorial corpus analysis of adjective order in English.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,8(2):245-282.
Yan, H.(2006). A Corpus-Based Study of Chinese EFL Learners’ Use of “so”.Unpublished MA thesis. Nanjing University.
陈淑芳.(2002).评价系统与词汇产出.山东外语教学,(6):28-30.
何安平.(2011).语料库视角的英语口语“立标语块”探究.外语教学理论与实践,(1):25-31.
何安平、黄雪梅.(2011).英语教材话语的立场标记语探究.当代外语研究,3:10-16.
李基安.(2008).情态与介入.外国语,31(4):60-63.
李荣娟.(2005).英语专栏语篇中态度意义的评价理论视角.山东外语教学,(4):30-33.
李战子.(2004).评价与文化模式.山东外语教学,(2):3-8.
廖益清.(2008).评判与鉴赏构建社会性别身份:时尚话语的批评性分析.外语学刊,145(6):71-75.
刘世铸,韩金龙.(2004).新闻话语的评价系统.外语电化教学,98(4):17-21.
刘晓琳.(2010).评价系统视域中的翻译研究:以“红楼梦”两个译本对比为例.外语学刊,(3):161-163.
马景秀.(2008).新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制.外语教学理论与实践,(4):77-81.
钱宏.(2007).运用评价理论解释“不忠实”的翻译现象:香水广告翻译个案研究.外国语,(6):57-63.
唐丽萍.(2009).对英语学习者文化霸权话语解读的批评话语分析.解放军外国语学院学报,(4)：47-51.
唐丽萍.(2005).英语学术书评的评价策略:从对话视角的介入分析.外语学刊,(4):1-7.
唐丽萍.(2010).英语学习者阅读立场之批评话语分析及其启示.外国语,33(3):60-66.
王立非,马会军.(2009).基于语料库的中国学生英语演讲话语立场构块研究.外语教学与研究,41(5):365-370.
王振华.(2001).评价系统及其运作:系统功能语言学的新发展.外国语,136(6):13-20.
王振华.(2004a).“硬新闻”的态度研究.外语教学,(5):31-35.
王振华.(2004b).法庭交叉质询中的人际关系.外语学刊,(3):51-59.
吴安萍,钟守满.(2010).评价性形容词形式范畴化的语义结构模式研究.外语与外语教学，254(5)：29-33.
徐海铭.(2004).中国英语专业本科生使用元语篇手段的发展模式调查研究.外语与外语教学,(3):59-64.
徐宏亮.(2011).中国高级英语学习者学术语篇中的作者立场标记语的使用特点:一项基于语料库的对比研究.外语教学,32(6):44-48.
严华.(2006).论SUCH的词性归属.外语教学与研究,38(3):184-188.
严华,王立非.(2010). PowerGrep与语料库加工.外语电化教学,(3):57-62.
杨信彰.(2007).元话语与语言功能.外语与外语教学,(12):1-3.
余继英.(2010).评价意义与译文意识形态:以“阿Q正传”英译为例.外语教学理论与实践,(2):83-90.
袁传有.(2008).警察讯问语言的人际意义:评价理论之“介入系统”视角.现代外语,(2)：141-149.
袁秀凤.(2007).英语叙述式招生广告的介入资源利用分析.外语研究,(4):36-42.
张德禄,刘世铸.(2006).形式与意义的范畴化,兼评“评价语言：英语的评价系统”.外语教学与研究,38(6):423-427.
张佩雯.(2010).叙述和阐述体裁的分级资源对比研究.中国外语,7(4):41-46.
张艳莉,潘鸣威.(2008). CEM写作语料的标注原则及说明.外语界,(4):20-25.
Baayen, R. H.(2008). Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction toStatistics Using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bednarek, M.(2006). Evaluation in Media Discourse: Analysis of a NewspaperCorpus. London: Continuum.
Belin, A.(2006). How do you Like it?: Likes and Dislikes in Native Speaker andAdvanced Learner Spoken English. Universite Catholique de Louvain:Unpublished MA dissertation.
Besnier, N.(1993). Reported speech and affect on Nukulaelae Atoll. In J.H. Hill&J.T.Irvine (Eds.), Responsibility and Evidence in Oral Discourse (pp.161-181).Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D.(1988). Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Biber, D.&E. Finegan (1988). Adverbial stance types in English. DiscourseProcesses,11:1-34.
Biber, D. et al.(1998). Corpus Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S.&E. Finegan.(1999) LongmanGrammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Biber, D.(2006). University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Writtenregisters. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Blasius, J.&M. Greenacre (1998).(Eds.) Visualization of Categorical Data. London:Academic Press.
Carver, Robert&Jane Gradwohl Nash.(2012). Doing Data Analysis with SPSSVersion18. Boston: Cengage Learning.
Chafe, W.&J. Nichols (1986).(Eds.), Evidentiality: the Linguistic Coding ofEpistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Chomsky, N.(1988). Generative Grammar: Its Basis, Development and Prospects.Kyoto: Kyoto University of Foreign Studies.
Connor, U.(2003) Changing currents in contrastive rhetoric: Implications for teachingand research. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Exploring the Dynamics of Second LanguageWriting (pp.218-241). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Conrad, S.&D. Biber (2000). Adverbial marking of stance in speech and writing. InS. Hunston&G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and theConstruction of Discourse (pp.56–73). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cowie, A. P.(Ed.).(1998). Phraseology: Theory, analysis, applications. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Crismore, A.&R. Farnsworth (1990). Metadiscourse in popular and professionalscience discourse. In W. Nash (Ed.) The Writing Scholar: Studies in AcademicDiscourse (pp.118–136). London: Sage.
De Cock, S.(2011). Preferred patterns of use of positive and negative evaluativeadjectives in native and learner speech: an ELT perspective. In A.Frankenberg-Garcia, L. Flowerdew&G. Aston (Eds.), New Trends in Corporaand Language Learning (pp.198-212). London: Continuum.
Divjak, D. S.&St. Th. Gries (2006). Ways of trying in Russian: clustering behavioralprofiles. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory,2(1):23-60.
Doyle, P.(2005). Replicating corpus-based linguistics: investigating lexical networksin text. In Proceedings from Corpus Linguistics. University of Birmingham.Retrieved at: www.corpus. bham.ac.uk/conference/proceedings.shml.
Dunning, T.(1993). Accurate methods for the statistics of surprise and coincidence.Computational Linguistics,19(1):61–74.
Ellis, R.(2003). Task Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Ellis, R.&G. P. Barkhuizen (2004). Analysing Learner Language. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Fillmore, C. J., J. Ruppenhofer,&C. F. Baker.(2004). FrameNet and Representingthe Link between Semantic and Syntactic Relations. In Huang, C. R.&W.Lenders (Eds.), Computational Linguistics and Beyond (pp.19-59). Taipei:Institute of Linguistics, Academia Sinica.
Firth, J. R.1957. A synopsis of linguistic theory,1930–1955. In Studies in LinguisticAnalysis (pp.1-32), reprinted in Selected Papers of J R Firth1952-59, F. Palmer(ed.),(pp.168–205). London: Longman.
Francis, G.(1993). A corpus-driven approach to grammar: principles, methods andexamples. In M. Baker et al.(Eds.), Text and Technology: In honour of JohnSinclair (pp.137–156). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Francis, G.(1995) Corpus-driven grammar and its relevance to the learning of Englishin a cross-cultural situation. In A. Pakir (Ed.), English in Education:Multicultural perspectives (pp.114-186). Singapore: Unipress.
Francis, G., Hunston, S.&E. Manning.(1996). Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns1: Verbs. London: HarperCollins.
Francis, G., Hunston, S.&E. Manning.(1998). Collins COBUILD Grammar Patterns2: Nouns and Adjectives. London: HarperCollins.
Goldberg, A.(2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization inLanguage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Grabe, W.(2001). Notes towards a theory of second language writing. In T. Silva&P.K. Matsuda (Eds.), On Second Language Writing (pp.39-58). Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
Granger, S.&P. Rayson (1998). Automatic profiling of learner texts. In S. Granger(Ed.), Learner English on Computer (pp.119–31). London: Longman.
Gries, St.Th.(2003). Multifactorial Analysis in Corpus Linguistics: A Study ofParticle Placement. London: Continuum.
Gries, St. Th.(2009a). Quantitative Corpus Linguistics with R. London and New York:Routledge.
Gries, St. Th.(2009b). Statistics for Linguistics with R: A Practical Introduction.Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Groom, N.(2005). Pattern and meaning across genres and disciplines: An exploratorystudy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,4:257-277.
Halliday, M. A. K.(1994). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Grammar. London:Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. and R. Hasan (1989). Language, Context, and Text: Aspects ofLanguage in a Social-Semiotic Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M. A. K.&C. Matthiessen.(2004). An Introduction to Functional Grammar.3rdedition. London: Arnold.
Hasan, R.(1987). The grammarian’s dream: lexis as most delicate grammar. In M. A.K. Halliday and R. P. Fawcett (Eds.), New Developments in Systemic Linguistics,vol.1(pp.184-211). London: Pinter.
Hoey, M.(1997a). Lexical problems for the language learner (and the hint of a textualsolution). In Proceedings of the5th Latin American ESP Colloquium, Merida,Venezuela.
Hoey, M.(1997b). From concordance to text structure: New uses for computercorpora. In Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, B.&P.J. Melia (Eds.), PALC97:Proceedings of Practical Applications in Language Corpora Conference(pp.2-23). ód: University of ó d.
Hoey, M.(2004). The textual priming of lexis. In Aston, G., S., Bernardini&D.Stewart (Eds.), Corpora and Language Learners (pp.21-44). Amsterdam: JohnBenjamins.
Hoey, M.(2005). Lexical Priming: A New Theory of Words and Language. London:Routledge.
Hornby, A. S.(1975). A Guide to Patterns and Usage in English.2ndEdition. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Hoye, L.(1997). Adverbs and Modality in English. London/New York: Longman.
Huddleston, R.&G. K. Pullum.(2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the EnglishLanguage. Cambridge: CUP.
Hunston, S.(1989). Evaluation in Experimental Research Articles. University ofBirmingham: Unpublished PhD thesis.
Hunston, S.(2002). Pattern grammar, language teaching, and linguistic variation:Applications of a corpus-driven grammar. In Reppen, R., S. M. Fitzmaurice&D.Biber (Eds.), Using Corpora to Explore Linguistic Variation (pp.167-186).Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hunston, S.(2003). Lexis, wordform and complementation pattern: A corpus study.Functions of Language,10:31–60.
Hunston, S.(2004). Counting the uncountable: problems of identifying evaluation in atext and in a corpus. In Partington, A., Morley, J. and L. Haarman (eds). Corporaand Discourse. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, pp.157-188.
Hunston, S.(2008). Starting with the small words: Patterns, lexis and semanticsequences. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,13:271-295.
Hunston, S.(2011). Corpus Approaches to Evaluation: Phraseology and EvaluativeLanguage. Oxon: Routledge.
Hunston, S.&J. Sinclair (2000). A local grammar of evaluation. In S. Hunston&G.Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse (pp.74-101). Oxford: Oxford University Press.pp..
Hunston, S. and G. Thompson (Eds.)(2000). Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance andthe Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K.(2003). Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.
Hyland, K.(2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London:Continuum.
Hyland, K.(2009). Corpus informed discourse analysis: The case of academicengagement. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari&S. Hunston (Eds.), Academic Writing:At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse (pp.110–128). London: Continuum.
Hyland, K.&P. Tse (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal.Applied Linguistics,25:156–176.
Hyland, K.&P. Tse (2005). Hooking the reader: A corpus study of evaluative that inabstracts. English for Specific Purposes,24:123–139.
Johns, A.M.(1990). L1composition theories: Implications for developing theories ofL2composition. In B. Kroll (Ed.), Second Language Writing: Research Insightsfor the Classroom (pp.24-36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Laufer, B.&P. Nation (1995). Vocabulary size and use: Lexical richness in L2writtenproduction. Applied Linguistics,16(3):307-322.
Lee, D. Y. W.(2001). Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: clarifying theconcepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning andTechnology,5(3):37-72.
Leech, G.(1992). Corpora and theories of linguistic performance. In Svartvik, J.(Ed.),Directions in Corpus Linguistics: Proceedings of Nobel Symposium82(pp.125-148). Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lemke, J. L.(1992). Interpersonal meaning in discourse: value orientations. In M.Davies&L. Ravelli (Eds.), Advances in Systemic Linguistics: Recent Theory andPractice (pp.82–194). London: Pinter.
Lemke, J. L.(1998). Resources for attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientations in textsemantics. Functions of Language,5(1):33–56.
Liu, B.(2010). Sentiment analysis and subjectivity. In N. Indurkhya&F. J. Damerau(Eds.), Handbook of Natural Language Processing,2ndedition (pp.627–665).Boca Raton: Chapman&Hall.
Lewis, M.(1993). The Lexical Approach: The State of ELT and a Way Forward. Hove:LTP.
Long, M.(2002). Stabilization and fossilization in interlanguage development. In C.Doughty&M. Long (Eds.) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition(pp.487-535). Oxford: Blackwell.
Long, M.H. and G. Crooks (1992). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design.TESOL Quarterly,26(1):27-56.
Lyons, J.(1977). Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Martin, J. R.(2000). Beyond exchange: appraisal systems in English. In S. Hunstonand G. Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and theConstruction of Discourse (pp.143-175). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Martin, J. R.(2003). Introduction: special issue on Appraisal. Text,23:171-181.
Martin, J. R. and P. White (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English.London: Palgrave.
Marco, M. J.(1999). The Phraseology and Meanings of the Pattern “Be Adjectiveto-Infinitive”. La Linguistique,35(2):47-60.
Mauranen, A.(2002).“A good question”: Expressing evaluation in academic speech.In G. Cortese&P. Riley (Eds.), Domain-specific English: Textual Practicesacross Communities and Classrooms (pp.115-140). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
McEnery, T.&A. Wilson (2001). Corpus Linguistics.2ndedition. Edinburgh:Edinburgh University Press.
McEnery, T.&A. Hardie.(2012). Corpus Linguistics: Method, Theory and Practice.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Neff, J.(2006). A rhetorical analysis approach to English for academic purposes.Revista de Lingu sticay Lenguas Aplicadas,1:63-72.
Nishina, Y.(2007). A corpus-driven approach to genre analysis: The reinvestigation ofacademic, newspaper and literary texts. Empirical Language Research,1:1-36.
Nishina, Y.(2011). Evaluative Meanings and Disciplinary Values: A Corpus-basedStudy of Adjective Patterns in Research Articles in Applied Linguistics andBusiness Studies. University of Birmingham: Unpublished PhD Dissertation.
Oakes, M.(1998). Statistics for Corpus Linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UniversityPress.
O’Keeffe, A., M., McCarthy&R. Carter (2007). From Corpus to Classroom:Language use and Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Palmer, F.R.(1990). Modality and the English Modals. New York: Longman.
Palmer, F.R.(2001). Mood and Modality.2ndedition. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Partington, A.(1998). Patterns and meanings: Using corpora for English LanguageResearch and Teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Quirk R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech,&J. Svartvik.(1985). A Comprehensive Grammarof the English Language. London: Longman.
Renouf, A.&J. Sinclair (1991). Collocational frameworks in English. In K. Aijmer,&B. Altenberg (Eds.), English Corpus Linguistics (pp.128-143). New York:Longman.
R mer, U.(2005a). A phraseology-driven approach to identifying evaluation in a bookreview corpus. Retrieved at http://ute-roemer.de
R mer, U.(2005b).“This seems somewhat counterintuitive, though...” Negativeevaluation in linguistic book reviews by male and female authors. In E.Tognini-Bonelli&G. D.L. Camiciotti (Eds.), Strategies in Academic Discourse.Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins
R mer, U.(2008). Identification impossible? A corpus approach to realisations ofevaluative meaning in academic writing. Functions of Language,15(1):115-130.
Samson, C.(2006). A corpus-based study of evaluative adjectives in economicsdiscourse. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication,49(3):236-245.
Sinclair, J.(1991). Corpus Concordance Collocation. Oxford: Oxford UniversityPress.
Sinclair, J.(1996). The search for units of meaning. Textus,9(1):75-106.
Sinclair, J.(2004). Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London:Routledge.
Skehan, P.(1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
Stubbs, M.(1996). Text and Corpus Analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Stubbs, M.(2001). Words and Phrases: Corpus Studies of Lexical Semantics. Oxford:Blackwell.
Stubbs, M.(2002). Two quantitative methods of studying phraseology in English.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,7,215–244.
Stubbs, M.(2009). The search for units of meaning: Sinclair on empirical semantics.Applied Linguistics,30:115–137.
Swales, J. M.&A. Burke (2003).“It’s really fascinating work”: Differences inevaluative adjectives across academic registers. In P. Leistyna&C. F. Meyer(Eds.), Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use (pp.1–18). NewYork: Rodopi.
Tabata, T.(2006). A statistical approach to style and discourse in inaugural addressesof U.S. presidents: Correspondence analysis of high frequency words. TheInstitute of Statistical Mathematics Cooperative Research Report,190:47-58.
Teubert, W.(2008). Sinclair, pattern grammar and the question of hatred.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,12:223-247.
Thompson, G.(2001). Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with thereader. Applied Linguistics,22:58–78.
Thompson, G. and S. Hunston (2000). Evaluation: an introduction. In S. Hunston&G.Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction ofDiscourse (pp.1–27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, G.&S. Hunston (Eds.)(2006). System and corpus: Exploring connections.London: Equinox.
Ting, Y. R.(2007). Text memorization and imitation: The practices of successfulChinese learners of English. System,35:271-280.
Tognini-Bonelli, E.(2001). Corpus Linguistics at Work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Tucker, G. H.(1998). The Lexicogrammar of Adjectives: A Systemic FunctionalApproach to Lexis. London: Cassell.
Turney, P. D.(2002). Thumbs up or thunbs down? Semantic orientation applied tounsupervised classification of reviews. Proceedings of the40th Annual Meetingof the Association for Computational Linguistics(417–424). Philadelphia, July2002.
Vande Kopple, W.J.(1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. CollegeComposition and Communication,36:82-93.
Weigle, S.C.(2002). Assessing Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Widdowson, H. G.(1989). Knowledge of language and ability for use. AppliedLinguistics,10(2):128-37.
Widdowson, H. G.(2004). Text, Context, Pretext. Oxford: Blackwell.
Wray, A.(2002). Formulaic Language and the Lexicon. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.
Wulff, S.(2003). A multifactorial corpus analysis of adjective order in English.International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,8(2):245-282.
Yan, H.(2006). A Corpus-Based Study of Chinese EFL Learners’ Use of “so”.Unpublished MA thesis. Nanjing University.
陈淑芳.(2002).评价系统与词汇产出.山东外语教学,(6):28-30.
何安平.(2011).语料库视角的英语口语“立标语块”探究.外语教学理论与实践,(1):25-31.
何安平、黄雪梅.(2011).英语教材话语的立场标记语探究.当代外语研究,3:10-16.
李基安.(2008).情态与介入.外国语,31(4):60-63.
李荣娟.(2005).英语专栏语篇中态度意义的评价理论视角.山东外语教学,(4):30-33.
李战子.(2004).评价与文化模式.山东外语教学,(2):3-8.
廖益清.(2008).评判与鉴赏构建社会性别身份:时尚话语的批评性分析.外语学刊,145(6):71-75.
刘世铸,韩金龙.(2004).新闻话语的评价系统.外语电化教学,98(4):17-21.
刘晓琳.(2010).评价系统视域中的翻译研究:以“红楼梦”两个译本对比为例.外语学刊,(3):161-163.
马景秀.(2008).新闻话语直接引语的“修辞—评价”机制.外语教学理论与实践,(4):77-81.
钱宏.(2007).运用评价理论解释“不忠实”的翻译现象:香水广告翻译个案研究.外国语,(6):57-63.
唐丽萍.(2009).对英语学习者文化霸权话语解读的批评话语分析.解放军外国语学院学报,(4)：47-51.
唐丽萍.(2005).英语学术书评的评价策略:从对话视角的介入分析.外语学刊,(4):1-7.
唐丽萍.(2010).英语学习者阅读立场之批评话语分析及其启示.外国语,33(3):60-66.
王立非,马会军.(2009).基于语料库的中国学生英语演讲话语立场构块研究.外语教学与研究,41(5):365-370.
王振华.(2001).评价系统及其运作:系统功能语言学的新发展.外国语,136(6):13-20.
王振华.(2004a).“硬新闻”的态度研究.外语教学,(5):31-35.
王振华.(2004b).法庭交叉质询中的人际关系.外语学刊,(3):51-59.
吴安萍,钟守满.(2010).评价性形容词形式范畴化的语义结构模式研究.外语与外语教学，254(5)：29-33.
徐海铭.(2004).中国英语专业本科生使用元语篇手段的发展模式调查研究.外语与外语教学,(3):59-64.
徐宏亮.(2011).中国高级英语学习者学术语篇中的作者立场标记语的使用特点:一项基于语料库的对比研究.外语教学,32(6):44-48.
严华.(2006).论SUCH的词性归属.外语教学与研究,38(3):184-188.
严华,王立非.(2010). PowerGrep与语料库加工.外语电化教学,(3):57-62.
杨信彰.(2007).元话语与语言功能.外语与外语教学,(12):1-3.
余继英.(2010).评价意义与译文意识形态:以“阿Q正传”英译为例.外语教学理论与实践,(2):83-90.
袁传有.(2008).警察讯问语言的人际意义:评价理论之“介入系统”视角.现代外语,(2)：141-149.
袁秀凤.(2007).英语叙述式招生广告的介入资源利用分析.外语研究,(4):36-42.
张德禄,刘世铸.(2006).形式与意义的范畴化,兼评“评价语言：英语的评价系统”.外语教学与研究,38(6):423-427.
张佩雯.(2010).叙述和阐述体裁的分级资源对比研究.中国外语,7(4):41-46.
张艳莉,潘鸣威.(2008). CEM写作语料的标注原则及说明.外语界,(4):20-25.