Genre Register and EAP A Comparative Stu

Genre, register and EAP:
A comparative study of writing for

academic purposes
Christoph Alexander Hafner
A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

the degree of Master of Arts (Language Teaching), University of
Auckland 1999
for my parents
Abstract
This study considers the question of how NNS writing for an examination in Commercial
law compares to NS writing on the same task. An analysis of genre and register in the
writing of 123 Commercial Law students was carried out. The students’ language was
compared according to three different background variables: student language
background (NS and NNS), academic level (first and second year) and content score. The
writing was analysed both for schematic structure and features of grammar and lexis. It
was found that: 1. NSs tended to use more appropriate schematic structure, grammar and
lexis than NNSs; 2. 3. appropriate language is an important part of a good examination
answer; 4. students with greater experience of the subject used more appropriate
schematic structure than students with less experience. The results demonstrate that there
is a need for writing skills development in both NSs and NNSs, but the need is more
pressing for NNSs. It is suggested that courses for NSs should focus on discourse level
genre conventions. Courses for NNSs should include this and extend to include lexico-
grammatical features as well.
iii
Acknowledgements
I would not have been able to produce this thesis without the contributions of quite a
number of people. Although it is impossible to thank them all by name, a few of them
deserve a special mention.
Firstly, I would like to thank my supervisors, Scott Allan and Helen Basturkmen. Thank-
you Scott, for being approachable, for having time and for listening to my ideas: I have
enjoyed my discussions with you. Thank-you Helen, for your comments and for
introducing me to discourse analysis and computer concordancing. I am particularly
indebted to you for the use of your computer during the concordancing stage of my
research.
Two other members of staff should also be mentioned. I would like to thank Marilyn
Lewis for her initial input into this thesis. I am also very grateful to Rod Ellis for making
time to discuss this thesis with me: your comments were very valuable.
A number of people assisted with the data-collection. Thanks are due to Sue Laurenson,
whose support and encouragement in the initial stages were greatly appreciated. I would
also like to acknowledge all the staff at the Commerce Student Resource Centre, for their
assistance in collecting, photocopying and coding the examination data. Without your
help in maintaining confidentiality, this study would not have been possible.
I would like to thank the staff of the Commercial Law department for their willingness
and co-operation. In particular, Marnie Prasad for her support in obtaining consent from
students and for encouraging Commercial Law tutors to sit their own exams! I would also
like to say a special word of thanks to those legal professionals who responded to the call
and provided me with their ‘expert opinions’. To the many Commercial Law students that
made this study possible: thank-you.
Darren Conway’s contribution to this thesis has been much appreciated. Thank-you for all
your time and energy. I have enjoyed discussing this thesis with you and have appreciated
the occasional pearls you’ve tossed my way.
In the writing stage of this thesis I had the assistance of a small team of proofreaders and I
would like to thank all of you for your time and effort: thank-you Lynn, Lisa, Wendy and
Paul. You all made useful comments.
Last but not least, it remains for me to thank my parents, whose support has been essential
to the success of this project. Thanks for putting up with the mess, the odd hours and the
theories. You have been great. This thesis is dedicated to you.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract iii
Acknowledgements iv
Table of Contents v
List of Tables vii
List of figures viii
List of Appendices ix
List of terms and abbreviations x
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 LITERATURE REVIEW 4
PART ONE:THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS OF LANGUAGE AND CONTEXT 4
2.1 Register theory 5
2.2 Genre theory 8
2.3 Competing theories: register and genre 14
2.4 The application of genre and register to ESP 16
PART TWO: TARGET LANGUAGE FOR EALP 17
2.5 Legal genres and schematic structure 18
2.6 General textual organisation 20
2.7 Lexico-grammatical features 25
2.8 Research questions 30
3 METHODOLOGY 32
PART ONE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION 32
3.1 Data collection 32
3.2 Participant background and writing conditions 35
PART TWO: BASELINE STUDY 37
3.3 Background 37
3.4 Procedure 38
PART THREE: SCHEMATIC STRUCTURE 40
3.5 Target language: operational definitions 40
3.6 Comparative analysis 48
PART FOUR: STUDY OF FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASES 54
3.7 Preliminary analysis 54
3.8 Comparative analysis 55
3.9 Lexical density 57
3.10 Summary 58
4 RESULTS 1: BASELINE STUDY 59

4.1 Writing task 59
4.2 Ranking task 60
4.3 Conclusion 61
v
5 RESULTS 2: SCHEMATIC STRUCTURE 62
PART ONE: RESULTS OF COMPARATIVE STUDY 62
5.1 Length of response 62
5.2 Schematic structure 65
5.3 Summary of results 77
PART TWO: DISCUSSION OF HYPOTHESES 78
5.4 Hypothesis one 78
5.5 Hypothesis two 79
5.6 Hypothesis three 80
5.7 Conclusion 81
6 RESULTS 3: FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASES 83

PART ONE: PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS 83
6.1 Framework of functional lexical phrases 83
6.2 Language options in functional lexical phrases 85
PART TWO: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS 88
6.3 Discourse moves 89
6.4 General features 103
PART THREE: DISCUSSION OF HYPOTHESES 106
6.5 Hypothesis four 106
6.6 Hypothesis five 109
6.7 Hypothesis six 111
6.8 Conclusion 113
7 FINAL DISCUSSION 114

7.1 Discussion of research questions 114
7.2 Implications for teaching and course design 116
7.3 Implications for research methodology 118
7.4 Implications for ESP 119
7.5 Further research 120
LIST OF REFERENCES 121

APPENDICES 128
vi
List of Tables
Table 1 Composition of final sample ......................................................................... 35
Table 2 Lawyers’ background .................................................................................... 38
Table 3 Ranking samples: background ....................................................................... 39
Table 4 Discourse features and background variables compared ............................... 48
Table 5 Scores calculated for analysis ........................................................................ 52
Table 6 Unedited language features by discourse move ............................................ 56
Table 7 Lawyers’ discourse scores ............................................................................. 59
Table 8 Lawyers’ ranking of sample answers ............................................................ 60
Table 9 Number of issues ........................................................................................... 62
Table 10 Length in number of words ......................................................................... 63
Table 11 Correlations to content score (by entire group) ........................................... 64
Table 12 Correlations to content score (by level)....................................................... 64
Table 13 Correlations to content score (by language background) ............................ 64
Table 14 Discourse score descriptive statistics .......................................................... 70
Table 15 Results: Differences noted and relationships established ............................ 77
Table 16 Genre moves and lexical phrase realisation ................................................ 84
Table 17 Language features in forecast and issue moves........................................... 89
Table 18 Expression of necessity in statement of law move ...................................... 91
Table 19 Functional lexis in statement of law move .................................................. 93
Table 20 Kind of authority in authority move ............................................................ 95
Table 21 Features of textual organisation in entire text ............................................. 97
Table 22 Modal auxiliaries in opinion move .............................................................. 99
Table 23 Hedging devices in entire text ................................................................... 100
Table 24 Rhetorical and grammatical choice in evaluation clause........................... 101
Table 25 Rhetorical use of passive voice ................................................................. 104
Table 26 Lexical density in NS and NNS................................................................. 105
Table 27 Age of participants .................................................................................... 135
Table 28 Ethnic background of participants ............................................................. 135
Table 29 Gender of participants ............................................................................... 136
Table 30 Time spent in New Zealand by participants .............................................. 136
Table 31 English qualifications of participants ........................................................ 136
Table 32 Time spent at university by participants ..................................................... 137
Table 33 Percentage agreement for schematic structure analysis ............................ 146
Table 34 Schematic structure reliability test: primary results .................................. 146
Table 35 Schematic structure reliability test: secondary results ............................... 147
Table 36 Percentage difference in concordancing scores ......................................... 148
Table 37 Concordancing reliability test: primary results ......................................... 149
Table 38 Concordancing reliability test: secondary results ...................................... 151
Table 39 Lexical density reliability test scores......................................................... 153
vii
List of figures
Figure 1 A stratified model of language, register and genre ...................................... 11
Figure 2 Sample move analysis for genre of problem question ................................. 42
Figure 3 Functional moves in the problem question .................................................. 45
Figure 4 Structure of issues and sub-issues ................................................................ 47
Figure 5 Categories used for analysis of individual discourse moves ........................ 49
Figure 6 Relationship of type 1 and type 2 patterns ................................................... 50
Figure 7 Summary of discourse pattern types ............................................................ 50
Figure 8 Example of data entry method ..................................................................... 52
Figure 9 Bar graph of mean move score by language background ............................ 66
Figure 10 Bar graph of mean move score by student level ........................................ 66
Figure 11 Example of Opinion – Application of law to facts sequence ..................... 67
Figure 12 Example of year 2 response ....................................................................... 69
Figure 13 Plot of discourse score by question mark (NS year 1) ............................... 71
Figure 14 Plot of discourse score by question mark (NNS year 1) ............................ 72
Figure 15 Plot of discourse score by question mark (Year 1) .................................... 72
Figure 16 Plot of discourse score by question mark (Year 2) .................................... 73
Figure 17 Graph of mean pattern type score by language background ...................... 75
Figure 18 Graph of mean pattern type score by student level .................................... 76
viii
List of Appendices
Appendix A: Participant information ........................................................................ 129
1. Participant information for students ............................................................. 129
2. Participant information for legal professionals ............................................ 129
Appendix B: Consent form ........................................................................................ 131
Appendix C: Background information questionnaires .............................................. 132
1. Background information for students........................................................... 132
2. Background information for lawyers and legal academics .......................... 134
Appendix D: Participant background information .................................................... 135
Appendix E: Examination Questions ........................................................................ 138
1. Paper 610.101 Law, Commerce and Government ....................................... 138
Semester 1, 1998, question four ....................................................................... 138
2. Paper 610.202 Finance and Property Law ................................................... 138
Semester 1, 1998, question four ....................................................................... 138
Appendix F: Instructions and ranking sheet for lawyers ........................................... 140
1. Instructions for survey of lawyers' writing................................................... 140
2. Ranking sheet ............................................................................................... 141
Appendix G: Samples for ranking task...................................................................... 142
Appendix H: Issues for analysis ................................................................................ 145
Appendix I: Reliability test results ............................................................................ 146
1. Intra-rater test results for study of schematic structure ................................ 146
2. Intra-rater test results for study of functional lexical phrases ...................... 148
Appendix J: Results to concordancing analysis. ....................................................... 154
ix
List of terms and abbreviations
English for Academic Purposes EAP

English for Academic Legal Purposes EALP
English for Specific Purposes ESP
Non-native speaker NNS
Native speaker NS
High scorer HS
Low scorer LS
Year 1 Y1
Year 2 Y2
x
1 Introduction
There is, at present, considerable concern for the standard of language use in New Zealand
universities. A report of a University of Auckland Sub-Committee of Deans Committee
summarises the need for research into the English language performance of students at the
University of Auckland in the following terms:
The sub-committee found depressing evidence that a considerable number of NESB1

(mainly Permanent Resident) students have not, as yet, acquired English language
skills to a ‘threshold’ stage sufficient to enable them to cope with studies at an
academic level. About the English language competence of native speakers of English
(mostly New Zealand-born and educated) the evidence for declining standards is
largely anecdotal, though critical comment is widespread amongst teaching staff and
should not be dismissed because it is anecdotal. There is an urgent need for reliable
data about the English language background and performance at University of all
students.
(University of Auckland Sub-Committee of Deans Committee, 1995)
Thus, the report calls for research into the English language needs of students at the university.
This thesis responds to that call by considering the needs of both native speaker (NS) and non-
native speaker (NNS) students at the University of Auckland.
A considerable body of literature into the linguistic, cultural and academic needs of non-native
speakers has been developed in the field of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). A range of
language skills are required at university, including a variety of listening, speaking, reading and
writing skills. In their writing assignments, students at university must learn to organise their
writing according to a range of new genres or structures, such as the ‘lab report’ or ‘expository
essay’. In addition, they must learn a new register or style of English, which is more formal and
academic than other varieties. The special role of such genres and registers is now recognised as
1Non English-Speaking Background

Chapter 1: Introduction
an essential part of courses in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) and English for Academic
Purposes (EAP). According to Dudley-Evans and St. John:
We also believe that language should be included as a defining feature of ESP. While
the specified needs arising from needs analysis relate to activities that students need to
carry out (rather than language), a key assumption of ESP is that these activities
generate and depend on registers, genres and associated language that students need to
be able to manipulate in order to carry out the activity.
(Dudley-Evans and St. John 1998: 4)
Much work in EAP has gone into the identification and description of genres and registers
required in the university context (e.g. Hopkins and Dudley Evans 1988; Swales 1990). It is
assumed that such descriptions will address the needs of students in the university environment.
However, there is relatively little research into student difficulties with these text types.
Furthermore, few studies have attempted to assess the importance of genre and register in terms of
academic success or grade awarded.
This thesis compares the performance of NSs to NNSs and examines the role of appropriate
language (i.e. genre and register) in academic success. A textual study of genre and register in the
examination writing of a number of Commercial Law students is carried out. The study proceeds
at two different levels of inquiry: schematic structure and grammar and lexis. The needs of NSs
and NNSs are assessed in light of the text analysis. In addition, the influence of appropriate
language on grade awarded is considered and the variation between subjects of different
experience with the genre is gauged.
In chapter 2, the linguistic theory relating to genre, register and appropriate language use is
summarised. This includes a consideration of theoretical frameworks and how those frameworks
are applied to ESP. This is followed by a specific examination of language appropriate to English
for Academic Legal Purposes (EALP), which is the language field under investigation in this
thesis. It is argued that the linguistic features and discourse patterns described provide important
input to courses in EALP.
-2-
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 3 details the background and methodology used in the study. The study is broken into
three distinct parts. Firstly, in order to assess the use of legal genres in examination questions, a
baseline study involving a small number of legal professionals was conducted. Secondly, student
needs were considered by an analysis of discourse-level, schematic structures in student writing.
Finally, in order to examine student difficulties at a lower level, a study of lexico-grammatical
features was carried out. The method for each of these studies is considered in turn.
The results of the studies are presented in chapters 4, 5 and 6. In chapter 7 these results are
discussed and implications for teaching and further research are considered.
-3-
2 Literature Review
OVERVIEW
This chapter considers the question of what language is appropriate in academic legal writing. Part
one is a general discussion which may be applied to the field of ESP as a whole. It concerns
frameworks for the analysis of language in context, and the application of these frameworks to
ESP. Part two is concerned with the more detailed question of what language is appropriate in the
academic legal context: i.e. the context of the study conducted for this thesis. It is divided into
three sections: legal genres and schematic structure, textual organisation, and lexico-grammatical
features.
PART ONE:
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS OF LANGUAGE AND CONTEXT
The notion that language and context are interrelated can be traced back to Malinowski (1923). A
number of different taxonomies have been proposed to describe both aspects of situation and
linguistic variation in context (e.g. Firth 1957; Hymes 1964; Halliday 1978; Crystal and Davy
1969; Biber 1994). Research in this area has been conducted from a number of different
perspectives, including ‘linguistics, anthropology, composition research, folklore, rhetoric,
education, sociology, literature and communication’ (Atkinson and Biber 1994: 351). Much of this
literature is relevant to ESP, as it presents useful analyses of language in a variety of different
contexts.
This review is limited to two different approaches to language in context: that of M.A.K. Halliday
(e.g. 1978) and that of John Swales (e.g. 1990). Both of these approaches have had considerable
influence and application in practical fields. Swales’ approach has been applied in various areas of
ESP, and Halliday’s approach has been used in curriculum design for Australian schools (see
Chapter 2: Literature review
Cope et al. 1993). The following section considers Halliday’s theory of register, and this is
followed by a discussion of Swales’ theory of genre.
2.1 REGISTER THEORY
Context of situation
Halliday identifies with Malinowski and Firth in attempting to describe the notion of context of
situation. According to Halliday, context of situation can be interpreted using a conceptual
framework, consisting of the notions of field, tenor and mode (Halliday 1978; Halliday and Hasan
1989). The following definition of these concepts is provided:
1. The FIELD OF DISCOURSE refers to what is happening, to the nature of the social
action that is taking place: what is it that the participants are engaged in, in which the
language figures as some essential component?
2. The TENOR OF DISCOURSE refers to who is taking part, to the nature of the
participants, their statuses and roles: what kind of role relationships obtain among the
participants, including permanent and temporary relationships of one kind or another,
both the types of speech role that they are taking on in the dialogue and the whole
cluster of socially significant relationships in which they are involved?
3. The MODE OF DISCOURSE refers to what part the language is playing, what it is
that the participants are expecting the language to do for them in that situation: the
symbolic organisation of the text, the status that it has, and its function in the context,
including the channel (is it spoken or written or some combination of the two?) and
also the rhetorical mode, which is being achieved in the text in terms of such
categories as persuasive, expository, didactic, and the like.
(Halliday and Hasan 1989: 12)
As an example of the application of these three contextual variables, consider the following text:
(2.1) Round the bend for home. It’s In the Swing in the inside, Brusano’s at the front,
Penelope Pitstop’s out to bomb it. A bit through the back behind them is Scoots,
Cliftenbell can’t get through, and Susan May down the outside, Brusano. Ah, here it is,
Penelope Pitstop goes up on the outside, Susan May’s arriving, Penelope’s home!
Radio I, 18 February, 1999
The field here involves the communication of technical information, specifically the description of
a horse race. The tenor can be described as one active participant (the commentator) addressing a
-5-
collective group (the listeners). The mode is spoken monologue, with particular time-constraints,
and the rhetorical function is expository or descriptive. Furthermore, in this situation, the text is
organised to convey accurate information as quickly and efficiently as possible.
Halliday contends that any situation can be interpreted in light of these three variables. The system
is sometimes criticised for a lack of specificity, as the extent of the various variables is not entirely
clear. In addition, it attempts to take institutional and social factors into account and these
concepts can be difficult to measure. However, it is suggested that the system of field, tenor and
mode provides a useful conceptual framework within which to consider aspects of context.
A definition of register
The concept of register links language to situation. According to Halliday, register is defined as ‘a
configuration of meanings that are typically associated with a particular situational configuration
of field, mode and tenor.’ (Halliday and Hasan 1989: 38) Register differs from context of situation
in the sense that it is a semantic concept. It therefore includes the lexico-grammatical and
phonological features that typically realise certain situations. In addition, Halliday notes that
certain registers have ‘indexical’ features, such that we are able to recognise the situation by the
nature of the language in use. An example of such an indexical feature is the phrase ‘Once upon a
time’ which signals the beginning of a traditional tale (Halliday and Hasan 1989: 39). It should be
noted however, that a register is usually realised by a particular co-occurrence of lexico-
grammatical features, and the mere presence of one of these features is often insufficient to signal
the register.
Field, Tenor, Mode and Systemic Functional Grammar
An important part of Halliday’s theory is the linking of particular language features to context,
through the notion of register and the theory of systemic functional grammar. The contextual
variables field, tenor and mode are all realised by different systems or functions in the grammar of
the language. Halliday notes that:
-6-
[T]he field is expressed through the experiential function in the semantics... [T]he
tenor is expressed through the interpersonal function in the semantics... The mode is
expressed through the textual function in the semantics.
(Halliday and Hasan 1989: 25)
Furthermore, each of these functions is related to particular lexico-grammatical systems (Halliday
1994). This means that if a situation is conceived of in terms of field, tenor and mode, then
predictions about the typical lexico-grammatical structure of language in that situation can be
made. In this way, the context of situation can be interpreted in terms of linguistic features.
Thus, in the horse racing example above, the field will probably be realised through a high
number of racing technical terms and material verbs (verbs of doing, happening and creating).
According to our description of the mode, there is little interpersonal interaction. As a result, one
would predict the use of straight declaratives and little modality. Finally, the use of the spoken
mode will probably be realised through a high number of simple clauses, explicit conjunction,
active voice and so on. By relating the description of context to functional systems of grammar,
the context of situation can be characterised in terms of lexico-grammatical features.
Summary
Register theory in the systemic functional tradition makes use of the concepts of context of
situation and register to link situation to language use. Context of situation is described using the
contextual variables of field, tenor and mode. These correspond to the semantic notions of
experiential, interpersonal and textual functions which can in turn be interpreted in terms of
functional grammar. Some aspects of the theory do pose problems. In particular, the definition of
field, tenor and mode is very broad and this might lead to difficulties in working the theory.
However, for applied purposes, the framework provides a powerful tool in assessing language use
in context. It therefore has potential to be employed in target language analysis for ESP.
-7-
2.2 GENRE THEORY
An alternative concept relating language and context is the concept of genre. Genre theory has
blossomed in a number of related fields including literary theory (e.g. Bakhtin 1986, writing 1952-
1953), rhetoric (e.g. Berkenkotter and Huckin 1995; Freedman and Medway 1994a; 1994b; Miller
1984), linguistics (e.g. Martin 1992; Hasan in Halliday and Hasan 1989; Ventola 1987; Couture
1986) and English for Specific Purposes (e.g. Dudley-Evans 1994; Bhatia 1993; Swales 1990).
Because this concept has developed in so many different disciplines, it is necessary to consider a
number of different traditions to gain a proper understanding of it. For language teaching
purposes, the three most important traditions in genre theory are probably North American New
Rhetoric, ESP, and Australian systemic functional linguistics (Hyon 1996). In this section, the
principal features of genre are summarised with reference to these three different fields.
A preliminary definition of genre
The concept of genre is grounded in social theories of language. One scholar who has had a
considerable influence on genre theory is M. M. Bakhtin. His notion of ‘speech genre’ is
particularly relevant:
All the diverse areas of human activity involve the use of language. Quite
understandably, the nature of forms of this use are just as diverse as are the areas of
human activity ... Language is realised in the form of individual concrete texts (oral
and written) by participants in the various areas of human activity. The texts reflect the
specific conditions and goals of each such area not only through their content
(thematic) and linguistic style, that is the selection of the lexical, phraseological, and
grammatical resources of the language, but above all through their compositional
structure. All of these aspects - thematic content, style, and compositional structure -
are inseparably linked to the whole of the text and are equally determined by the
specific nature of the particular sphere of communication. Each separate text is
individual, of course, but each sphere in which language is used developed its own
relatively stable types of these texts. These we may call speech genres.
(Bakhtin 1986: 60, writing in 1952-1953; the term text has been substituted for
utterance throughout. Cited in Martin 1992.)
The concept of language as related to spheres of human activity is an important one, as it
reinforces the notion of a link between language and context. The suggestion is that specific
-8-
linguistic forms have evolved in response to recurrent social situations or contexts (see also Miller
1984). These forms are employed because they perform a necessary function in the given
situation. Thus, genre refers to both the linguistic form and the rhetorical action in context.
According to Martin, genres are ‘staged, goal-oriented, social processes’ (Martin in Halliday and
Martin 1993: 36). The concept of genre incorporates the notions of form on the one hand, and
purposeful action on the other.
Genre theory stresses the notions of purposeful rhetorical action in a recurring social context. The
following sections show how this concept has been developed in the various fields of New
Rhetoric, systemic functional linguistics and ESP.
Genre and New Rhetoric
The approach to genre taken by scholars in New Rhetoric studies gives priority to the
consideration of social action. Research conducted in this area tends to be directed at the
institutional context of genres and the role of particular genres in that context. This has resulted in
a number of detailed, ethnographic descriptions of writing context (e.g. Herrington 1985). The
formal recognition and classification of genres is seen as of secondary importance only, as formal
features are little more than the ‘traces’ of a genre. This approach is summed up by Devitt:
Once our attention shifts to the origin of genres, it also shifts away from their formal
features ... Genre entails purposes, participants, and themes, so understanding a genre
entails understanding a rhetorical and semiotic situation and a social context.
(Devitt 1993: 575-576)
Whilst few would want to disagree with the notion that the social context should be investigated
as fully as possible, this aspect is arguably overemphasised in this research. The New Rhetoric
studies are not concerned with the linguistic realisation of genres, and as a result, this research has
less direct application to language teaching.
-9-
Genre and systemic functional linguistics
A more formal approach to genre is that taken by adherents to systemic functional linguistic
theory. The interest here is in defining genres in terms of both schematic structure and
grammatical form. A number of different formal systems have been elaborated (e.g. Hasan in
Halliday and Hasan 1989; Ventola 1987).
Hasan’s (Halliday and Hasan: 1989) notion of generic structural potential attempts to account for
the larger formal properties of genres. Hasan reasons that our ability to identify texts as examples
of a genre depends on the recognition of certain typical formal elements in those texts. With
regard to these formal elements, Hasan attempts to determine:
1. What elements must occur;

2. What elements can occur;
3. Where must they occur;
4. Where can they occur;
5. How often can they occur.
(Hasan in Halliday and Hasan 1989: 56)
Hasan develops a notation to convey the generic structural potential. This summarises information
regarding the obligatory elements, the optional elements, the sequencing and the possibility of
iteration (for a summary see Halliday and Hasan 1989: 52-69). According to Hasan, the generic
structural potential describes all possible actualisations of texts in the genre under description.
Furthermore, Hasan asserts that elements of text structure, sequencing and so on, can be predicted
from the context of situation (Hasan in Halliday and Hasan 1989: 56).
There is some disagreement over the role of genre in systemic functional linguistics. A number of
different positions can be made out. The view preferred by Halliday and Hasan, alluded to above,
is that generic structure is an aspect of register (Halliday and Hasan 1989). According to this view,
aspects of the situation determine what text structure is appropriate. The register variable of field
accounts for content, and the register variable of mode accounts for the notion of purpose in the
text.
- 10 -
An alternative view is put forward by J. R. Martin (e.g. 1984; 1992; 1993). Martin suggests a
‘stratified’ model of language which views genre and register as different semiotic communication
planes. According to this model, genre is the communication plane that relates to the social
context or context of culture (see Malinowski 1923). On the other hand, register is the
communication plane that relates to context of situation. Genre is seen as a form of social
communication which is expressed through register. Register is in turn realised by the lexico-
grammatical and phonological features of language. This relationship can be illustrated as follows:
Figure 1 A stratified model of language, register and genre
Genre
Register
Language
Adapted from Martin (1993: 158)
Following this view, the underlying notion is genre. As well as specifying appropriate schematic
structure, the genre acts to constrain possible register choices of field, tenor and mode.
Martin contends that this model has a number of theoretical advantages over Halliday’s model of
register and context of situation (Martin 1992: 505-508). In addition, he notes that it ‘has proven
very effective in Australian educational linguistics as far as giving teachers an accessible handle
on contextual considerations is concerned’ (Martin in Halliday and Martin 1993: 36). The
approach does have the advantage of providing a clear interface between the notions of genre and
register. However, this remains controversial, and it is not clear whether the extra level of analysis
will prove to be theoretically tenable.
- 11 -
For the purposes of this thesis, it is sufficient to observe that both Halliday and Hasan’s and
Martin’s approach link schematic structure to context. According to systemic functional
linguistics, context plays a role in both grammatical form and schematic structure.
Genre and ESP
The approach to genre in ESP is slightly different again. The following extract from Swales’ 15-
line definition of genre gives some idea of the more prominent concepts in ESP genre theory:
A genre comprises a class of communicative events, the members of which share some
set of communicative purposes. These purposes are recognised by the expert members
of the parent discourse community and thereby constitute the rationale for the genre.
This rationale shapes the schematic structure of the discourse and influences and
constrains choice of content and style.
(Swales 1990: 58)
Perhaps the most distinctive aspect of this definition is the notion of a ‘parent discourse
community’. Amongst other things, a discourse community is recognised by its shared set of
common public goals and mechanisms of intercommunication between members. According to
Swales, genres are created to further the communicative aims of the members of the discourse
community. This builds on Miller’s (1984) conception of genre as a response to recurrent social
situations, and on Martin’s (Halliday and Martin 1993) definition of genre as staged, goal-oriented
social processes.
Swales (1990: 24-27) offers six criteria to characterise the notion of discourse community.
However, the concept remains a slippery one, as Swales readily admits (1990: 32). Swales’
definition is somewhat utopian and leaves a number of questions unanswered. For example, at
what point does a group of people with similar aims become a discourse community? To what
extent must there be a common consensus about goals and purposes in a discourse community?
While Swales’ criteria are capable of identifying prototypical examples of discourse communities,
they do not seem to be able to distinguish between borderline cases. As the notion of discourse
community is central to Swales’ conceptualisation of genre, this poses some theoretical problems.
- 12 -
In characterising genre, Swales also makes reference to the notion of communicative purpose.
Swales (1990: 46) stresses that communicative purpose, not form, is the primary criterion in
defining genre. However, form does play a role. The rationale for the genre, established by the
communicative purpose, constrains the form in terms of schematic structure, lexical and syntactic
choice (Swales 1990: 53). This explanation of genre establishes a link between context and form,
with the criterion of communicative purpose acting as the primary link between the two.
In spite of the importance of social context in this definition, the main emphasis of ESP text
analyses has been on the formal characteristics of genres (Hyon 1996). Unlike the New Rhetoric
studies described above, there is less involvement in the study of the social function of texts.2
Genre analysis in ESP links the analysis of form to the notion of communicative purpose.
Dudley-Evans summarises the goals of genre analysis in ESP as exploring the ‘style of
presentation of content, the order of presentation of that content and all the myriad rhetorical
factors that affect the plausibility for readers of the argument presented’ (1994: 219). The analysis
is frequently concerned with the identification and sequencing of discourse elements called
‘moves’. However, the analysis may also focus on lexico-grammatical features (Dudley-Evans
1994; Bhatia 1993; Swales 1990). The main difference between such genre analysis studies and
studies of register, it is claimed, is the focus on communicative purpose. Through the notion of
communicative purpose, practitioners of genre analysis relate features of linguistic form to the
surrounding social context.
Summary
All the definitions of genre reviewed here emphasise the idea of purposeful action in a social
context. Research into genre has focused both on the role of particular genres in the social context
and on the formal realisation of generic structures. In systemic functional theory, there is some
disagreement as to the precise role of genre in a theory of language. However, in ESP, formal
2The number of context studies in ESP may be on the rise however. See Belcher and Braine (1995) for a
volume dedicated to the study of genre and context.
- 13 -
studies in genre analysis serve to link linguistic form with social context, through the notion of
communicative purpose. Such analysis may be carried out at a number of different levels
including the levels of schematic structure, lexis and grammar. The concept of genre thus
formulated relates language to context at all levels of language use. As such, it would appear to be
highly relevant to courses in ESP, particularly for the analysis of language in the target situation.
2.3 COMPETING THEORIES: REGISTER AND GENRE
Thus far, the analysis has concentrated on the separate notions of register and genre. We have seen
that both approaches are concerned with the contextual analysis of form, where form is defined as
the schematic structures, lexis and grammar of the language. However, influential treatments of
genre analysis have tended to view register and genre theory as competing frameworks (see
Swales 1990; Bhatia 1993). In this section the two approaches are contrasted and some commonly
cited points of difference are discussed.
Surface features and communicative purpose
It is sometimes claimed that register studies are limited to studies of the frequency of syntactic
properties of language varieties. The following passage from Bhatia illustrates this point:
[S]uch studies [of syntactic properties of different varieties of English] tell us very
little about the restricted values these elements of syntax realise in specific varieties. In
fact, they tell us nothing whatsoever about the aspects of the variety these syntactic
elements textualise or to what purpose such features are markedly present or absent in
a particular variety. The findings remain severely constrained by their emphasis on
surface features and do not provide adequate insights about the way information is
structured in a particular variety. However perceptive these observations may be, they
fall some way short of offering an explanation of why a particular variety takes the
form that it does, and it is reasonable to suppose that specialised language courses will
be more effective for being informed by insights into the rationale underlying selection
and distribution of surface linguistic features.
(Bhatia 1993: 6. My emphasis CH)
Similarly, both Swales (1990: 2-3) and Widdowson (1979: 55-56) suggest that the analysis of
lexico-grammatical features is less meaningful than the analysis of discourse. A related claim is
- 14 -
that genre is distinguished from register by its focus on communicative purpose (Dudley-Evans
1994: 219). The general view is that register is a surface phenomenon providing mere
grammatical description, while higher level discourse analyses provide more meaningful
explanation.
While early register studies (e.g. Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens 1964) focused on identifying
features of scientific language, register studies in the systemic functional tradition have long since
moved on to the purposeful explanation of such features (e.g. Halliday and Martin 1993). This
involves a full functional analysis of language, which by definition includes reference to deep
concepts of discourse community, rhetorical purpose and so forth. In addition, the contextual
variables of field, tenor and mode also account for features of physical situation, which explain
many of the linguistic properties of on-line, unfolding text. A systemic functional analysis of
register explains language use by reference to all aspects of context accounted for in genre theory,
and more.
While it is true that communicative purpose occupies a central position in genre analysis, it does
not follow that this criterion is neglected in register studies. As we have seen, the framework of
field, tenor and mode explicitly includes the notion of purpose (see 2.2 above, page 10).
Domain of inquiry
Register studies are often criticised for their breadth of inquiry. An extract from Swales serves to
illustrate this point:
Even if there remains some shorthand convenience attached to retaining registral

labels such as scientific, medical, legal or even newspaper English, in reality such
terms can now be seen to be systematically misleading. They overprivilege a
homogeneity of content at the expense of variation in communicative purpose,
addresser-addressee relationships and genre conventions.
(Swales 1990: 3)
Thus, Swales criticises studies of register for being too broad. In fact, the concept of register can
vary in delicacy. For example, the register of academic lecture includes the register of academic
- 15 -
lecture in science, which in turn includes the register of academic lecture in marine biology (this
point is made in Halliday 1978: 110; Halliday, McIntosh and Strevens 1964: 93; both cited in
Conway 1997). The breadth of register depends on the purpose of the analysis.
For language teaching purposes, it is obviously desirable to take a broad approach to register or
genre where possible. This provides linguistic data that can be applied in a range of teaching
situations. However, the consequences of a broad approach are that the analysis itself must be
concerned with general features and general explanations. For example, instead of focusing on the
purposes of a particular sub-group such as astrophysicists (see Tarone et al. 1981), the analyst
must focus on purposes common to a group such as scientists in general. In spite of assertions to
the contrary, such common purposes do exist. A good example of this is the use of nominal style
in scientific English for textual and ideational purposes (Halliday and Martin 1993). It is argued
that if the claims of register studies are considered on their individual merits, they will be found to
provide valuable insights into the nature of specialised varieties of English.
2.4 THE APPLICATION OF GENRE AND REGISTER TO ESP
The differences in orientation discussed above have led to the rejection of findings in register
analysis as not applicable to ESP. However, the theoretical approaches of genre analysis and
register analysis bear marked similarities.3 In addition, some of the differences that are frequently
referred to appear to be less important than is commonly maintained.
For the practical purposes of ESP, it is necessary to understand both what language occurs in the
target environment and how and why it is used. A communicative approach to ESP requires an
understanding of both form and function in the target environment .
To this it may be added that form is not limited to grammar and lexis. Genre theory identifies,
describes and explains conventional schematic structures that occur in settings of interest to ESP.
3Biber seems to suggest that the difference between these two approaches is primarily one of terminology:
‘Swales (1990) differs from proponents of the systemic-functional tradition in preferring the term genre to
register, and in focusing on purpose alone as the central parameter distinguishing among genres’ (1994: 52).
- 16 -
The target language in ESP needs to be understood both in terms of these schematic structures and
in terms of their lexico-grammatical realisation.
Both genre and register are concerned with the description and explanation of form-function
correlations. To the extent that genre emphasises schematic structures, it provides a useful
overview of particular text types. Similarly, to the extent that register studies focus on the link
between context and lexico-grammatical features, they provide useful information regarding the
function of such features in context.
At a theoretical level, it may be possible to reconcile the concepts of register and genre in a model
similar to that proposed by J.R. Martin (see figure 1). Whether this is possible or not, it would
seem that in practical terms there is a role for both genre and register in target language analysis.
Both frameworks contribute to our understanding of the relationship between linguistic form and
context.
PART TWO: TARGET LANGUAGE FOR EALP
By applying principles of genre and register, it is possible to predict what kind of language is
expected in the academic legal context. Firstly, it is necessary to consider what particular
schematic structures apply in the given context. Within this framework we need to know how
these structures are realised and more generally, what kind of grammar is likely to occur in the
given context.
Applying a broad analysis to the academic legal register, the following interpretation is suggested.
The field can be described as writing for academic purposes realised through the use of technical
vocabulary on the one hand, and explicit logical, deductive language on the other. The tenor is
formal, and as a result the language employed should on the whole be impersonal, probably
making use of nominalisation and passivisation to maintain a certain distance between reader and
writer. Where the writer expresses opinions these will usually be extensively hedged or modalised.
The mode is written academic discourse, so a formal written variety of language is appropriate.
- 17 -
This again suggests a highly nominal style. In addition, academic language in general exhibits a
high level of textual organisation, which is realised through the use of nominalisation, explicit
conjunction and other cohesive devices such as reference, ellipsis, substitution and lexical
cohesion.
The following section reviews some aspects of language important to the academic register,
beginning with schematic structure and then considering textual organisation followed by the
lexico-grammatical features of grammatical metaphor and hedging. Some of the linguistic
description given here is of obvious relevance to other subjects in EAP and some of it may even
be relevant to courses in general English. This does nothing to reduce its particular importance to
EALP.4
2.5 LEGAL GENRES AND SCHEMATIC STRUCTURE
Most of the literature on legal discourse concentrates on professional and juridical language and
there are few studies of legal pedagogical genres (Bhatia 1987). According to Howe (1990: 217)
the two main tasks for law students are essay writing and the answering of problem questions. In
this section a brief account of the genre of problem question, including the rationale and a
summary of moves, is sketched. A more detailed consideration of the genre, as encountered in the
current study, is found in chapter 3.
Background to the genre of problem question
The problem question is used both to assess a student’s knowledge of the law, and as a teaching
tool to demonstrate the application of the law in concrete fact situations. Each problem question
consists of a fact situation giving rise to a legal problem. The student is asked to comment on the
fact situation, taking into account his or her knowledge of the law. This involves identifying the
legal issues in the fact situation, giving an account of the relevant law, and demonstrating how the
4In the past, it has been suggested that there is no need for special purposes courses, because the special
language taught is derived from ‘general English’ (e.g. Crombie and Rika-Heke 1991, Paltridgre 1993). This
bizarre argument ignores the benefits of focusing on particular target forms that play a particular rhetorical
role in the target situation. As mentioned in the introduction (chapter 1), the case for recognising special
genres and registers now appears to have widespread support.
- 18 -
law applies to the fact situation. The basic rationale is to develop the student’s knowledge of the
law by considering its application in concrete fact situations.
Functional moves in the genre of problem question
Howe (1990: 231) identifies a total of eight different functional moves for the problem question in
law. The first two are performed by the instructor, and the remaining six are performed by the
student. The moves are:
1. Situation
2. Instruction
3. Forecast
4. Issue
5. Statement of law
6. Authority
7. Application of law to facts
8. Opinion
(Howe 1990)5
The first two moves, situation and instruction, explain the facts to the student and tell the student
what to do. The student responds with moves 3 to 8. The first two student moves, forecast and
issue, are both introductory moves which vary slightly in scope. The key moves in the student’s
response are the statement of law, authority and application of law to facts, where the student
provides an explicit description of the law and explains how it applies to the fact situation. The
student’s response typically ends with an evaluation of the situation in the form of an opinion
move.
The schematic structure identified by Howe provides useful insights into the organisation of legal
discourse and an understanding of the genre is essential to both teachers of EALP and their
students. Much of this thesis is concerned with the elaboration of the framework provided by
5Howe refers to move 7 as application of the facts. My conversations with lawyers suggest that it is the law
which is applied to the facts in this move. Consequently, this move will be referred to as application of law
to facts (or simply facts for short) in this thesis.
- 19 -
Howe, including the lexical realisation of moves, sequencing, the identification of optional and
obligatory moves and so forth (see chapters 3, 4, 5, 6).
2.6 GENERAL TEXTUAL ORGANISATION
As well as the identification of conventional text types and their schematic structure, a more
general approach to discourse analysis can also be useful. Eugene Winter (1977; 1994) and
Michael Hoey (1983; 1994) provide a broad analysis of patterns and clause relations in text, and
show how discourse organisation can be signalled at the lexical level. In this section, we consider
the notions of text patterns, clause relations and lexical signalling.
Text patterns
Winter (1994) and Hoey (1994; 1983) describe a number of commonly occurring patterns in text.
As suggested, the patterns identified differ from the schematic structures described in genre
analysis in two ways. Firstly, the patterns are not explicitly conventional structures and may be
found in a variety of genres. Secondly, the scope of the patterning varies much more than in genre
analysis. The patterns identified here may occur over an extract of text as short as a few sentences,
or as long as an entire chapter or more.
The patterns described include problem-solution (Hoey 1994; 1983), hypothetical-real (Winter
1994) and general-particular (Winter 1994; Hoey 1983). An example of the problem-solution
pattern, with discourse elements labelled, is provided below:
(2.2) I was on sentry duty. Situation

I saw the enemy approaching. Problem
I opened fire. Response
I beat off the enemy attack. Evaluation
(From Hoey 1983: 35)
This pattern is frequently found in expository texts and has therefore attracted a great deal of
attention in EAP. It is also of relevance to the essay-writing task in EALP. Raising students’
awareness of discourse structures of this kind may assist them in developing general strategies for
textual organisation. In addition, students can be shown how to explicitly signal such text patterns
- 20 -
(see below). Naturally, the same approach can be applied to conventional generic structures, such
as the problem question discussed above.
Clause relations
A second kind of textual organisation is the clause relation. The concept of clause relation is
defined as follows:
A clause relation is the cognitive process whereby we interpret the meaning of a

sentence or group of sentences in the light of its adjoining sentence or group of
sentences.
(Winter 1977: 5)
Thus, a clause relation arises when two clauses or groups of clauses are interpreted together and
this interpretation adds some element of meaning. An example of this is provided below:
(2.3) Joe was desperate. Everything he had tried had failed miserably.
(From McCarthy and Carter 1994: 54)
In this example, the second sentence is interpreted as the cause of the first. Meaningful
connections arise between the clauses when they are interpreted together. This meaning is not
present if the clauses are interpreted independently. It is the semantic connection between clauses
that is referred to as a clause relation.
Clause relations are divided into two principal kinds: matching relations and logical sequence
relations (Winter 1977; 1994). The reader is referred to Hoey (1983: 19-21) for a brief summary
of the categories of clause relations.
Like the text patterns described above, clause relations are not limited to relations between single
clauses, but can also occur between longer stretches of text.
- 21 -
Lexical signalling of clause relations
Subordinators and sentence connectors
It is not absolutely necessary for clause relations to be signalled.6 Consider the following example:
(2.4) He was frugal and deeply religious; she was spendthrift and frankly worldly in all
things.
(From Winter 1977: 30)
In this example, the simple juxtaposition of the clauses and the repetitive grammar, are sufficient
to make the relation of comparison clear.7 It would however, be possible to make the relation
explicit. This is illustrated in the following examples:
(2.5) Whereas he was frugal and deeply religious, she was spendthrift and frankly
worldly in all things.
(2.6) He was frugal and deeply religious; she, however, was spendthrift and frankly
worldly in all things.
(Both From Winter 1977: 31)
In example 2.5, the relation is signalled by the subordinator whereas. This makes explicit the
notion of difference. Winter refers to such subordinators used to signal clause relations as
Vocabulary 1. Other examples include: after, because, in spite of, instead of, unless, until (see
Winter 1977: 14 for a more complete list).
In example 2.6, the same relation is signalled by the sentence connector however. Winter terms
these sentence connectors Vocabulary 2. Other examples are: as a result, in addition, for example,
then, nevertheless (Winter 1977: 16). The difference between Vocabulary 1 and Vocabulary 2 is
based entirely on form.
6Grice’s (e.g. 1975, 1978) maxim of relevance suggests that readers or listeners make the connections
between clauses themselves. The addressee assumes that the unfolding discourse is normally related to what
has come before, and interprets it accordingly.
7Whether such implicit relations should be recognised in text analysis is a matter of some difference. Winter
(1977: 30) clearly recognises the relation as existing independent of signalling lexis. Whilst recognising that
such implicit relations can be found in text, Halliday cautions that ‘the attempt to include [implicit relations]
in the analysis leads to a great deal of indeterminacy, both as regards whether a conjunctive relation is
present or not and as regards which particular relation it is.’ (Halliday 1994: 327) Thus, the application of
the theory in text analysis may give rise to some difficulties.
- 22 -
The use of subordinators and sentence connectors (also known as sentence adjuncts and sentence
conjunctions) is probably the most obvious way of signalling clause relations. Such closed-set
functional lexis has been considered in other accounts of cohesion as well, notably Halliday and
Hasan (1976), who treat such devices under the heading of conjunction.8
Other lexical signalling of clause relations
Another way of signalling the clause relation in example 2.4, is suggested below:
(2.7) They differed radically in their approaches towards life. He was frugal and
deeply religious; she was spendthrift and frankly worldly in all things.
Here, the notion of difference is made explicit by the lexical item differed in the first sentence.
Winter refers to such lexical items, which perform a similar function to the subordinators and
sentence connectors, as Vocabulary 3. Other examples include: cause, consequence, distinction,
reason, same, subsequent (Winter 1977: 20).
These items share many of the features of open-set lexis. They are drawn from the set of nouns,
verbs and adjectives in the language and function as subject, predicate, object or complement in
the clause. They can be modified in the same way as other open-set lexis. However, the
Vocabulary 3 items duplicate the organising function of the subordinators and sentence
connectors. As illustrated by examples 2.5, 2.6 and 2.7, they often paraphrase Vocabulary 1 and
Vocabulary 2 items. Like the closed-set items, they serve to explicitly identify the clause relation.
Text patterns and lexical signalling
In addition to signalling clause relations, Vocabulary 3 items may also signal the organisation of
longer passages. Winter refers to some Vocabulary 3 items as ‘items of the meta-structure’
(Winter 1977: 19). ‘Meta-structure’ here refers to larger patterns in text, such as those described
8It should be noted that Winter’s (1977) Vocabulary 1 and Vocabulary 2 extends further than Halliday and
Hasan’s (1976) notion of conjunction. For example, in his category of Vocabulary 1 Winter lists all
subordinators, and this includes such forms as relative pronouns, which are not found in Halliday and
Hasan’s category of conjunction.
- 23 -
under the heading ‘text patterns’ above. The function of such Vocabulary 3 items is to explicitly
identify elements of the underlying discourse structure.
An example of this can be given by considering the problem-solution text pattern. Winter suggests
the following Vocabulary 3 items as ‘items of the metastructure’: situation, problem, solution,
observation and evaluation (Winter 1977: 19). Thus, the use of the word problem explicitly
signals the problem element of the text-structure and so on.
There does not seem to be any reason why such signalling should be limited to the problem-
solution text pattern. It should be possible for any text pattern to be signalled in this way, provided
appropriate vocabulary exists to describe the elements of the pattern in question.
Lexical signalling and cohesion
The final characteristic of Vocabulary 3 is its cohesive function. Winter notes that ‘these items
become signposts or anticipators for the next part of their paragraphs because their abstract
notions will have to be lexically realised by compatible particulars if there have been no
particulars of this kind in the preceding context’ (1977: 9; emphasis in original). These items are
similar to pronouns in the sense that it is not clear what they are referring to until it is mentioned
in the text. This is demonstrated in the following example:
(2.8) One condition for the success of the course is obvious. If the student likes the
course, he will follow it with enthusiasm.
The full meaning of condition depends upon the lexical realisation in the following clause. By
anticipating or repeating information, Vocabulary 3 items establish links between clauses and this
assists in textual cohesion.
Some Vocabulary 3 items are defined by this function alone. Winter refers to them as the
anaphoric connectors of the clause (Winter 1977: 19-20). He identifies the following six lexical
- 24 -
items as commonly referring back to elements of the preceding clause: action, event, do, happen,
move, thing. An example of this is provided below:
(2.9) The rifle clubs have banned the use of automatic and semi-automatic weapons.
The move follows the police raids.
(BBC Radio Commentator, 17 June 1967; cited in Winter 1977: 10)
Summary
Winter and Hoey describe a number of patterns and relations that commonly occur in a variety of
genres. Furthermore, Winter identifies a range of language that functions to signal the relations
between clauses and the schematic structure of text. Insofar as such language contributes to the
explicit, logical organisation of text, it performs an important function in all varieties of academic
writing. It seems desirable to make students aware of the forms and functions described here.
2.7 LEXICO-GRAMMATICAL FEATURES
Grammatical metaphor
Formal written text is characterised both by the grammatical phenomenon of nominalisation
(Biber 1988) and also by the presence of a large proportion of nouns (Wells 1960; Brown and
Fraser 1979; cited in Biber 1988). Bhatia (1993) also comments on the extensive use of
nominalisation in legal English. All of these observations can be explained by the phenomenon of
grammatical metaphor.
The term grammatical metaphor is derived from the concept of metaphor in literature. The notion
that meaning can be expressed either literally or metaphorically is extended to grammar by
Halliday (e.g. 1994). According to Halliday any function may be expressed either congruently or
incongruently. A simple example of a congruent form is the use of a verbal form to encode a
process: ‘he departed’. The same meaning could be encoded ‘metaphorically’ by the use of a
noun: ‘his departure’. Halliday identifies the following forms as congruent realisations of
function:
1. processes (actions, events, mental processes, relations) are expressed by verbs;
- 25 -
2. participants (people, animals, concrete and abstract objects that take part in
processes) are expressed by nouns;
3. circumstances (time, place, manner, cause, condition) are expressed by adverbs and
prepositional phrases;
4. relations between one process and another are expressed by conjunctions.
(Halliday and Martin 1993: 80)
Systematic use of grammatical metaphor has far-reaching effects. Consider the difference between
the following utterances:
(2.10) the cast acted brilliantly so the audience applauded for a long time
(2.11) the cast’s brilliant acting drew lengthy applause from the audience
(Both from Halliday and Martin 1993: 80)
The second example rephrases the processes and expresses them in nominal form. Other examples
of grammatical metaphor are also present here: for example, the conjunction so in example 2.10
finds expression in a verbal group in example 2.11.
Halliday considers grammatical metaphor mainly in terms of scientific writing, but he notes that
the nominal style has been adopted in other registers as well, notably the language of bureaucracy
(Halliday and Martin 1993: 68). In this section it will be argued that the use of grammatical
metaphor in science is mirrored in academic legal language. Thus, Halliday’s work on the role of
grammatical metaphor in science will be considered first, followed by the application of this
description in academic legal language.
Grammatical metaphor conveys two main advantages in scientific writing. Firstly, the noun phrase
has greater structural possibilities than other word groups and this means that it can convey
complex ideas. An example of the flexibility of the noun phrase is provided below:
(2.12) Our apparent imaginative understanding of these processes is quite fallacious.
(Halliday 1985: 71; my emphasis CH)
The noun phrase (in italics), with its extensive premodification and postmodification, is capable of
representing very complex ideas in a single syntactic package. This means that elaborate
- 26 -
taxonomies of complex processes can be created, and this suits the scientific purpose. Science
uses grammatical metaphor to package and pigeonhole experience.
The second advantage of grammatical metaphor is its textual function. Halliday argues that
generally, when information is presented as new information, a congruent form of the grammar
will be used. Consider example 2.13, below:
(2.13) If electrons weren’t absolutely indistinguishable, two hydrogen atoms would

form a much more weakly bound molecule than they actually do. The absolute
indistinguishability of the electrons in the two atoms gives rise to an ‘extra’ attractive
force between them.
(David Layzer, Cosmogenesis, 1990: 61; cited in Halliday 1998)
The first sentence introduces new information to the discourse. In the second sentence, this
information is packaged into the first noun group, by the process of grammatical metaphor. The
quality indistinguishable becomes the thing indistinguishability. This allows the writer to
comment upon the given information in the remaining portion of the second sentence. As
scientific writers develop their arguments, they summarise the complex processes which they have
previously discussed, by referring to them in nominal form. The use of grammatical metaphor in
this textual function is very common in scientific language.
In his discussion of nominalisation in legislative provisions, Bhatia (1993: 154-157) confirms that
the two functions used by the scientist are used by the legal draftsman as well. The flexibility of
the nominal phrase allows a legislative provision to be specific and list important qualifying
features. The use of the textual function is also evident. Bhatia uses the following example:
No obliteration, interlineation or other alteration made in any will after the execution
thereof shall be valid or have effect except so far as the words of effect of the will
before such alteration shall not be apparent, unless such alteration shall be executed in
like manner as hereinbefore is required for the execution of the will; [...]
(Bhatia 1993: 154)
- 27 -
Here we see the use of extensively-modified noun phrases to specify precisely the meaning
intended. Furthermore, in this example, the repetition of the noun alteration provides a cohesive
link (other less explicit genres or registers might use a pronoun here).
A further function of the nominal style, which is not addressed by Halliday or Bhatia, is the
interpersonal function. Brown and Levinson (1987: 208) comment that ‘the more nouny an
expression, the more removed an actor is from doing or feeling or being something’. They observe
that more formal texts tend to make greater use of nominal expressions (Brown and Levinson
1987: 207-209).
Grammatical metaphor seems to play a role in a variety of formal genres. A grammatical process
as common as this, which performs such a range of functions, has obvious application in EALP.
Hedging
There is a growing body of research that suggests that the use of hedging devices is an important
interpersonal strategy in academic writing (e.g. Bloor and Bloor 1991; Holmes 1988; Hyland
1996; 1994; Myers 1989; Salager-Myer 1994; Skelton 1988a; 1988b).
Hedging devices, or ‘hedges’, were initially defined by Lakoff as ‘words whose job it is to make
things more or less fuzzy’ (Lakoff 1972; cited in Hyland 1996: 477). Hedging has come to include
language that reduces the speaker’s commitment to the proposition, as in the following example:
(2.14) And I think we can probably just slow him down to a little over maintenance...
(From Prince et al. 1982: 89; emphasis in original)
Such devices have been termed shields (Prince et al. 1982). They include modal auxiliaries used
epistemically i.e. may, might, could for possibility.
Hedging has also been interpreted to include words which affect the meaning of the proposition
itself. Consider the following example:
- 28 -
(2.15) His weight was approximately three point two kilograms, um which is
essentially what his birth weight was.
(From Prince et al. 1982: 87; emphasis in original)
This set of devices are known as approximators (Prince et al. 1982). Other examples include sort
of, about, almost. These devices do not reduce the speaker’s commitment to the proposition, but
rather, reduce the strength of the proposition itself.
In academic language the role of hedges has been interpreted as a politeness strategy (Myers
1989). Myers suggests that the making of claims in academic articles is an inherently face-
threatening act, requiring face-saving politeness strategies (see Brown and Levinson 1987).
According to Myers:
The making of claims always involves a tension: the writer must stay within a certain
consensus to have anything to say to members of his or her discipline, but must also
have a new claim to make to justify publication.
(Myers 1989: 5)
According to Myers, hedging serves to mark statements as provisional, pending acceptance by the
community (1989: 12). In addition to the politeness function, Hyland identifies hedging as an
‘important means of stating uncertain scientific claims with appropriate caution’ (1996: 478). He
further suggests that hedges allow writers to avoid the ‘negative consequences of being proved
wrong’ (1996: 479). These functions are also recognised by Swales, who states that hedges are
rhetorical devices used for ‘projecting honesty, modesty and proper caution in self-reports and for
diplomatically creating space in areas heavily populated by other researchers’ (1990: 175).
Formal definitions of hedging have proved rather problematic. A surprising range of language has
been included under the heading of hedging devices. For example, Hyland includes ‘IF-clauses,
question forms, passivisations, impersonal phrases and time reference’ (Hyland 1994: 240; cited
in Crompton 1997: 277). This has prompted one commentator to describe it as a ‘“rag-bag”
category of features noticed in academic/scientific writing, understood by different people in
different ways’ (Crompton 1997: 281).
- 29 -
Crompton (1997) argues convincingly that a definition of hedging for research and pedagogical
purposes should be limited to language that modifies the speaker’s commitment to the proposition
(i.e. shields). For the pragmatic purposes outlined above (politeness strategies in academic
writing), this would seem to be the most important form of hedging for NNSs.
The use of hedging devices depends upon a number of socio-pragmatic conditions, related to
discourse community and general cultural standards. It is therefore not surprising that hedging is
identified as an area of weakness for NNS students (e.g. Bloor and Bloor 1991; Skelton 1988a).
There have recently been a number of calls for this interpersonal aspect of academic writing to be
better recognised and applied in EAP courses (Bloor and Bloor 1991; Hyland 1996, 1994). Howe
(1990) also recognises the importance of hedging in answering problem questions. Hedging is
clearly an important lexico-grammatical feature in EALP.
2.8 RESEARCH QUESTIONS
This literature review has demonstrated a number of different approaches to language in the area
of ESP. In ESP it is often assumed that knowledge of language structures predicted by genre and
register studies are of relevance to students in ESP courses. However, there appears to have been
little empirical research to test this assumption.
The study proposed here attempts a linguistic analysis of student examination answers, using
principles of genre analysis, register analysis and discourse analysis. Three related questions for
study are considered. They are:
(1) How do NSs and NNSs differ in their use of language in the university setting?
(2) How do more experienced students and less experienced students differ in their use
of language in the university setting?
(3) How do successful students and less successful students differ in their use of
language in the university setting?
- 30 -
For the purposes of this study, successful students refers to students who are awarded high grades
in the subject area; similarly, more experienced students refers to students who are at a higher
level in the subject area.
In order to investigate these questions, a set of six hypotheses was developed. These are as
follows:
1. Native speakers use more appropriate schematic structure than non-native speakers.
2. More experienced students use more appropriate schematic structure than others.
3. More successful students use more appropriate schematic structure than others.
4. Native speakers use more appropriate grammar and lexis than non-native speakers.
5. More experienced students use more appropriate grammar and lexis than others.
6. More successful students use more appropriate grammar and lexis than others.
The method used to investigate these hypotheses, including a definition of ‘appropriate language’,
is detailed in chapter 3. Results are presented in chapters 4, 5 and 6, and the discussion takes place
in chapter 7.
- 31 -
3 Methodology
AIMS AND OVERVIEW
As suggested, the aim of this research is to determine whether:
1. NS students use more appropriate language than NNS students.
2. more experienced students use more appropriate language than others.
3. more successful students use more appropriate language than others.
In general terms, the method used was to analyse student writing from examinations in
Commercial Law. The analysis proceeded on two separate levels: appropriate schematic structure
and the appropriate functional lexical phrase realisation of that structure. In order to verify the
validity of the schematic structure used, a baseline study involving a small number of legal
professionals was conducted.
This chapter is divided into four parts. The first is concerned with background information
including data collection procedures, choice of task and so on. The second is devoted to a
description of the baseline study. The third details the method of analysis used for the study of
schematic structure. Finally, the fourth part is concerned with the method of analysis used in the
study of functional lexical phrases.
PART ONE: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
3.1 DATA COLLECTION
Contacting Participants
Participants were identified by addressing lecture and tutorial groups. Students interested in the
study were provided with participant information sheets and given an opportunity to ask questions
about the research. They were then asked to fill out a background information questionnaire and
Chapter 3: Methodology
give consent in writing for their examination answers to be analysed. Copies of the participant
information sheet, consent form and questionnaire used are attached in Appendices A, B and C.
Protection of Identity
Participants were requested to write their student ID number on the questionnaire, so that the
questionnaires could later be matched with the appropriate examination answer. The
questionnaires were collected by members of staff at the University of Auckland and taken to the
Commerce Student Resource Centre. The student ID numbers were removed at this stage and
replaced by a participant ID number specific to this study. A record of participant ID numbers and
student ID numbers was kept by staff at the Commerce Student Resource Centre. Only after
student ID numbers had been removed were the questionnaires passed on to the researcher. A
similar procedure was followed when copies of the examination scripts were made. In this way it
was possible to protect the identity of participants, whilst still being able to match their scripts to
their background information.
The Target Group
The target group consisted of undergraduate students from the Commercial Law department in the
Faculty of Commerce. Commercial Law was preferred for three reasons. Firstly, like all
Commerce subjects, there is a high NNS student population. Secondly, the subject demands high
proficiency in English, with more long-answer questions than other Commerce subjects. Finally,
Law requires the development of a special pedagogical genre, distinct from any genres that might
have been learnt at school (see Freedman 1987; Howe 1990).
A mixture of native-speaker (NS) and non-native speaker (NNS) students was required to provide
a control for the analysis of NNS text. In order to measure the effect of exposure to the target
environment both year 1 and year 2 students were approached. As year 1 Commercial Law is
compulsory for all students and year 2 Commercial Law is compulsory for all students majoring in
accounting, it was felt that the two levels were comparable.
- 33 -
Sampling procedure
In order to ensure that participants conformed to the target profile, they were asked to complete a
background information questionnaire (see Appendix C). The questionnaire was rather detailed
and allowed for considerable cross-referencing to check student responses. For example, a number
of students identified their first language as other than English but also reported living in New
Zealand for their entire lives, attending school in New Zealand and speaking only English with
friends and family. Because the questionnaire was sufficiently detailed, unreliable responses like
these (and there were surprisingly many) could be excluded from the study. Information from the
questionnaire was also used to sort the participants into four different groups: NSs at year 1, NNSs
at year 1 , NSs at year 2, NNSs at year 2. The following definitions were used:
Native Speaker (NS)
Native speaker was defined as a person whose native language is English and who has spent most
of their life, including their entire secondary school life, in New Zealand. Bilingual participants,
and participants who had spent more than 3 years overseas were excluded, on the grounds that
they might have an unpredictable effect on the data. Thus, for the purposes of this study the term
‘native speaker’ is restricted to New Zealand native speakers of English.
Non-native Speaker (NNS)
Non-native speaker was defined as a person whose native language was not English and who had
taken up residence in New Zealand or in any other English-speaking environment after the age of
12-13.9 It was assumed that it would be impossible for a person arriving in an English-speaking
environment at or after this age to acquire English as a first language.
Once the sample had been sorted into NSs and NNSs, the following groups were also excluded on
the grounds that they would have an unpredictable effect on the data: 1. Participants over 30 years
of age; and 2. NNS participants of a European cultural background.
9 This corresponds approximately to Lenneberg’s notion of the critical period for language learning
(Lenneberg, 1967). According to Lenneberg, there is a critical period for language learning, after which it
becomes more difficult to learn a language as a result of developments that have taken place in the brain. As
suggested, this critical period lasts until puberty, or the age of 12-13.
- 34 -
For practical reasons the NS year 1 sample was reduced to match the NNS year 1 sample.
Accordingly, 45 participants were randomly selected (by drawing numbers from a hat), and those
participants were used for the study. The final sample population is described below.
3.2 PARTICIPANT BACKGROUND AND WRITING CONDITIONS
Participant background
The final sample comprised 123 Commercial Law students, both NSs and NNSs from year 1 and
year 2. The composition of the sample is summarised in the table below.
Table 1 Composition of final sample

Group
Year 1 Year 2 Total
Native speakers 45 (50.56%) 28 (82.35%) 73 (59.35%)

Non-native speakers 44 (49.44%) 6 (17.65%) 50 (40.65%)
Total 89 (100%) 34 (100%) 123 (100%)
Figures refer to number of students in the group, percentages refer to the percentage of NSs or
NNSs in each group (i.e. year 1, year 2, total).
The overall number of students in the year 1 groups was very satisfactory and provided the basis
for reliable comparisons. However, the low numbers in the NNS year 2 group meant that it was
not possible to make comparisons relying on this group alone. This problem is considered in
greater detail below (page 53).
The sample comprised participants ranging in age from 16-30 years. On average, the NNSs were
slightly older than the NSs (NNS average age: 22, NS average age: 20). The dominant ethnic
background in the NS sample was ‘European or NZ European’. The majority of participants in the
NNS sample had some kind of Chinese background. Exactly half of the NNS participants had
been in New Zealand for a total of three years or less, and the overwhelming majority (96%) had
been in NZ for a total of six years or less. Most of the NNSs had obtained some kind of English
language qualification, either from New Zealand schools or through a recognised syndicate such
- 35 -
as IELTS10. However, a total of 6 NNSs (12%) reported no English language qualification
whatsoever. A more detailed summary of background information is provided in table form in
Appendix D.
Task and writing conditions
In order to make a valid and reliable comparison of student writing, it was necessary to ensure that
the task and writing conditions were sufficiently similar.
The kind of task that was chosen for this study was the pedagogical genre of problem question in
law (see 2.5). In year 1 Commercial Law, students’ only written assessment is in the form of a
mid-semester test and end-of-semester examination. For this reason the mode for analysis was
written examination. Analysing examination scripts also had the advantage of ensuring
authenticity of data: the scripts were written without the assistance of a proof-reader, and they
were all written under the same conditions. Because the main function of the students’ writing was
to pass an examination, the task in this study has the advantage of being very realistic.
The tasks analysed are two different examination questions (one for year 1 and one for year 2),
both of which elicited the problem question genre. The year 1 question was from the core
Commercial Law paper, Law, Commerce and Government, and concerned the subject area of
Negligence. This question was worth 15% of the final mark and students should therefore have
allocated themselves 27 minutes to complete it. The year 2 question was from the Finance and
Property Law exam, and concerned the subject of Mortgagee Sales. This question was worth 20%
of the final mark and students should therefore have allocated themselves 36 minutes to complete
it. Both questions were open-ended and required a full-length response (as opposed to short,
paragraph-long answers about a given fact situation). Copies of the questions are provided in
Appendix E.
10International English Language Teaching Syndicate
- 36 -
It is suggested that the tasks and writing conditions were in all respects sufficiently similar to
warrant a comparison on an even basis.
PART TWO: BASELINE STUDY
3.3 BACKGROUND
Rationale and overview
The contrastive analysis in this paper is based on Howe’s (1990) description of the genre of
problem question (see 2.5 and 3.5 below). However, because Howe’s study was conducted in a
foreign environment, it was not initially clear whether this genre was in use in the setting of this
study (i.e. the University of Auckland, New Zealand). It was therefore necessary to conduct a
small baseline study of initiated members of the legal discourse community in Auckland.
Members of the Auckland legal discourse community were first of all asked to perform the writing
task expected of the students. Each lawyer’s response was analysed and assigned a discourse
score in the same way as the student responses (see 3.6, below). The discourse score is a measure
of how well the obligatory elements of the expected genre have been fulfilled and has a maximum
value of 3 (see 3.6 for a more detailed explanation). In addition, the participants were also asked
to rank a number of extracts of student writing, according to appropriateness. It was felt that the
lawyers ought to rank those extracts with the expected schematic structure higher than the others.
Participants: background information
In order to ensure that participants could indeed be considered members of the legal discourse
community in Auckland, participants were asked to fill in a background information questionnaire
(see Appendix C). The background of the participating lawyers is summarised in table 2. (over
page).
- 37 -
Table 2 Lawyers’ background

Background details Individual
L1 L2 L3 L4
Position Senior tutor Senior tutor Solicitor Solicitor

Years practising law 1 10 2.5 3
Years teaching law 7 6 n/a 6
Country of training New Zealand New Zealand New Zealand New Zealand
Country of practise England New Zealand New Zealand New Zealand
New Zealand
As illustrated in the table, two of the participants came from the University environment and two
from the wider legal community. All of the participants had practical experience, and the only
participant not to have some teaching experience was L3. All of the lawyers trained in New
Zealand and had at least some practical experience in New Zealand.
3.4 PROCEDURE
The Writing Task
In order to determine whether initiated members of the discourse community would use the target
genre, participants were given a copy of question 4 of the year 1 Commercial Law examination,
and asked to complete it under exam conditions. Participants were allowed to research the
question if they so desired, but the actual writing of the examination answer was limited to 30
minutes. Participants were asked to answer the question as if they were sitting an exam, in order to
elicit a response that they thought was appropriate to an examination setting (as opposed to an
opinion for a client or senior solicitor, for example).
The Ranking Task
For the ranking task, the lawyers were asked to rank a number of extracts from student responses
to the examination, according to appropriateness. The extracts were taken from the study of
student writing, described in parts 3 and 4 below. The anticipated result was that lawyers would
rank the extracts with the expected schematic structure high. A total of five extracts were used for
this purpose: two of them were good examples of the Howe discourse structure, whilst the other
- 38 -
three were poor examples of the structure. The background information for these samples is
summarised in the table below:
Table 3 Ranking samples: background

Subject (1) NS/NNS Content mark Discourse score (2)
P1690 NS 8.5 2
P1830 NS 6 2
P240 NNS 11 1
P620 NS 7 1
P1720 NS 7 1
(1) All subjects in the student study were designated a participant number in order to preserve
confidentiality.
(2) The composition of this score is described in 3.6 below. The maximum score is three.
The table shows that two of the subjects (P1690 and P1830) had a high discourse score, while the
other three subjects (P240, P620 and P1720) had a low discourse score. The discourse score
reflects the extent to which the Howe discourse structure is present (see below 3.5 and 3.6). The
table also shows that a range of content marks was present. It was hoped that this would minimise
the effect of content on the lawyers’ assessment of appropriate writing.
These scripts served as the basis from which the five extracts were adapted. The extracts were
adapted to ensure that they were uniform in terms of surface features such as nominalisations and
passivisations, that could have the effect of making one sample seem more appropriate than
others. In the case of the one NNS sample, the grammar was corrected so that participants would
not respond on the basis of grammar errors. In order to further ensure that the participants were
rating the discourse structure (and not other features such as content), the topic for all five samples
chosen was the same. Copies of the final samples used are provided in Appendix G.
The lawyers were asked to rank these samples according to how appropriate they were, and to pay
particular attention to the kind of information presented and the organisation of information in the
answers. It was hoped that this instruction would elicit a response based on the discourse structure,
without making this overly explicit. In order to check this, participants were asked why they gave
- 39 -
the best ranking to their chosen sample. A copy of the ranking sheet with instructions is provided
in Appendix F.
It was hoped that this procedure would provide the necessary baseline data for the Howe discourse
structure. The results of this study are reported in chapter 4.
PART THREE: SCHEMATIC STRUCTURE
The analysis of schematic structure was divided into two stages. First, a ‘rough-and-ready’
analysis of the data was conducted in order to develop an analytical framework for the analysis
proper. Once this preliminary analysis was complete, the texts were classified according to the
framework elaborated and a statistical analysis was performed. In this part, we first consider the
findings of the preliminary study. This is followed by a description of the procedure for text
classification and statistical analysis.
3.5 TARGET LANGUAGE: OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS
As mentioned above (3.2), it was expected that the task would elicit the problem question genre
(Howe 1990; see 2.5). In this section, the notion of appropriate schematic structure is defined, and
operational definitions for elements of the problem question genre are provided.
Appropriate schematic structure defined
Appropriate schematic structure was defined as the schematic structure described by Howe (1990)
and elaborated in this chapter, provided the baseline study supported this.
Functional moves in the genre of problem question
It was established earlier (3.2) that the functional moves suggested by Howe for the genre of
problem question are:
1. Situation
2. Instruction
3. Forecast
4. Issue
- 40 -
5. Statement of law
6. Authority
7. Application of law to facts
8. Opinion (Howe 1990)
The situation and instruction moves are completed by the instructor and provide the student with
information about the fact situation and the legal task to be completed. These moves will not be
considered further here. An example of the move analysis in an extract from a student script is
provided below (figure 2, page 42), and the various student moves are discussed with reference to
this. Where the extract does not provide an exact example of language features, other examples
from student writing are provided. The descriptions elaborated serve as operational definitions for
the analysis of discourse moves.
The forecast always occurred at the beginning of a student’s answer (see figure 2, line 1). Its
function is to provide an overview of the whole problem. In the example provided it is realised by
a general statement identifying the parties to the problem. It may also be realised through an
overview of the area of law to be examined, the issues presented in the problem, or the opinion
which the student is required to make and which usually occurs at the end of the answer. Because
of the many possible realisations of this move, some of which were functionally ambiguous, it was
difficult to identify the move reliably. As a result, it was not possible to include this move in the
analysis.
The issue move was normally found at the beginning of a sequence of statement of law,
authority, application of law to facts moves (see figure 2, line 4). Its function is to identify
and introduce each of the individual issues. There is only one such move in the example
above, but there can be as many issue moves as there are issues in the answer. This move can
be realised directly, as above, or indirectly through a tentative opinion move. Once again,
because of its functional ambiguity, it was necessary to exclude this move from the analysis.
Figure 2 Sample move analysis for genre of problem question
- 41 -
P1790
1 [The parties involved in this case are Putt Ltd., Duffer, an employee Forecast
2 of Putt Ltd., Dendron and Hoe Limited, Kemex Ltd.] [FIRST ISSUE AND SUB-
ISSUE]
3 [DHL would sue Putt Ltd. for negligence.] [Because Duffer is an Issue
4 employee of Putt Ltd., he makes them liable.] [For the negligence Opinion (embedded)
5 suit to be successful, DHL would have to prove a number of things. Law
6 Firstly, that a duty of care was owed. [The case of Donoghue v
7 Stephenson establishes who is owed a duty of care.] It is described Authority (embedded)
8 as a neighbour - someone who is foreseeably likely to be caused
9 harm as a result of the plaintiff’s actions.] [In this case, Putt Ltd. is a
10 foreseeable plaintiff. The nature of the operations of Putt Ltd. Facts
11 suggests that the neighbouring property could be placed in danger
12 if something went wrong. Their closeness in proximity suggests
13 this. [This is illustrated in the case Dorset Yacht Club v Home
14 Office.] There are also policy reasons which may see them be Authority (embedded)
15 denied of negligence.]
16 [The next thing they must prove is breach of duty of care. [Putt [SECOND SUB-ISSUE]
17 personnel breached the duty of care by not phoning the fire Law
18 service.] The test for a breach of duty of care is the ‘reasonable Facts (embedded)
19 person’ test - what a reasonable person would do.] [In this situation,
20 a massive explosion involving chemicals would lead a reasonable Facts
21 person to call the fire service.]
22 [Thirdly, DHL would need to prove that the breach of duty of care [THIRD SUB-ISSUE]
23 caused the damage. The ‘but for’ test is applied.] [In this case the Law
24 damage would not have occurred if the defendants had taken Facts
25 reasonable care and called the fire department.]
26 [The fourth thing needed to be proven is the remoteness of [FOURTH SUB-ISSUE]

27 damage. Here the Wagon Mound test is applied. If the kind of Law
28 damage is foreseeable, then they will be found liable.] [Possible
29 defences for Putt Ltd. will be contributory negligence on the part of Opinion
30 Rhoda and Blythe, as they didn’t attempt to extinguish the embers.]
[SECOND ISSUE]
31 [Blythe cannot claim for the $20 000 of illegal drugs destroyed and Opinion
32 if they are found out about, he could face criminal prosecution.]
[FIRST ISSUE AGAIN]
33 [DHL can claim for damages, both physical and economic (loss of Opinion
34 business).]
- 42 -
The statement of law move normally occurred with an authority move (see below). It was usually
followed by an application of law to facts. The function of this move is to explain the law
applying to the fact situation. An example of this is given below:
(3.1) Section 92 of the Property Law Act specifically deems that a mortgagee must
supply specific notice in any action to possess or sell land under a mortgage. (P2240)
This move could also be realised in less abstract, more concrete language, as in the following
example (and see also figure 2, line 6):
(3.2) To successfully sue Putt Ltd. in negligence, Kemex Ltd. and DHL would have to
prove that Putt Ltd. owed them a duty of care and that Putt Ltd. breached that duty,
which was the cause of the harm suffered by Kemex Ltd. & DHL . It would also be
necessary to prove that Putt Ltd.’s action was not too remote so as to negate liability.
(P1290)
The statement of law usually involved some kind of explicit deontic modality (e.g. must, have to,
need to, is required to etc.), as can be seen in the examples provided. However, this element was
not always present: the simple description of a legal test was also considered to be a statement of
law (as in figure 2, lines 7-11 , above).
The authority move was usually found with a statement of law move (see figure 2, line 8). Its
function is to give legal support for the proposition in the statement of law and it typically takes
the form of a reference to a case or to a particular section of a statute.
In statute law, the authority is usually cited first, followed by the rule or principle, as in the
following example:
(3.3) s 152(1) states that any notice served must be delivered either by registered mail
or personally. (P2600)
In case law, the rule or principle is usually cited first, followed by the authority, as in this
example:
(3.4) One factor in considering the breach of a duty of care is the probability of harm
of the defendant’s conduct , as seen in Bolton v Stone. (P1290)
- 43 -
In this analysis, the authority move was simply defined as any reference to case or statute used in
support of the student’s argument.
The application of law to facts usually occurred as the third element of the sequence statement of
law, authority, application of law to facts (see figure 2, e.g. lines 11-15). Its function is to relate
the facts given to the law. It provides the reasoning for the associated opinion, which it often, but
not always leads into. An example of this is given below:
(3.5) The notice that Genevieve sent to Bianca did not contain any of these points, and
therefore did not constitute notice, as described in the Act. (P2600)
This move signals the logical connection between the law, the facts and the opinion. As a result,
the move frequently requires the use of causal conjunction, such as the conjunction therefore in
example 5.
The opinion is the last move in any given issue cycle (see figure 2, lines 37-38). Its primary
function is to evaluate the likely outcome of the case, that is to state the legal rights and
obligations of the parties in the fact situation. This is illustrated below:
(6) Genevieve therefore had no right to exercise her power of sale as mortgagee.
Bianca could’ve remedied the mortgage if she wished and Genevieve would have had
to serve proper notice before exercising her right of sale. (P2290)
The opinion often functions as a concluding move at the end of an issue cycle or at the end of an
answer, predicting the success of the various participants and sometimes also giving advice to
those participants. It can however also function to raise the issue at the beginning of a move cycle.
The definitions established here were used as operational definitions for the analysis of student
text.
Discourse patterns in the genre of problem question
Thus far, the various different functional moves occurring in the genre of problem question have
been described. This preliminary analysis also considers the patterns that these moves can be
- 44 -
combined in. This section is concerned with a description of optional and obligatory moves, and a
consideration of sequence.
Typical sequence
The forecast move is optional and occurs only once, at the beginning of the answer. The answer is
subsequently divided into a number of legal ‘issues’ raised by the fact situation. Each issue is
typically realised through the sequence statement of issue, statement of law, authority, application
of law to facts, opinion, where the statement of issue and opinion moves are optional. These ‘issue
cycles’ can be repeated as many times as there are issues. The basic pattern of all eight moves can
thus be summarised as follows:
Figure 3 Functional moves in the problem question
situation instructor moves
instruction
( forecast ) student moves
( statement of issue )
statement of law
application of law to facts
authority
( opinion )
( ) = optional move
Adapted from Howe (1990)
- 45 -
The preliminary analysis demonstrated that two different sequences of moves were used within
each issue cycle. These are described below.
Pattern Type 1: General principle - particular application
This is the standard sequence, described above: i.e. statement of issue, statement of law, authority,
application of law to facts, opinion. The underlying rationale in this pattern is to provide the
general principles of law first, and the opinion or outcome to the legal problem, second.
Identifying the relevant legal issues and explaining how the law applies to the fact situation is as
important as the actual opinion or outcome itself.
Pattern Type 2: Result - Reason
This non-standard sequence consisted of a similar set of functional moves, albeit arranged
differently. The sequence is: opinion, application of law to facts, statement of law, authority. In
contrast to the first pattern identified, the focus of this pattern is on the outcome of the particular
fact situation. This was followed by reasoning in the form of application of law to facts, statement
of law, authority. The general principles of law were secondary and often neglected in this pattern.
It is suggested that this pattern is less appropriate to the genre of problem question.
A further variation in pattern occurred where the relevant law was applied to the facts in stages. In
such cases issues are sometimes divided into sub-issues, or repeated cycles of statement of law -
application of law to facts. An example of this is provided in figure 2 (page 42), where a series of
tests are applied to the fact situation in order to determine liability. In figure 2, the general issue is
first introduced by a statement of issue move. Each sub-issue is then introduced by an elaboration
of the statement of law. The various moves are signalled as follows (see figure 2):
Line 3: FIRST ISSUE: DHL would sue Putt for negligence

Line 6: FIRST SUB-ISSUE: Firstly [DHL would have to prove] that a duty of care
was owed.
Line 16: SECOND SUB-ISSUE: The next thing they must prove is breach of duty of
care.
- 46 -
Line22: THIRD SUB-ISSUE: Thirdly, DHL would need to prove that the breach of
duty of care caused the damage.
Line26: FOURTH SUB-ISSUE: The fourth thing needed to be proven is the
remoteness of damage.
The sub-issues can follow a general-particular (i.e. type 1) pattern or a particular-general (i.e. type
2) pattern. The structure of an issue divided into sub-issues is illustrated in figure 4, below.
Figure 4 Structure of issues and sub-issues
GENERAL ISSUE
Statement of Issue
SUBISSUE TYPE 1 OR SUBISSUE TYPE 2
Statement of law Appln of law to facts
Appln of law to facts Statement of law
Opinion
The figure shows that the general issue is introduced by a statement of issue move. This is then
followed by a number of cycles of statement of law and application of law to facts, which can be
organised according to either type 1 or type 2 patterns. Often, the first sub-issue was more general
than the others, and included an authority move. The remaining sub-issues consisted of a more
precise statement of law and application of law to facts. Because authority was provided in the
general statement, there was usually no authority move in the remaining sub-issues. The sub-issue
cycles would be repeated as often as necessary and the issue would then be concluded by an
opinion move.
- 47 -
3.6 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Textual comparisons
As reported above, the preliminary analysis identified six different functional moves and two
different pattern types in the student responses (3.5). This suggested three different comparisons.
The first of these was the occurrence of individual genre moves. It was felt that the number and
kind of individual moves chosen might vary according to language background, level or content
score. It was further hypothesised that the combined use of obligatory moves (statement of law,
authority, application of law to facts) might vary according to the same three background
variables. Finally, it was felt that the kind of discourse pattern employed might also vary between
the different groups. The comparisons made are summarised in the table below:
Table 4 Discourse features and background variables compared

COMPARISON MADE Discourse feature
Individual genre Obligatory genre Pattern type

moves moves
Student Language
background background X X X
variable Level X X X
Content Score X X X
‘X’ signifies comparison of discourse feature by student background
Analysis of individual genre moves
The aim was to determine whether the presence of particular moves was related to language
background, level or content score. To complete this analysis a count of move frequency was
carried out.
As mentioned above (3.5), the preliminary analysis revealed that the optional forecast and
statement of issue moves were functionally ambiguous and difficult to categorise. As a result,
these moves had to be excluded from the analysis. The more important moves, statement of law,
authority, application of law to facts and opinion, were retained.
- 48 -
With regard to the opinion move, two distinct functions were identified. At the beginning of an
issue cycle it signalled the appropriate area of law and functioned as a statement of issue. At the
end of the issue cycle it functioned in its more typical role of evaluating the problem. In
recognition of this, a record of opinion moves in ‘initial position’ and in ‘final position’ was kept.
In summary, the following five categories were established for analysis:
Figure 5 Categories used for analysis of individual discourse moves
1. opinion (initial position)

2. statement of law
3. authority
4. application of law to facts
5. opinion (final position)
In order to ensure consistency in analysis it was necessary to establish a firm set of definitions for
each of the categories. The descriptions provided in 3.5 were used as operational definitions for
the analysis.
Analysis of obligatory genre moves
The next comparison was of the combined obligatory moves (statement of law, authority,
application of law to facts). By recording the combined frequency of these three moves, it was
hoped that an indication of the participants’ overall adherence to the schematic structure could be
obtained. The aim was to determine whether the presence of all three obligatory moves was in
some way related to language background, level or content score. With the obvious difference that
this analysis was only concerned with the three obligatory moves, it was in all other respects
almost identical to the analysis of individual discourse moves.
- 49 -
Analysis of pattern types
Two different patterns were noted in the preliminary analysis (see 3.5 above). However, it was
nonetheless difficult to class every text as a clear example of either the type 1 or type 2 discourse
pattern. The relationship between the two pattern types appeared to be of a continuous nature, with
clear examples of the type 1 pattern at one extreme, and clear examples of the type 2 pattern at the
other. This relationship is illustrated in the figure below:
Figure 6 Relationship of type 1 and type 2 patterns
type 1 type 2
Many responses appeared to share features of both pattern types. It was particularly difficult to
distinguish between them when students omitted moves from the discourse. As a result, it was
necessary to establish a third category for ‘incomplete or ambiguous’ patterns. This catch-all
category was referred to as pattern type 3. Operational definitions of the different pattern types
used in the study are summarised in the figure below:
Figure 7 Summary of discourse pattern types
type 1 type 2 type 3
statement of law opinion

application of law to facts application of law to facts other
opinion statement of law
N.B. For purposes of this analysis the authority move had no structural impact, and is therefore
omitted from this summary.
Thus, pattern type 1 consisted of any sequence of statement of law, application of law to
facts, opinion. Pattern type 2 included any sequence of opinion, application of law to facts,
statement of law. Pattern type three was any other sequence. The authority move could be
embedded at almost any point and had no impact on the structure or pattern. As a result, it is
not included in these definitions.
- 50 -
Data collection and entry
As mentioned above, the texts were analysed for number of pattern types and number of moves. It
was also necessary to keep a record of the number of issue cycles used (see 3.5). Students that
used a greater number of issue cycles naturally had a greater opportunity to use the various moves
and patterns in the discourse. In order to control for this effect, issue cycles were counted as well.
Furthermore, only the larger, more important issues elicited the target schematic structure. Some
issues were so minor that they could be dealt with in a single utterance, as in figure 2, SECOND
ISSUE (see above, page 42). In order to control for this, a list of the important issues was made
and the analysis was confined to these issues. This list is reproduced in Appendix G. Thus, the
macro unit of analysis was the issue, and it was vital that it be consistently identified from one text
to the next.
Where an issue was divided into sub-issues (see 3.5 above), these were not counted unless they
presented different pattern types. The reason was that in general, sub-issues did not need an
authority move, and would therefore normally be scored lower than normal issues. However,
where an issue was divided into sub-issues of different pattern types, the sub-issues were counted
in order to record the different patterns. This had a slight negative effect on such answers, but this
was felt to be justified as it only happened on a very small number of occasions.
Each text underwent the following analysis procedure. First, the appropriate issues were isolated.
Next, each issue was analysed for pattern types and move types according to the definitions given
above. The number of issues, moves and pattern types was recorded. The data obtained was
entered into a computer data-base, as illustrated in figure 8 below. The participant identification
number was entered in the left-hand column and the frequency of pattern types and move types
was recorded in the other columns:
- 51 -
Figure 8 Example of data entry method
Initial Final
Subject Type One Law Facts Authority Opinion Opinion
P270 1 1 1 1 0 0
Thus, in this example, participant P270 recorded one type 1 pattern. Within that pattern, the
student used one statement of law, one application of law to facts, one authority and no initial
opinion or final opinion moves. This procedure was repeated for type 2 and type 3 patterns, so that
at the end of the analysis a record of pattern type, move type and number of issues11 had been
compiled.
Statistical operations
At this stage the data represented the total frequency of pattern types and move types. As
mentioned above this figure does not take into account the fact that some students discussed more
issues than others. In order to provide a valid comparison of results, the frequency for each
participant had to be divided by the number of issues raised, to give a final score per issue. This
operation was performed for all the discourse moves and pattern types recorded. In addition,
another score was generated representing the total number of obligatory moves used per issue
raised. This generated a total of three different kinds of scores, summarised in the table below:
Table 5 Scores calculated for analysis

Score Calculation
total occurrences of discourse move

Move score number of issues
total occurrences of law, authority, facts moves

Discourse score number of issues
total occurrences of discourse pattern type

Pattern score number of issues
11The number of issues is equal to the total number of different patterns recorded.
- 52 -
Once generated, these scores were compared between groups of participants. By comparing the
mean, maximum and minimum scores of NS year 1 and NNS year 1 groups it was possible to
draw conclusions about the effect of language background. Similarly, by comparing the overall
year 1 and overall year 2 groups, comments about the effect of level could be made. Finally, these
scores were statistically correlated with the content scores achieved by participants (both for the
particular question and for the exam in general). This made it possible to make predictions about
the relationship between content score and the various different features of discourse.
Issues of reliability
In order to determine whether there was variation according to language background, level or
content score, it was necessary to set up a number of different groups for comparison. Because of
the low number of participants in the NNS year 2 group, it was not possible to make any
comparisons relying directly upon this group. However, a reliable comparison of NSs and NNSs
was possible by comparing the NS year 1 and NNS year 1 groups. Furthermore, if NSs and NNSs
were combined at both levels this allowed a fairly reliable overall comparison of year 1 students to
year 2 students.
In order to check reliability of the analysis itself, an inter-rater test was conducted. The test
considered the classification of patterns and moves. The percentage agreement was .72 and .77 if
only the patterns and obligatory moves were considered (see Appendix H). Although this is on the
low side, it is suggested that it is nevertheless acceptable for this kind of analysis. The analysis of
text in general is often imprecise because of the fuzzy nature of textual boundaries (see de
Beaugrande and Dressler 1981). In this particular instance this effect was exaggerated because of
the writing conditions: novice writers, unfamiliar with what is a complex genre, were required to
produce it under the pressure of exam conditions. This made it harder to reliably identify
underlying move structure and pattern types. It should be noted that the intra-rater test conducted
here was more like an inter-rater test, as it was performed over 3 months after the initial analysis
was completed.
- 53 -
In summary, the student text was analysed for pattern types and discourse moves in the genre of
problem question. A number of statistical operations were performed in order to compare the
results by student language background, level and content score. The results of the study and their
implications for hypotheses 1, 2 and 3 are reported in chapter 5.
PART FOUR: STUDY OF FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASES
This study was concerned with the lexico-grammatical realisation of the various discourse
functions in the genre of problem question. First, a ‘rough-and-ready’ analysis was conducted in
order to identify target language and establish a framework for the analysis proper. Once this
preliminary analysis was complete, the texts were studied using concordancing techniques to
compare the use of functional lexical phrases in different groups of subjects. Finally, a lexical
density count was performed, comparing the overall frequency of content and function words in
different groups. The three different stages of this study are considered in turn.
3.7 PRELIMINARY ANALYSISAppropriate grammar and lexis defined
Appropriate grammar and lexis was defined as 1. functional lexical phrases occurring in the genre
of problem question; and 2. other features of grammar including nominalisation, passivisation and
hedging, commonly recognised as markers of formal written registers and academic writing (see
2.7).
Preliminary analysis procedure
In order to gain an impression of the texts, the four top-scoring papers from each of the four basic
groups (NS year 1, NNS year 1, NS year 2, NNS year 2) were analysed for the presence of
functional lexical phrases. The premise was that the higher-scoring samples would provide better
models than the others. The following definition of functional lexical phrase was used:
- 54 -
Functional lexical phrase
For the purposes of this study, functional lexical phrase was defined as a form-function composite,
varying in length from one word to many words, and found to perform a particular discourse
function (adapted from Nattinger and DeCarrico 1992).
Preliminary concordancing
Once an initial framework of functional lexical phrases had been established, it was tested on the
entire group using concordancing techniques. In this way, it was possible to determine whether the
initial samples were representative of the whole group or not. Some modifications to the
framework were made at this stage. The functional lexical phrases identified are reported in
chapter 6.
3.8 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Once particular linguistic features were attributed to different moves in the analysis, a quantitative
study was carried out to analyse the relative use of those features. Language use was compared
according to student language background, level and content score. There are two principal
methodological issues here. The first concerns the use of concordancing techniques in the analysis
of the various linguistic features. The second concerns the principles of comparison used to
contrast the different groups in the analysis.
The use of concordancing techniques
Once the appropriate functional lexical phrases were identified, data about the various groups’
usage was obtained by using a concordancing program.
The main difficulty encountered was that the computer could not differentiate between different
functional uses of the same word. For example, in this study modal verbs were found to occur in
similar structures in both the statement of law and opinion moves. It was therefore necessary to
edit the concordancing results and determine from context which entries belonged to which move.
- 55 -
For practical reasons, such editing was performed only where it was felt to be absolutely
necessary. The following table shows which language features were not edited. Where a language
feature was not edited, this simply means that the results obtained were results for the whole text,
rather than just for the one move.
Table 6 Unedited language features by discourse move

Discourse move Unedited language feature
Forecast and issue sequencing lexis

Application of law to facts reference to fact situation
topicalisers
causal conjunction
Opinion hedging devices
The table shows that a small number of language features were not edited. Rather than providing
figures on hedging for the opinion move alone, figures on hedging refer to the entire discourse.
Language features were only left unedited like this where it was thought to be of little or no
consequence. It should however be noted that the discussion of language features associated with
application of law to facts and some of the features of the forecast, issue and opinion moves are
not limited to these moves alone.
The practice of editing the results in this way reintroduces the element of human error and this can
have an effect on the reliability of the study. In order to control for this, an intra-rater test was
conducted. This involved checking a sample of the concordancing results (in this case every tenth
entry). The results of the reliability test are attached in Appendix H. Percentage agreement was
.91.
Comparative analysis
In order to compare the various background variables, the data was divided into a number of
different groups. As in the study of schematic structure, the variable of language background was
controlled for by comparing the NS year 1 with the NNS year 1 group. Similarly, level was
- 56 -
contrasted by comparing the entire year 1 with the entire year 2 group (see 3.6 for a comment on
reliability).
The effect of content score (in Commercial Law) was measured by grouping different high-
scoring and low-scoring texts together. The top five texts and the bottom five texts from the year 1
NS and NNS groups were separated and results were recorded for these groups. There were thus
two high-scoring groups: NS high scorers (NS HS) and NNS high scorers (NNS HS). Similarly,
there were two low-scoring groups: NS low scorers (NS LS) and NNS low scorers (NNS LS). The
effect of content score could be judged by comparing these groups to each other and to the overall
year 1 NS and year 1 NNS groups. Because each group consisted of only five participants, the
results had to be treated carefully. Differences could only be attributed to content score if they
occurred both in NSs and NNSs and if a difference was found between HSs, LSs and entire group.
The extensive process of cross-referencing made reliable conclusions about the effect of content
score possible.
3.9 LEXICAL DENSITY
It was felt that in general, the NNSs might not be using enough structural lexis to adequately
construct their text. In order to test this theory, a lexical density count of content and structure
words was performed.
Halliday (1985) identifies a number of different ways of counting lexical density. As suggested,
the method used in this study was to present lexical density as a ratio of content words to total
number of words. This was felt to be the simplest possible method and an adequate representation
for the purposes of this study.
In this study, the following forms of lexical items were considered to be structural:
All determiners, pronouns, prepositions, conjunctions, copulas, auxiliaries (including

quasi-modals), adverbs of modality (e.g. perhaps), adverbs of place/position/distance
(e.g. here), adverbs of time (e.g. now), adverbs of personal opinion (e.g. frankly),
- 57 -
focusing adverbs (e.g. particularly), adverbs of emphasis (e.g. absolutely), adverbs of

degree (e.g. very), prepositional phrases functioning as conjunction (e.g. as a result).
All other forms were considered to be content words.
Lexical density was compared across language background only. The count was done by hand in
order to be able to account for different functional uses of words (for example, some words used
as adjectives were considered to be content words, but used as adverbs appeared to be structural).
In order to check reliability an intra-rater test was done on a sample of the data. The intra-rater
reliability was .98 (see Appendix H for test results).
3.10 SUMMARY
This research consists of a text analysis of examinations written by students in Commercial Law.
The texts are compared according to three main background features: student language
background, experience of the genre and content score. Aspects of language compared include the
use of the problem question discourse structure, and the lexical realisation of that discourse
structure. In order to validate the discourse structure under investigation, it was necessary to
conduct a baseline study involving a small group of lawyers and legal academics. In this chapter,
aspects of methodology including data collection and research design have been described.
Chapter 4 reports the results to the baseline study. Chapters 5 and 6 are concerned with the
findings of the comparative study of schematic structure and functional lexical phrases.
- 58 -
4 Results 1: Baseline study
OVERVIEW
The baseline study consists of two tasks for the lawyers to complete: the results to the writing task
are presented first, followed by the results to the ranking task.
4.1 WRITING TASK
The lawyers’ were asked to perform the same task as the year 1 students, under exam conditions
(see methodology). The writing produced was analysed for the target schematic structure (see
methodology) and a discourse score was assigned (see methodology). This score measures the
presence of the obligatory moves statement of law, authority and application of law to facts in the
text. The maximum possible score is 3.0. The results are summarised in table 7, below.
Table 7 Lawyers’ discourse scores

Lawyers’ writing Individual
L1 L2 L3 L4
Discourse score 1.5 2.0 3.0 3.0
Mean discourse score 2.38
The table shows that two of the lawyers (L3 and L4) scored the maximum possible on the
discourse score. The participants in question headed up each section of the discourse, first
identifying the issues, then the relevant law with authority, and finally applying the law to the
facts and stating an opinion.
The other two lawyers (L1 and L2) were also found to follow the target structure for most of their
answer. The lower scores recorded largely reflects the complexity of the year 1 task. In addition,
the lower score recorded by L1 is partly due to the fact that the authority move was not present in
Chapter 4: Baseline study
this answer. This suggests that this move may not be essential in the examination context.
However, it should be noted that it occurred in 3 out of the 4 responses.
The scores achieved by this small sample of lawyers were much higher than those recorded by the
year 1 students themselves. The maximum discourse score achieved by students on the year 1 task
was 2.5 and the year 1 mean was 1.45 (see table 14, page 70). This compares with 3.0 and 2.38,
respectively. The accomplished writers showed a much greater tendency to use obligatory
elements of the problem question discourse structure.
4.2 RANKING TASK
The lawyers were also asked to rank a number of short, sample answers, according to appropriacy
(see methodology). Table 8 matches the sample answers with their expected ranking and the
actual ranking assigned by the lawyers.
Table 8 Lawyers’ ranking of sample answers

Lawyers’ ranking Individual ranking assigned
Sample answer Expected ranking L1 L2 L3 L4
P1690 1 or 2 1 1 3 5
P1830 1 or 2 2 2 1 1
P240 3, 4 or 5 3 3 2 2
P620 3, 4 or 5 4 4 4 3
P1720 3, 4 or 5 5 5 5 4
The table shows that out of the 20 responses, 16 conformed to expectations. The only really
surprising result was in L4, where P1690 was placed fifth out of the five samples. It should
perhaps be noted that two of the participants mentioned that it was difficult to form an impression
from the short texts presented. This may have had some effect on the results. On the whole, the
results show that the lawyers preferred the samples conforming to the problem question discourse
structure.
- 60 -
Chapter 4: Baseline study
As noted above (3.4), the lawyers were also asked to state the reasons for their ranking. In their
responses, all referred to structure and clarity of expression. In addition, three of the lawyers
mentioned ‘identifying’, ‘covering’ or ‘demonstrating an understanding of’ the issues (L1, L2 and
L4). Two identified reference to the ‘principles’ or ‘components’ of the law as desirable (L3 and
L4). The same two mentioned the use of case law as a positive feature. Finally, one of the lawyers
also referred to the way his/her preferred sample applied the law to the facts (L4).
These comments demonstrate that the lawyers were using some notion of structure and clarity of
expression to guide them in judging the samples. The criteria they used to identify effective
organisation include establishing whether the student sample identified the issues, stated the law,
gave authority and applied the law to the facts. This corresponds to four of the moves from
Howe’s discourse structure: statement of issue, statement of law, authority, application of law to
facts. This suggests that the functions identified by Howe are indeed important to the genre of
problem question.
4.3 CONCLUSION
These results show that members of the legal community, performing the same task as the
students, tend to make use of the Howe discourse structure. In addition, writing samples that
follow the target schematic structure are generally evaluated more favourably than those that do
not. Finally, lawyers report using elements of the Howe discourse structure to distinguish good
legal writing from poor legal writing. From this it is possible to conclude that the Howe discourse
structure is in use in the context of the New Zealand legal community. Furthermore, this discourse
structure represents the established way of responding in the genre of problem question in law.
- 61 -
5 Results 2: Schematic structure
OVERVIEW
In this study, three principal linguistic comparisons were made. Firstly, the number and kind of
genre moves employed; secondly, the frequency of combined obligatory moves; thirdly, the
pattern types used. Each of these was compared in terms of student language background, subject
area level and content score (see table 4, section 3.6). It was also felt that the difference in length
of response would be instructive. In this chapter the results of the various comparisons are
reported and hypotheses 1, 2 and 3 are considered (see 2.8).
PART ONE: RESULTS OF COMPARATIVE STUDY
5.1 LENGTH OF RESPONSEThe length of response was measured in two different ways.
Firstly, the number of issues that each student raised was considered. Secondly, the length in
words was compared.
The number of issues
The number of issues provides a rough measure of the length of each answer. Descriptive statistics
showing the number of issues occurring in the various groups are provided in the table below.
Table 9 Number of issues

Minimum Maximum Mean
NS Year 1 1 6 3.13
NNS Year 1 1 5 2.61
Year 1 1 6 2.88
Year 2 1 5 2.88
Chapter 5: Schematic structure
Table 9 shows that the NSs and NNSs wrote a very similar number of issues, with the NSs writing
slightly more on average. There is almost no difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups in
terms of both the range and the average number of issues.
A statistical correlation (using Pearson’s correlation coefficient12) was performed to ascertain
whether there was a relationship between the number of issues and either question mark or exam
mark. The results are summarised, along with other results of correlations, in tables 11, 12 and 13
below (under ‘number of issues’).
It was found that for the entire group (i.e. all 123 participants) there was a statistically significant
relationship between the number of issues and the question mark awarded. However, the
relationship was too weak to draw any conclusions (Pearson’s correlation coefficient = .199
(.027)). In addition, when the data was split into the various groups the relationship was found to
exist only in the year 1 group, and within that group, only in the NS year 1 group. The number of
issues identified therefore only appeared to have an effect on grade in the NS year 1 group.
The number of words
Another measure of the length of student response is the number of words. Table 10 summarises
descriptive statistics of the length of scripts, in words.
Table 10 Length in number of words

Minimum Maximum Mean
NS Year 1 142 788 420

NNS Year 1 90 700 366
Year 1 90 788 394
Year 2 202 667 369
12Pearson’s correlation coefficient is a number between 1 and -1 which represents the degree of correlation
between two variables. A positive score represents a positive correlation, and a negative score represents a
negative correlation. The correlation is strongest at 1 and -1, and weakest at 0. It is usually accompanied by a
p-value, which indicates the significance of the correlation. In this study, a p-value of up to 0.05 was
considered acceptable.
- 63 -
Table 11 Correlations to content score (by entire group)

Standardised question mark Standardised exam mark
Discourse score .255 (.004)** .266 (.003)**

Law score .219 (.015)* .218 (.015)*
Facts score .217 (.016)* .189 (.036)*
Authority score .108 (.233) .142 (.116)
Initial opinion score -.079 (.383) -.144 (.112)
Final opinion score -.034 (.706) .057 (.532)
type 1 score .202 (.025)* .168 (.064)
type 2 score .200 (.027)* .097 (.284)
type 3 score -.244 (.006)** -.186 (.040)*
Number of issues .199 (.027)* .125 (.168)
Number of words .522 (.000)** .360 (.000)**
Table 12 Correlations to content score (by level)

Year 1 Year 2 Year 1 Year 2
Discourse score .347 (.001)** .399 (.019)* .412 (.000)** .252 (.151)
Law score .224 (.035)* .422 (.013)* .272 (.010)** .300 (.085)
Facts score .280 (.008)** .069 (.697) .263 (.013)* .013 (.942)
Authority score .169 (.114) .118 (.507) .239 (.024)* .054 (.763)
Initial opinion score .005 (.961) -.482 (.004)** -.120 (.264) -.407 (.017)*
Final opinion score -.020 (.850) .146 (.409) .075 (.482) .029 (.871)
type 1 score .178 (.094) .370 (.031)* .195 (.067) .216 (.221)
type 2 score .289 (.006)** .020 (.913) .189 (.076) -.095 (.591)
type 3 score -.251 (.018)* -.383 (.026)* -.238 (.025)* -.194 (.272)
Number of issues .369 (.000)** -.213 (.227) .234 (.027)* -.145 (.412)
Number of words .587 (.000)** .317 (.068) .405 (.006)** .209 (.235)
Table 13 Correlations to content score (by language background)

NS Year 1 NNS Year 1 NS Year 1 NNS Year 1
Discourse score .378 (.010)** .212 (.167) .398 (.007)** .352 (.019)*
Law score .247 (.102) .015 (.922) .269 (.074) .154 (.317)
Facts score .157 (.303) .334 (.027)* .218 (.150) .261 (.087)
Authority score .276 (.066) .070 (.652) .256 (.089) .228 (.136)
Initial opinion score -.180 (.237) .268 (.078) -.159 (.297) -.047 (.763)
Final opinion score -.193 (.203) .208 (.176) -.138 (.366) .268 (.078)
type 1 score .083 (.587) .095 (.539) .143 (.349) .104 (.503)
type 2 score .271 (.072) .258 (.090) .157 (.304) .151 (.328)
type 3 score -.167 (.274) -.140 (.366) -.185 (.224) -.130 (.402)
Number of issues .377 (.011)* .177 (.251) .266 (.077) .012 (.936)
Number of words .768 (.000)** .411 (.006)** .516 (.000)** .240 (.117)
* correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)

** correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
- 64 -
Table 10 shows that the NSs tended to write slightly more than the NNSs with a higher minimum,
maximum and mean number of words. On average the NSs wrote almost 15% more than the
NNSs. The difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups is slightly more complex. The year 2
group tended to write a more consistent length: according to Table 10, the minimum length is far
higher at year 2 than at year 1. However, both the maximum and the mean were lower at year 2.
There appears to be a correlation between number of words and content score (see tables 11,
12 and 13 ‘number of words’). Overall, a relatively strong relationship emerges for the entire
group. However, upon closer examination, the relationship again only appears to hold at year
1 level. The correlation is strongest in the NS year 1 group (.768 (.000)). It seems that the
better year 1 students wrote longer answers than the others. The results for all correlations to
content score are recorded in tables 11, 12 and 13, above.
5.2 SCHEMATIC STRUCTURE
Individual Discourse Moves
The individual discourse moves were assigned a percentage score for each participant as outlined
in 3.6 above. The mean scores recorded for the various groups are displayed in the bar graphs
below.
- 65 -
Figure 9 Bar graph of mean move score by language background
Figure 10 Bar graph of mean move score by student level
Language background
- 66 -
As shown in figure 9, the NSs and NNSs used very similar proportions of discourse moves. Of the
moves counted, the most frequently occurring move was the application of law to facts, followed
by the opinion move in initial position. However, if the overall use of the opinion move is
considered (by combining initial and final position uses) then the opinion move was the most
frequent. As illustrated in the graph, the opinion move was used far more frequently in initial
position than in final position. The opinion and application of law to facts moves were used
significantly more frequently than the other moves recorded. These were often combined in
sequence, as in the following example:
Figure 11 Example of Opinion – Application of law to facts sequence
P620
1 Legal positions of parties.
2 i) Putt Ltd. [Putt has become vicariously liable for the damage that his Opinion
3 negligent employee has done (Duffer).] [However, Putt can argue that Facts
4 Blythe and Rhoda had a duty to actually grab the fire extinguisher
5 when Rhoda suggested and prevent the actual scenario from
6 happening.] [Thus, this leaves Putt with a defence against claims from Opinion
7 both DHL and Kemex,] [as Kemex Ltd would not have accrued any Facts
8 damage `but for’ the negligent conduct by Blythe and Rhoda to stop the
9 smouldering debris from causing any more damage.] [Putt can also
10 claim against Duffer through his employment contract. Putt can be Opinion
11 liable] [for the fact that he did not call the fire service as he made poor Facts
12 judgement about the fire being under control.]
In this example, the opinion - facts sequence is repeated 3 times. The student provides the
immediate solution to the legal problem and supports this with information from the fact situation.
At no point does he or she explicitly refer to the law, but rather expects the lecturer to infer
knowledge. This particular strategy was very common at year 1, where the students were very new
to law and did not use the target schematic structure confidently.
- 67 -
The NSs nevertheless did approximate the problem question structure somewhat better than the
NNSs. The only significant difference between the NSs and NNSs (year 1) was the frequency of
the statement of law move. On average, the NSs used this move more than one and a half times as
frequently as the NNSs (NS=.29, NNS=.18, i.e. NSs used the move 1.62 times as frequently as
NNSs). This indicates a better grasp of the need to explicitly refer to law in this genre.
In summary, the results show that both NSs and NNSs at year 1 tend to overuse the opinion and
application of law to facts moves. However, the NSs appear to have a better understanding of the
requirement for an explicit statement of law in this genre.
Level
As demonstrated by figure 10, the difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups is much more
pronounced. The year 1 students placed a much greater emphasis on the opinion and application
of law to facts moves, than did the year 2 students. In particular, the year 1 group used opinion
moves in initial position significantly more frequently than the year 2 group. The graph shows that
the year 2 students scored well on all the obligatory moves (i.e. statement of law, authority and
application of law to facts: .72, .86 and .81 respectively). By comparison to the year 1 students,
the year 2 responses are generally better examples of the genre of problem question in law, as
described by Howe (1990). An example is provided over.
The example (see over) demonstrates that the year 2 students showed a much greater awareness of
the need to explicitly state the law and explain how it applies to the fact situation. This is reflected
in the number and kind of genre moves used by the year 2 group (see figure 10, page 66).
- 68 -
Figure 12 Example of year 2 response
P2600
1 s 92 Property Law Act 1952 states the rules that must be adhered to Issue
2 when a mortgagor is in default of their repayments.
3 s 92(1) states that notice must be given in writing that the default has Law and
4 occurred and that it must contain certain points Authority
5 a. nature of default
6 b. date required to remedy the default
7 c. the rights the mortgagee has to exercise
8 The notice that Genevieve sent to Bianca did not contain any of these Facts
9 points, and therefore did not constitute notice, as described in the Act.
10 Therefore s 92(1) states Genevieve has no power to sell land, or enter
11 into possession of land conferred by the mortgage.
12 This in itself is enough to cancel the mortgagee sale. Opinion
Content score
The results of correlations of the various moves to question mark and exam mark are displayed in
tables 11, 12 and 13 above (page 64). Although a number of significant correlations were found to
exist, most were too weak to be meaningful. Some stronger correlations were obtained in the year
2 group, where question mark was found to be positively correlated with law score (.422 (.013)).
In addition, question mark and exam mark were negatively correlated with initial opinion score at
this level (-.482 (.004) and -.407 (.017) respectively).
The results suggest that at year 2 there was a tendency for the higher-scoring students to make
greater use of the statement of law move. This tendency highlights the importance of this move in
the genre of problem question. In addition, the lower-scoring year 2 students tended to use the
initial opinion move more frequently than the others. This suggests that the strategy of stating the
- 69 -
opinion in initial position was not particularly successful. This is an interesting finding because
the opinion occurred frequently in initial position in the year 1 group. However, these results must
be treated with caution as they apply to only one of the groups in the sample.
Obligatory moves: Discourse Score
The overall discourse was measured by combining scores for the obligatory moves in the
discourse (i.e. statement of law, authority and application of law to facts). The final score reflected
the extent to which the most important functions in the discourse were being performed (see 3.6).
This score could then be compared across the various groups and correlated with question mark
and exam mark, in order to establish whether or not some kind of relationship existed. The table
below provides some basic descriptive statistics for the groups under consideration.
Table 14 Discourse score descriptive statistics

Group Minimum Maximum Mean
NS year 1 .50 2.50 1.54

NNS year 1 .00 2.00 1.36
year 1 .00 2.50 1.45
year 2 1.33 3.00 2.44
Language background
Table 14 shows the minimum, maximum and mean discourse score achieved by the different
groups. The NSs and NNSs at year 1 had rather similar discourse scores. However, the NS results
are in all respects slightly higher than the NNS results: they have a higher minimum score, a
higher maximum score and a higher mean score. This suggests that on the whole, the NSs are
better at realising the obligatory moves of the discourse.
Level
The real difference is between the year 1 and year 2 results though. All three descriptives are
significantly higher at year 2 (see table 14). These results clearly indicate that the obligatory
discourse functions identified by Howe were performed much more consistently at year 2.
- 70 -
Content score
An overall relationship (i.e. for the entire group) between discourse score and both question mark
and exam mark was established. However, the correlations were rather weak (.255 (.004) and .266
(.003)). A more important correlation was obtained in the year 1 group between the same
measures (.347 (.001) and .412 (.000)). There was a similar correlation at year 2, between the
discourse score and question mark (.399 (.019)). Finally, a relationship to content score was also
found in both the NS year 1 and NNS year 1 groups. In the NS year 1 group the discourse score
correlated positively with both the question mark and the exam mark (.378 (.010) and .398 (.007)).
By contrast, in the NNS year 1 group a correlation was obtained only between the discourse score
and exam mark (.352 (.019)).
On the whole, the results make out a fairly consistent relationship between content score and the
overall use of obligatory moves in the discourse. These results indicate that there is a tendency for
the better students to make greater use of the target discourse structure.
In order to further investigate the relationship between discourse score and question mark,
scatterplots of the results were constructed. These are provided over.
These scatterplots show that even students who scored relatively low question marks were able to
score relatively high on the discourse measure. The fact that a number of students who scored
poorly on content did relatively well on the discourse measure is reflected in all groups
Figure 13 Plot of discourse score by question mark (NS year 1)
- 71 -
Figure 14 Plot of discourse score by question mark (NNS year 1)
Figure 15 Plot of discourse score by question mark (Year 1)
- 72 -
Figure 16 Plot of discourse score by question mark (Year 2)
The second thing that these scatterplots show, is that there is a general trend for the very high
scorers (in terms of question mark) to perform at a level well-above average on the discourse
score. This trend is visible in the year 1, year 2 and NS year 1 samples (figures 13, 15 and 16) but
does not appear in the NNS year 1 sample (figure 14). The trend is clearest in the NS year 1 and
year 2 samples (figures 13 and 16).
In the year 2 group, students that scored 9.5 or better (out of 13) also scored between 2.5 and 3 on
the discourse score. These students represent the top 18 percent of the year 2 population.
- 73 -
Similarly, in the NS year 1 group, almost all the students that scored 11.5 or better (out of 15) on
the question mark, scored at least 2 out of 3 on the discourse score. These students represent the
top 13 percent of the NS year 1 population. In these groups then, the high-scoring students make
better use of the target discourse structure.
There was no similar trend in the NNS year 1 group: in this group, the high-scoring students (in
terms of question mark) all achieved in the range of 1 to 1.5 on the discourse score (i.e. average to
below-average). It should however be noted that compared to the NS sample, these students
tended to have relatively average question mark scores (only one achieved greater than 11.5 out of
15). Thus the NNS year 1 results are consistent with the proposition that the top students (in terms
of question mark) have better than average discourse scores. Looking at the year 1 results as a
whole (see figure 15, page 73), the trend was for the better students to follow the target discourse
structure more.
Overall, although students with a low question mark sometimes had a high discourse score, the
reverse was not the case. All students with a high question mark had an above-average discourse
score, and the general tendency was for these scores to be well above-average. It would appear
that it is necessary to address the obligatory elements of the discourse structure in order to obtain a
very good mark.
Discourse patterns
As described in 3.6 (methodology), a count of three different discourse patterns was kept. Pattern
type 1 was the standard pattern, pattern type 2 was a non-standard pattern, and pattern type 3
included mixed and incomplete patterns (see 3.5). Once complete, the count was converted to a
pattern type score, with a maximum score of 1 indicating 100% usage. The following bar graphs
summarise the mean pattern type scores by language background and student level.
The graphs show that the most frequently used pattern was pattern type 3 (for example, the
average year 1 type 3 score was .83). The graphs further show that the number of instances of a
- 74 -
clear example of pattern type 2 was very small (this is illustrated by the average year 1 NNS type
2 score, which was .06 or around 6%). This suggests that the non-standard pattern identified in 3.5
is not really in use. In part, this finding can be attributed to the small number of statement of law
moves, which were identified as an essential part of pattern type 2. The result-reason pattern
discussed above (page 46) follows a similar rationale as the full pattern type 2: it answers the
particular legal question and then gives reasoning. This reasoning tended not to involve the
statement of law move. Thus, a more meaningful result would perhaps have been achieved if the
statement of law had not been defined as an essential element of the pattern type 2 structure.
Language background
At year 1, there were roughly twice as many clear uses of pattern type 1 in the NS text than in the
NNS text (average type 1 score: NS = .21, NNS = .10). This reflects a greater tendency in the NSs
to follow the target discourse structure. However, both NS and NNS populations at year 1
consisted overwhelmingly of type 3 discourse patterns (average type 3 score: NS = .76, NNS =
.90). Although NSs demonstrate a better understanding of the discourse pattern required,
convincing use of the target discourse pattern was rare.
Figure 17 Graph of mean pattern type score by language background
- 75 -
Figure 18 Graph of mean pattern type score by student level
Level
By contrast, the year 2 sample showed a much higher proportion of the type 1 discourse pattern
(average type 1 score = .54). The approach at year 2 seems much more consistent with Howe’s
discourse pattern than the approach at year 1.
Content score
In order to determine whether the use of one or another of these patterns was a factor in the mark
awarded for the question or in the final mark achieved, the pattern type scores were correlated
with the participants’ question mark and exam mark.
Overall (i.e. for the entire group), type 1 and type 2 patterns were found to correlate positively
with content score while pattern type 3 correlated negatively. However, the relationships
- 76 -
discovered were too weak to support any significant conclusions (.202 (.025), .200 (.027), -.244
(.010) for type 1 score, type 2 score and type 3 score respectively).
A stronger relationship was found in the year 2 group between both type 1 score, type 3 score and
question mark. The type 1 discourse pattern was found to correlate positively with content score,
whereas the type 3 discourse pattern correlated negatively (.370 (.031) and -.383 (.026)
respectively). For this group, the use of the Howe pattern played a role in the more successful
answers, whereas the use of mixed or incomplete patterns was related to lower content scores.
This result tends to emphasise the importance of the type 1 pattern in achieving a higher grade.
However, the finding is limited to the year 2 group.
5.3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The overall difference between groups can be conceived of as the sum of the differences on
individual comparisons. The following table summarises this by showing which comparisons
yielded positive results. The symbol ‘X’ signifies that a difference between groups was found, or
in the case of the content score, a relationship was established.
Table 15 Results: Differences noted and relationships established

COMPARISON MADE Discourse feature
Individual genre Obligatory genre Pattern type

moves moves
Student Language
background background X X X
variable Level X X X
Content Score X
‘X’ signifies a difference noted or relationship established in the results
As indicated in the table, most comparisons resulted in a contrast between groups. However, the
only discourse feature that established a consistent relationship with content score was the analysis
of obligatory genre moves (i.e. discourse score). These results are interpreted in the light of
hypotheses 1, 2 and 3, below.
- 77 -
PART TWO: DISCUSSION OF HYPOTHESES
5.4 HYPOTHESIS ONE
Native speakers use more appropriate schematic structure than non-native speakers.
Similarities in discourse structure
In comparing NSs and NNSs perhaps the most interesting finding is that both groups appear to
experience some difficulty adjusting to the legal genre under investigation. Both groups were
characterised by an extremely high use of type 3 patterns, i.e. incomplete or mixed patterns of
discourse (see 3.5). In addition, the results also showed that both NSs and NNSs overused the
opinion and application of law to facts moves (see figure 9, page 66).
The overall trend in both groups was to respond to an issue with the pattern opinion - application
of law to facts. This strategy is understandable, because it gives a direct response to the question at
hand: the student is providing the practical ‘solution’ to the problem in the fact situation.
However, this approach tends to neglect the important function of using the law to provide
reasoning for the result, and the equally important function of explicitly demonstrating that one is
able to do so. In general, neither group demonstrated a particularly sound understanding of the
appropriate discourse structure.
Differences in discourse structure
In spite of the foregoing observations, some differences between the NSs and the NNSs were
nevertheless observed. Firstly, the NSs made greater use of pattern type 1 than the NNSs (see
figure 17, page 76). Secondly, the NSs used the discourse moves in a manner that was more
consistent with the target genre. This was evident in the higher number of explicit statement of law
moves employed by the NS group (see figure 9, page 66). And finally, the NSs generally
performed better on the discourse score measure, indicating that their overall use of the
obligatory moves was better.
- 78 -
Interpretation
The results above seem to support hypothesis 1 fairly consistently. Compared to the NSs, the
NNSs appear either not to appreciate the need for an explicit explanation of the law. Alternatively,
they may not be able to express this function in sufficiently explicit terms (or a combination of
these two possibilities). While the NSs appear to have some advantage over the NNSs, it should
be noted that they also seem to have some difficulty in responding appropriately, if only to a lesser
degree. It is clear that both NSs and NNSs need to be made aware of discourse community
conventions.
5.5 HYPOTHESIS TWO
More experienced students use more appropriate schematic structure than others
Differences in discourse structure
The results show that the year 2 students use the target discourse pattern (i.e. pattern type 1) more
frequently than the year 1 students (see figure 18, page 76). In addition, they appear to use a more
appropriate combination of moves (see figure 10, page 66). The year 1 tendency to overuse the
opinion and application of law to facts moves is replaced by a greater reliance on the obligatory
moves statement of law, authority and application of law to facts. As a result of this, the year 2
students achieved a much higher average discourse score than their year 1 counterparts (see table
14, page 70).
The effect of task on writing
One possible contributing factor to the result achieved here is the different emphasis of the
different tasks at year 1 and year 2. The year 1 group answered a question on the topic of
negligence, from the area of tort law, whereas the year 2 group answered a question on the topic
of mortgagee’s rights, from the area of property law. The year 1 answer involved reference to
broad principles of case law, whereas the year 2 answer involved reference to precise sections of
statute and the application of much narrower rules to the fact situation. The statute-based property
- 79 -
law question may therefore have lent itself to the target discourse structure better than the
negligence question.
This suggests that certain subject areas tend to ‘trigger’ the discourse structure, depending on
whether or not precise reference to narrow rules is called for. This may have contributed to the
difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups in this study. Unfortunately, it was not possible to
control for this effect.
Interpretation
Bearing in mind the caveat above, hypothesis 2 is also supported by the data. The year 2 students
have significantly more experience with the genre of problem question. As a result, their
appreciation of the requirements of the genre is much better developed.
5.6 HYPOTHESIS THREE
More successful students use more appropriate schematic structure than others.
The relationship between discourse structure and content score
Although some relationships were found at year 2 (see page 64) the use of particular pattern types
and particular moves did not consistently correlate to a higher content score.
A more consistent relationship was established between the discourse score and content score
however. This was found to correlate positively with both the question mark and the exam mark,
at a variety of levels (see page 64, 71 ff.). It was suggested that the overall use of obligatory
moves in the discourse structure was therefore a factor in the awarding of content marks. Closer
analysis revealed that in general, the higher-scoring students achieved well-above average results
on the discourse score measure (see figures 13, 14 , 15 and 16, pages 72 to 73)).
- 80 -
The results further showed that the use of the target discourse structure was not the only factor in
determining grade. A number of students did well on the discourse score but failed to achieve in
terms of content score. Clearly, content also plays an important role in the allocation of marks.
Interpretation
Hypothesis 3 is also supported by the results. There are two possible interpretations of this. The
first is that higher-scoring students have a better understanding of the subject and as a result of this
organise their answers more appropriately. The alternative is that use of the appropriate discourse
structure actually has a bearing on mark at the upper end of the scale. In order to demonstrate a
better-than average understanding of the law, it may be necessary to demonstrate an understanding
of the appropriate legal genres. It is possible that the difference between ‘good’ and ‘very good’
lies as much in the presentation, as in the content itself.
5.7 CONCLUSION
This study was designed to test hypotheses 1, 2 and 3. The results support the following
propositions:
HYPOTHESIS ONE:
• Native speakers tend to use more appropriate schematic structure than non-native
speakers
• Nevertheless, the special pedagogical genres present problems to both native

speakers and non-native speakers.
HYPOTHESIS TWO:
• More experienced students use more appropriate schematic structure than less
experienced students.
• However, certain subject areas may lend themselves better to the realisation of
special pedagogical genres.
HYPOTHESIS THREE:
• Overall, the use of appropriate schematic structure is not a decisive factor in the
awarding of marks.
- 81 -
• However, the use of appropriate schematic structure is a factor in the awarding of

marks at the upper end of the scale.
The implications of these results are discussed in chapter 7. Chapter 6 reports on the results to the
study of grammar and lexis and discusses the findings in terms of hypotheses 4, 5 and 6.
- 82 -
6 Results 3: Functional lexical phrases
OVERVIEW
This chapter reports the results to the study of functional lexical phrases. The first part focuses on
the preliminary analysis of text and establishes a framework. Part 2 reports the results of the
comparative analysis proper. This is followed by a discussion of hypotheses 4, 5 and 6 in part 3
(see 2.8).
PART ONE: PRELIMINARY ANALYSISThis part is divided into two sections. The first
summarises the functional lexical phrases found in the various discourse moves. This is followed
by a discussion of language options for the lexical phrases identified.
6.1 FRAMEWORK OF FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASESTwo kinds of functional
lexical phrase were identified: 1. legal technical lexical phrases, which performed a unique
discourse function in the problem question genre; and 2. text-organising lexical phrases, which
performed a textual function common to other academic genres as well. The following table (over
page) summarises the functional lexical phrases found.
The table lists the discourse moves on the left with their lexical phrase realisation on the right.
Moves that are similar in function (such as the forecast and statement of issue) are summarised
together. The following section discusses language options within the lexical phrases.
Chapter 6: Functional lexical phrases
Table 16 Genre moves and lexical phrase realisation
Genre Move Lexical phrase realisation
Forecast General reference to problem: semi-technical lexis

Statement of Issue • The issue/problem/question here is whether...
Sequencing lexis and advance labelling
• The first issue to be discussed is whether...
Statement of Law Statute authority and necessity clause

Authority • Section 92 states/provides that... must/it is necessary...
Case authority and necessity clause
• In <case>, it was / the judge held that... must/it is necessary...
Purpose clause and necessity clause
• In order to prove... it must be shown that / X must show that...
Condition - consequence
• If it is shown that... then X is liable.
Naming legal test, rule, principle, standard
• The test to be applied is...
• The rule/principle/standard here is...
Application of Law to Reference to fact situation

Facts • In this case/Here...
Topicalisers
• With regard to the plaintiff’s action...
Causal conjunction
• Therefore...
Opinion Assessment of legal process: successful action

• It is possible that X may be able to / can sue Y
• It is possible that X may have / has a case against Y
Assessment of legal process: liability
• It is possible that X may be liable
• It is possible that X may face liability
Assessment of outcome: benefit
• It is possible that X will be compensated
• It is possible that X will receive compensation
Assessment of outcome: obligation
• It is possible that X will have to pay compensation
- 84 -
6.2 LANGUAGE OPTIONS IN FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASES
Within the lexical phrases established, a number of language options are available. This section
considers those options by discussing devices for textual organisation on the one hand, and lexico-
grammatical features on the other.
Textual organisation
Three different moves were found to require devices for the organisation of text. They are the
forecast, statement of issue and application of law to facts. The range of possible language for the
textual function is considered here.
General semi-technical lexis
This occurred in the forecast and statement of issue. It takes the form of general lexis which
functions to signal aspects of the legal discourse, in the same way as Winter’s Vocabulary 3 (see
section 2.6). An example is provided below:
(6.1) The issue here is whether Bianca is deemed to have had proper notice from
Genevieve... (P2520)
The lexical item issue signals the issue or problem of the case. Other signalling lexis found
includes: situation, scenario, case, instance, event, example, problem, question, party/parties,
plaintiff, defendant, cause of action, defence, remedy.
Sequencing lexis
This lexis occurs throughout the text, but is particularly useful for the forecast and statement of
issue moves. It functions to make explicit the sequence of discourse acts, as in the following
example:
(6.2) The first issue to be discussed is whether the notice served by Genevieve is a
valid notice. (P2270)
Sequencing lexis includes a range of adjectives and adverbs such as first, second, third, final, last
firstly, secondly, thirdly, finally, lastly, then and next.
- 85 -
Advance labelling of discourse acts
This lexis was found primarily in the forecast and statement of issue. It occurs where the student
explicitly signals a particular discourse act to be performed later in the text (see Tadros, 1985;
1994). This is illustrated by the use of discussed in example 6.2. Other examples of verbs used to
label discourse acts include discuss, consider, look at, see, determine, establish and conclude.
Topicalisers
This was found to occur in the application of law to facts. It functions to draw attention to a
particular thing or proposition. An example is provided below:
(6.3) Regarding the damage done to Kemex Ltd. the Wagon Mound case could apply
to this situation. (P1780)
Other examples of topicalisers found in the text are: with regard to, in relation to, in the concern
of.
Causal conjunction
This was also found to occur in the application of law to facts. Its function is to make explicit the
logical relationship between law, facts and opinion. Consider this example:
(6.4) The building of Putt Ltd. is located in an industrial park and I would say that it is
foreseeable that if Putt’s building catches fire that others around it will catch on fire as
well. Thus DHL would have a good case to sue Duffer in negligence. (P970)
Other such lexical items include: therefore, hence, so, as a result, then, as a consequence, in
consequence, consequently, because of this, in conclusion.
Lexico-grammar
In expressing the functions identified (table 16), students are confronted by a myriad of
grammatical possibilities. For the purposes of this study, the three most important features of
grammar were nominalisation, passivisation and hedging (see 2.7). The various possibilities are
discussed below and related to elements of the genre.
- 86 -
Nominalisation
Nominalisation was found to occur primarily in the opinion move. For the purposes of this study
nominalisation was broadly defined as any use of nominal groups in place of verbal groups. For
example:
(6.5) DHL may also be able to sue Putt Ltd. under strict liability for dangerous items
escaping their property. (P1790)
(6.6) Kemex has a very strong case against DHL and Putt Ltd. with regards to
negligence. (P830)
Example 6.6 is considered a nominal expression of example 6.5. The use of nominalisation here
appears to be, in part, a time-saving strategy. In the example above, the student using the
nominalised form is able to pack extra information into the noun phrase. Nominalisation was also
used simply as a marker of register, without the kind of modification illustrated in example 6.6.
Passivisation
Passivisation occurred throughout the text and was not limited to any one particular genre move.
The passive voice was found to perform a total of three functions in this discourse. Firstly, the
passive is used in general statements of law where the identity of the agent is of little or no
relevance. This has the effect of making the text more abstract. Consider the following example:
(6.7) A notice must be issued to the mortgagor. (P2400)
By contrast, a similar statement of law in active voice loses some of the detached authority of the
previous example. Compare example 6.8:
(6.8) Genevieve must issue a notice to Bianca... (P2480)
Secondly, the passive also serves to thematise the agent in utterances of the kind given in example
6.9, below.
(6.9) Putt Ltd. can possibly be sued by DHL and Kemex... (P1840)
Finally, the passive is also used where the real agent is the law or the court. An example of this is
provided in 6.10.
- 87 -
(6.10) When it is posted it is deemed to be served at the time when in the ordinary
course of post [it would] be delivered. (P 2370)
A surprisingly high number of lexical verbs can be used in this last way. Among them are: hold,
find, state, apply, administer, use, require, restrict, allow, entitle, consider, examine, see.
Hedging
In this corpus, hedges occurred almost exclusively in the opinion move. For the purposes of this
study, the following definition of hedging was used:
A hedge is an item of language which a speaker uses to explicitly qualify his/her lack
of commitment to the truth of a proposition he/she utters. (Crompton 1997: 281)
Hedges were found to conform to the following four categories (adapted from Crompton 1997:
284):
lexical verbs: copulas other than be. e.g. seem, appear etc.
modal adjectives: in clauses relating to the probability of the subsequent proposition
being true. e.g. it is possible that...
modal adverbs: sentence adverbials which relate to the probability of the proposition
being true. e.g. possibly, perhaps etc.
modal auxiliaries: modals used epistemically. e.g. may, might, could etc.
The most common form of hedging was the use of modal auxiliaries, as in the following example
from the study:
(6.11) Kemex may also be able to sue Rhoda and Blythe... (P1800)
However, other expressions did occur, often in combination as in example 6.12:
(6.12) Consequently. it is possible Rhoda and Blythe may try and sue Putt Ltd. for
private nuisance... (P1840)
The various use of these different language options is considered in the comparative study below.
PART TWO: COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
In this section the results of the comparative analysis are presented. In 6.3, the lexical and
grammatical realisation of discourse moves is considered. Then, in 6.4, more general functional
- 88 -
lexical phrases, grammar and lexis are examined. As described in 3.8, the sample was split into
eight different groups. These are: NNSs at year 1, NSs at year 1, year 1, year 2, NNS high scorers
(HS), NS high scorers, NNS low scorers (LS), NS low scorers. The use of the terms ‘high scorer’
and ‘low scorer’ refers to the content score (in Commercial Law) of the students. For each group,
a record of the number of occurrences of the target language was kept. The results of the analysis
are summarised below and the complete results are reproduced in Appendix I.
6.3 DISCOURSE MOVES
The language used in the various discourse moves is reported in this section. Where necessary,
examples of the target language have been provided.
Forecast and Statement of issue
The language features identified for analysis in this move were sequencing lexis, general semi-
technical lexis and advance labelling (see 6.2). The use of these features by different groups is
summarised in table 17, below.
Table 17 Language features in forecast and issue moves

Forecast and issue Group
Target language NNS 1 NS 1 Year 1 Year 2 NNS NS NNS NS
HS HS LS LS
total sequencing lexis 2.68 2.81 2.75 2.88 2.85 4.05 4.27 1.39
(e.g. firstly, secondly etc.)
Semi-technical lexis
issue/issues 1.06 1.22 1.15 1.44 0.00 0.31 0.86 2.09
problem 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
question 0.00 0.42 0.23 0.16 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
action 3.55 5.03 4.35 0.48 1.90 4.67 6.84 8.35
plaintiff 0.44 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.70
defendant 0.37 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.70
defence 0.44 0.95 0.72 0.08 1.42 1.56 0.00 0.00
remedy/remedies 2.30 0.48 1.32 5.75 2.37 0.00 0.86 0.70
total semi-technical lexis 8.16 8.75 7.93 8.07 6.65 7.78 8.55 12.52
total advance labelling devices 1.12 0.64 0.86 0.64 0.00 1.87 0.00 0.00
(e.g. discuss, consider etc.)
N.B. figures represent number of occurrences per 1,000 words of text.
- 89 -
Perhaps the most striking feature of these results is the low frequency of the target language. On
average, a score of 1.00 occurrences per 1,000 words of text equates with one instance every 2-3
answers. This is roughly how frequently advance labelling devices were found in many of the
groups. There is a slightly greater overall use of sequencing lexis, and the total amount of semi-
technical, signalling lexis is somewhat higher again. These results reflect the general absence of
explicit discourse organisation in the answers. The tendency was to use opinion or statement of
law moves to introduce the discourse, rather than the kind of explicit organisation described in
6.2. This finding is probably explained by the constraints of the exam situation: students had very
little time to plan their answers, and consequently there is little evidence of explicit organisation.
Overall, the results showed up very few differences between the groups. As expected, the NSs
used a slightly greater range of semi-technical vocabulary, with no occurrences of problem or
question in the NNS text. Surprisingly, the NNSs used more advance labelling devices than the
NSs. However, overall usage was extremely low. The year 1 and year 2 groups differed mainly in
their use of semi-technical lexis. In the year 1 group the most frequent reference was action,
whereas in the year 2 group it was remedy. This reflects the somewhat different focus of the two
tasks. Whereas the year 1 group were concerned with identifying the relevant parties and causes of
action, the year 2 group were more interested in specifying the outcome.
Statement of law
A number of realisations were identified for the statement of law (see table 16). However, this
move was somewhat neglected by students. Not all the linguistic realisations provided enough
data to make reliable comparisons. As a result, just two principal areas of analysis were identified.
The first was the expression of necessity and the second was the use of particular functional
vocabulary.
- 90 -
Expression of necessity
Example 6.13 provides an illustration of expression of necessity. This could also be realised by the
modal and quasi-modal auxiliaries must, shall, have to, need to, or the use of a form of require or
requirement.
(6.13) It would also be necessary to prove that Putt Ltd.’s action was not too remote so
as to negate liability. (P1290)
Table 18 summarises the various expressions of necessity.
Table 18 Expression of necessity in statement of law move

Statement of law Group
Target language NNS 1 NS 1 Year 1 Year 2 NNS NS HS NNS NS LS
HS LS
total expression of necessity (1) 3.11 3.34 3.23 9.99 3.32 8.09 0.00 1.39
modal auxiliaries 94% 83% 88% 74% 100% 73% 0% 100%

it … necessary to 0% 6% 4% 1% 0% 15% 0% 0%
require 4% 5% 4% 8% 0% 8% 0% 0%
requirement 2% 6% 4% 17% 0% 4% 0% 0%
expression of necessity:
total modal auxiliaries(1) 2.93 2.76 2.83 7.43 3.32 5.91 0.00 1.39
modal auxiliaries:
lexical choice
must 43% 38% 40% 81% 71% 32% 0% 50%
have to 28% 31% 29% 6% 29% 26% 0% 50%
need to 28% 31% 29% 5% 0% 42% 0% 0%
shall 2% 0% 1% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0%
modal auxiliaries:
grammatical choice
<modal> + active main verb 96% 71% 83% 52% 86% 68% 0% 100%
<modal> + passive main verb 4% 27% 16% 32% 14% 32% 0% 0%
<modal> + complement 0% 0% 0% 16% 0% 0% 0% 0%
other constructions 0% 2% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
(1) Figures represent number of occurrences per 1,000 words of text.
Table 18 shows that there was little difference between the NSs and NNSs on this measure.
However, the year 2 group scored significantly higher than the year 1 group. This reflects their
greater use of the statement of law move (see 5.2). There is also a considerable difference between
the two high-scoring groups and the two low-scoring groups. Both the NNS LS and NS LS groups
- 91 -
had comparatively low scores here, with the NNS LS group recording no expression of necessity
whatsoever. In a subject essentially concerned with rights and obligations, this is bound to have
some effect on the mark awarded. So it is not surprising that the results for the NNS HS and NS
HS groups were significantly higher. The NS HS result was particularly high. These results
suggest some kind of relationship between mark awarded and the use of expressions of necessity.
For all groups, the primary realisation was through the use of deontic modal auxiliaries, i.e. must,
have to, need to and shall. The distribution of these different auxiliaries was very similar for the
NS and NNS groups at year 1. However, the year 2 students made much greater use of the more
formal must and shall than the year 1 students. In all likelihood, this difference is partly due to the
use of statute law in the year 2 exam. Where students referred to or quoted statutory provisions,
they used the language of those provisions (i.e. must and shall). Such language is more
appropriate to the legal context.
In addition to lexical choice, the grammatical choice accompanying the use of modal auxiliaries
was also recorded (see table 18). In the NNS sample, the overwhelming majority of modal
auxiliaries were followed by a verb in the active voice. By contrast, over a quarter of such
occurrences in the NS sample were followed by a verb in the passive. This use of the passive lends
a tone of authority and objectivity to the answer (see 6.2). The NNSs do not appear to use the
passive voice appropriately here.
This effect is less pronounced with the higher-scoring NNSs. Both high-scoring groups recorded a
higher proportion of verbs in the passive voice than the respective year 1 NS and NNS groups.
Finally, the proportion of modal auxiliaries followed by passives in the year 2 group is almost one
third, twice the average percentage at year 1. These results show that the choice of the passive
voice in this position is associated with the language background of the student, the subject area
level of the student and the content mark achieved by the student.
- 92 -
Functional lexis
Two kinds of functional lexis were examined here. The first involved the identification of a legal
test, rule or principle, as illustrated in example 6.14. The second was used in the description of
legal tests and standards. It was found to occur in conjunction with an expression of necessity. An
example is provided below (6.15).
(6.14) Here the Wagon Mound test is applied. (P1790)

(6.15) Next, it must be proven that Putt have breached that duty of care... (P1690)
This kind of functional lexis occurred mainly in the year 1 sample, which was concerned with the
application of tests for the tort of negligence. The results are summarised in table 19.
Table 19 Functional lexis in statement of law move

Statement of law Group
HS HS LS LS
use/apply/administer (1)
use 0.50 0.85 0.69 0.16 0.00 0.31 0.85 1.39
apply 0.50 0.58 0.54 0.24 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.70
administer 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
total use/apply/administer 1.00 1.54 1.29 0.40 0.00 1.56 0.85 2.09
use/apply/administer: structure
active forms 44% 55% 51% 80% 0% 0% 0% 33%
passive forms 56% 38% 44% 20% 0% 100% 100% 67%
other forms 0% 7% 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
prove/show/establish (1)
<necessity> prove 1.00 1.64 1.35 0.08 1.90 4.98 0.00 0.00
<necessity> show 0.31 0.37 0.34 0.16 0.47 1.56 0.00 0.00
<necessity> establish 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
total prove/show/establish 1.37 2.07 1.75 0.32 2.85 6.85 0.00 0.00
prove/show/establish: structure
active forms 91% 69% 77% 50% 83% 73% 0% 0%
passive forms 9% 31% 23% 50% 17% 27% 0% 0%
Table 19 shows that the NSs tend to use both kinds of functional lexis a little more than the NNSs.
In addition, both high-scoring groups use prove, show and establish much more frequently than
the corresponding year 1 NS and NNS groups. This is probably as a result of a general tendency to
- 93 -
make greater use of the statement of law move. It is therefore somewhat surprising that the
functional lexis use, apply, administer occurs most frequently in the NS LS group. It would appear
that the preferred strategy of the low scorers in the statement of law was to name the appropriate
legal test, rule or principle.
In terms of grammatical structure, the NSs use a relatively high proportion of passives with both
sets of lexis (see table 19). The NNSs, on the other hand, do so only with the use, apply,
administer set, where over half the expressions are in the passive voice. The contrast is somewhat
puzzling at first. One explanation is that the two sets of lexis have been learned in different
contexts. Students may have encountered phrases like ‘the but-for test is used’ relatively
frequently in the context of their legal studies. At the same time, they may have had relatively
little exposure to prove, show, establish in a legal context. It may be that certain phrases are more
likely to be encountered solely in a legal context and be learned with appropriate grammar.
It should be added that the NNS HS group appeared to use prove, show, establish in a more
appropriate manner than the NNSs in general. This consolidates the finding with regard to
expressions of necessity, above (see table 18, page 91). As the examples of prove, show, establish
counted here all occurred in conjunction with an expression of necessity, this result was to be
expected.
Authority
Kind of authority
Following Swales (1982), three kinds of case authority are distinguished: parenthetic, locative and
marked case authority. The other kind of authority used was statute authority.
Parenthetic case authority
The simplest kind of case authority is the parenthetic kind, where the case simply appears in
parentheses after the statement of law. This is illustrated in example 6.16.
- 94 -
(6.16) The courts are not favourable to reopening contracts between parties of equal
bargaining strength (as per Italia Holdings case)... (P2240)
Locative case authority
This is illustrated in example 6.17. The case is introduced by some kind of locative preposition:
this is almost always in, but it would appear that under is also a possibility. The case is usually
followed by a reference to the facts of the case and a statement of the legal position.
(6.17) In a case regarding the remoteness issue Dorset Yacht Co Ltd v Home Office, in
which some borstal boys escaped from a camp and stole a yacht and damaged it [t]he
plaintiff was reasonably foreseeable. (P830)
Marked case authority
This is illustrated in example 6.18. It refers to an array of devices for marking the relationship of a
particular case to the discourse, where it is not clearly related to one single proposition of law.
(6.18) The case Palsgraf v Long Island Railway Company illustrates this point.
(P1500)
Table 20 reports the kind of authority used in the various groups.
Table 20 Kind of authority in authority move

Authority Group
HS HS LS LS
case authority (1) 2.74 2.49 2.61 2.80 2.85 5.29 0.86 0.70
statute authority (1) 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total authority 2.74 2.49 2.61 15.67 2,85 5.29 0.86 0.70
case authority
rhetorical/structural choice
parenthetic 80% 66% 73% 43% 83% 71% 0% 100%
locative 11% 13% 12% 34% 0% 6% 0% 0%
marked 9% 21% 15% 23% 17% 24% 100% 0%
- 95 -
The first point to be taken from these results is that in terms of quantity, the NS and NNS groups
are very similar.
Secondly, these results show that the overall use of authority was highest in the year 2 sample.
This reflects the fact that the year 2 students used statement of law and authority moves much
more frequently than their year 1 counterparts (see 5.2). The kind of authority required at the two
levels was also different. Whereas the emphasis in the year 2 sample was on statute authority,
there were no references to statute authority at year 1. Obviously, this depends entirely on content.
The difference in use of statute and case authority simply reflects the different topics of the year 1
and year 2 groups.
Thirdly, both low-scoring groups scored well below the respective year 1 NS and NNS samples.
By contrast, the NNS HS frequency was about average and the NS HS frequency was almost
double the general NS rate. Thus, both of the high-scoring groups made significantly more
reference to authority than the low-scoring groups. A rough relationship between content score
and frequency of case authority is made out. This supports Swales’ previous finding that there is a
relationship between mark and number of cases cited (Swales 1982: 145). These results are not
surprising. Knowing which cases apply in a given situation is an important part of knowing the
law.
It remains to comment on the kind of case authority employed. The most noticeable feature here
was the high amount of parenthetic authority used by the NNSs (80%). NNSs appear not to have
the linguistic resources to integrate case authority with the rest of the discourse.
Table 20 also shows a distinct difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups. The year 2
students used a comparatively low amount of parenthetic authority and a comparatively high
amount of locative and marked authority. This means that they provided more details of cases in
their answers. The amount of detail probably depends partly on how similar the facts of the
problem are to the facts of well-known cases. Where the facts are similar, students are likely to
- 96 -
recount details of cases to provide examples of how a court has solved a similar problem on
another occasion. Examples of this were found at both levels, but the need may have been greater
in the year 2 task.
Application of law to facts
As noted above (table 16) the language features typical of this move include a number of different
kinds of metadiscourse. Students were required to make reference to the fact situation, to signal
the application of law by means of topicalisers, and to use causal conjunction to signal
conclusions. Table 21 summarises the language features in this move.
Table 21 Features of textual organisation in entire text

Entire text (2) Group
HS HS LS LS
total reference to fact situation 3.42 3.18 3.29 2.72 2.85 3.11 2.56 4.87
(e.g. in this case, here) (1)
total topicalisers 0.37 0.64 0.52 0.32 0.47 0.62 0.00 0.70
(e.g. with regard to, as for)
causal conjunction
therefore 2.12 0.85 1.43 1.92 0.95 0.62 0.85 0.70
thus 0.44 0.37 0.40 0.48 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.00
hence 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
so 1.99 1.64 1.80 1.36 0.47 1.24 3.42 0.00
as a result 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.08 0.47 0.31 0.00 1.39
then (causal) 0.37 1.01 0.72 0.48 0.95 0.93 0.00 2.09
consequently 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
in conclusion 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total causal conjunction 5.17 4.56 4.84 4.64 3.80 3.73 4.27 4.17

(2) These results are unedited and apply to the entire text (see table 6, 3.8)
With regard to reference to the fact situation, there was very little difference between the NS,
NNS, year 1 and year 2 groups (see table 21, page 97). However, the NS LSs referred to the fact
situation significantly more than other groups. A possible explanation is that these students
overemphasised the concrete fact situation at the expense of the more general legal principles.
However, the NNS LS result was much the same as the other groups.
- 97 -
The table also shows that topicalisers were not used very frequently. This accords with the general
point made about textual organisation earlier (page 90); namely, that there is very little evidence
of explicit organisation in the answers.
Lastly, there is little difference in the amount of causal conjunction employed. NNSs used slightly
more than NSs but the range of devices used was slightly larger in the NSs. The NNSs in this
study did not appear to overuse conjunction, as has been found elsewhere (see Field 1994; Field
and Yip 1992).
Opinion
The opinion move is made up of two components - a hedging component and an evaluation
component. This is illustrated in example 6.19, below (the two components are separated by ‘//’).
(6.19) Consequently. it is possible Rhoda and Blythe may try and // sue Putt Ltd. for
private nuisance... (P1840)
A range of modal auxiliaries was found to occur in this move. The modal auxiliaries are
considered first, then the hedging devices and finally the various realisations of the evaluation
component.
Modal auxiliaries
Table 22 (over) summarises the use of modal auxiliaries in the opinion move.
As demonstrated in the table, there is little difference between the NSs and the NNSs in terms of
quantity. However, there is a marked difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups. The small
number of modal auxiliaries at year 2 is probably related to the smaller number of opinion moves
(5.2). The variation in the high-scoring and low-scoring groups is rather inconsistent, with NS LS
low on modal auxiliaries and NNS LS high.
- 98 -
Table 22 Modal auxiliaries in opinion move

Opinion Group
HS HS LS LS
total modal auxiliaries (1) (2) 19.67 21.04 20.41 6.95 19.93 22.09 27.35 17.39
may (=) 26% 35% 31% 21% 26% 39% 9% 24%

might (=) 4% 1% 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
can (=) 46% 16% 29% 43% 43% 8% 75% 0%
could (=) 6% 21% 14% 16% 2% 17% 6% 56%
will (=) 9% 16% 13% 6% 12% 25% 3% 12%
would (=) 7% 11% 9% 13% 17% 10% 0% 4%
shall (=) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
should (=) 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 6% 4%
must (=) 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0%
ought to (=) 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

(2) Only modal auxiliaries followed by a clause commenting on possible legal action, the success
of such action, the kind of damages to be paid or the liability of the parties are included.
The distribution of modal auxiliaries brings out some interesting contrasts. Firstly, by comparison
with the NSs, the NNSs tend to overuse can. Whereas can makes up almost half of the modal
auxiliaries used by the NNSs, the preferred auxiliary in the NS sample is may (35%). The results
further show a significantly higher use of could, will and would in the NSs. As a result, the NNS
text is less hedged than that of the NSs.
A similar difference can be discerned between the year 1 and year 2 groups. Essentially, the year 2
students tend to use can where the year 1 students use may. This too, has the effect of producing a
less-hedged text.
The variation in modal auxiliaries in the high-scoring and low-scoring groups seems to depend
mainly on student language background. There does not appear to be a consistent relationship
between content mark and use of modal auxiliaries.
- 99 -
Hedging devices
The reader is referred to 6.2 for a definition of hedging devices with examples. Table 23
summarises the use of hedging devices in the text.
Table 23 Hedging devices in entire text

Entire text (3) Group
HS HS LS LS
total hedging devices 9.28 18.06 14.02 4.96 9.02 22.09 7.69 18.78
Quantity (1) (2)

total lexical verbs 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.56 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
total modal adjectives 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.16 0.00 1.87 0.00 2.09
total modal adverbs 0.75 2.91 1.92 0.80 0.00 4.67 3.42 2.09
epistemic modal auxiliaries 8.53 14.15 11.56 3.44 9.02 14.62 4.27 14.60
Distribution
lexical verbs 0% 1% 1% 11% 0% 4% 0% 0%
modal adjectives 0% 4% 3% 3% 0% 8% 0% 11%
modal adverbs 8% 16% 14% 16% 0% 21% 44% 11%
epistemic modal auxiliaries 92% 78% 82% 69% 100% 66% 56% 78%

(2) With the exception of modal auxiliaries, hedging devices from all moves were considered here.
(3) These results are unedited and apply to the entire text (see table 6, 3.8)
The table shows that the amount of hedging in the NS group is roughly twice that of the NNS
group. This suggests that the NNSs are either unaware of the need for hedging, or lack the
necessary language. As we have seen, NNSs tend not to select the appropriate modal auxiliary
(see table 22, page 99). The effect of this is compounded by the fact that very few other hedging
devices appear in the NNS text at all.
It is interesting to note that the year 2 group uses so little hedging. This is partly as a result of the
lower number of opinion moves in the year 2 sample and partly as a result of the difference in
subject matter between the two groups.
The year 2 topic of Mortgagee Sales in Finance and Property Law was more cut and dried than
the year 1 topic of negligence. In the Finance and Property Law question, students were able to
- 100 -
reach a straightforward conclusion as to the outcome. By contrast, the answer to the Negligence
problem depended to a large extent on the court’s interpretation. Whereas it was possible to give a
strong indication of the result at year 2, this was not possible at year 1. As a result of this
difference in subject matter the use of hedging was more appropriate to the year 1 task.
Finally, the NS HS group used more hedging than any of the other groups. While the main factor
related to amount of hedging is clearly language background, the better NSs nevertheless used
hedging devices significantly more.
With regard to the distribution of hedging devices, the table shows that for most groups, the
majority of hedging devices are epistemic modal auxiliaries. The percentage of modal auxiliaries
in the NS group is lower than that in the NNS group. This suggests that the NSs have a greater
variety of linguistic options available for the expression of hedging. Interestingly, a similar result
was obtained for the year 2 group. The main difference between the year 1 and year 2 groups is
the use of lexical verbs for hedging. These hedging devices were largely absent from the year 1
sample.
No consistent pattern of hedging devices is discernible in the high-scoring and low-scoring
groups.
Evaluation clause or phrase
Four different kinds of evaluation were identified (see table 16, 6.1). Table 24 (over) displays the
rhetorical and grammatical choices of students. This is discussed below.
Table 24 Rhetorical and grammatical choice in evaluation clause
- 101 -
Opinion Group
HS HS LS LS
total evaluation clause (1) 19.23 20.92 20.14 3.60 20.87 17.42 22.21 26.44
Rhetorical choice
Assessment of process:
ability to take action
e.g. X can sue Y 63% 60% 61% 73% 57% 63% 81% 79%
Assessment of process: liability

e.g. X is liable 33% 36% 34% 4% 39% 32% 19% 18%
Assessment of result: benefit
e.g. X will receive damages 4% 4% 4% 11% 2% 5% 0% 3%
Assessment of result: obligation
e.g. X must compensate Y 1% 1% 1% 11% 2% 0% 0% 0%
Grammatical choice
total verbal forms 84% 72% 78% 71% 91% 59% 85% 82%
total nominal forms 16% 28% 22% 29% 9% 41% 15% 18%
Firstly, the table shows overall use of the evaluation clause. NSs and NNSs recorded very similar
scores here. In marked contrast, these forms hardly occurred in the year 2 sample at all. There are
two main explanations for this. On the one hand, the year 2 students made comparatively little use
of the opinion move (see 5.2). On the other, they tended to express their opinions in terms specific
to the relevant law and the fact situation. In the year 2 problem, the outcome depended on whether
a mortgagee’s notice to a mortgagor was valid. It was therefore possible to conclude by referring
to the status of this notice, as in example 6.20, below:
(6.20) Basing this decision on earlier case laws, the notice is not a valid notice and
Genevieve cannot exercise her power of sale as Bianca has not had the opportunity to
remedy her default. (P2270)
This illustrates the fact that the opinion move is not limited to the broad categories outlined above,
but may also be stated in specific terms.
Table 24 further shows that the low-scoring groups tended to use this move slightly more than the
high-scoring groups and the corresponding NS and NNS year 1 groups. This is consistent with the
- 102 -
proposition that the poorer answers were dominated by application of law to facts and opinion
moves, and made little reference to statement of law and authority (see 5.2)
In terms of rhetorical choice, there is again little difference between the NS and NNS groups.
Assessment of process is generally preferred to assessment of result. The main difference occurs
between the year 1 and year 2 groups. Assessment of result is used more frequently in the year 2
group. This lends some support to the idea that the year 2 group were more focused on outcome
than the year 1 group (see above, e.g. page 90).
For some reason that is not quite clear, the low-scoring groups demonstrated less variety in their
rhetorical choice. Both low-scoring groups used the ability to take action clause more than the
high-scoring groups and the corresponding NS and NNS year 1 groups.
Finally, the table also summarises grammatical choices. The NSs recorded a much higher
proportion of nominal forms than the NNSs. However, there was no great difference between year
1 and year 2. Nominal forms were also a feature of the NS HS group, but not of the other three
high-scoring or low-scoring groups.
6.4 GENERAL FEATURES
The rhetorical use of the passive voice
The use of the passive voice is summarised in 6.2 and has been commented on with regard to
functional lexis in the statement of law (pages 93 to 94). The passive voice there was used for two
reasons. Firstly, it was used in the necessity clause and with prove, show, establish to convey a
tone of authority and impartiality. Secondly, it occurred with use, apply, administer where the real
agent was the law, or an agent of the law such as the judge or the court. In addition to use, apply,
administer there are a number of other verbs which can imply a ‘legal actor’ in this way. These
verbs occurred in a number of different moves in the discourse. Because of their functional
diversity, they must be considered apart from the analysis of discourse moves. The verbs and
associated results are listed in table 25.
- 103 -
Table 25 Rhetorical use of passive voice

Entire text Group
HS HS LS LS
verbs implying a legal actor (1)

(i.e. entitle, allow, require, restrict,
consider, examine, see, deem,
hold, find, state) 2.12 3.18 2.69 10.63 1.42 7.16 2.56 0.00
Grammatical choice
active forms 59% 25% 37% 32% 67% 22% 0% 0%
passive forms 29% 63% 51% 56% 0% 70% 100% 0%
other forms 12% 12% 12% 12% 33% 9% 0% 0%
As illustrated in the table, the law does quite a number of things: it entitles, allows, requires and
restricts. It considers arguments and examines facts. It sees things to be as they are or else deems
them to be as it wishes. It can state propositions, hold for a party, or find against a party. However,
it tends to do so implicitly, in passive voice. With some exceptions, we do not appear to be overly
comfortable with the use of the active voice here, unless it is an agent of the law (e.g. judge, court)
that is performing the action.
The table shows that the NNSs seem to have grasped this to a certain extent. The use of the
passive here compares favourably to the use of the passive in necessity clauses (see table 18, page
91). However, the proportion of passives employed by the NSs is still roughly twice that of the
NNSs. This suggests that a significant proportion of the NNSs are unaware of the appropriate
structural choice with this lexis.
Lexical density
As mentioned in 3.9, it was felt that the failure to use adequate structural lexis might be
contributing to the difficulties of NNSs. This would have the effect of making their text denser
and therefore more difficult to read. In order to ascertain whether this was indeed the case, a
lexical density count of content and structure words was performed. The count included only the
NS and NNS year 1 groups. The results are summarised in table 26, below.
- 104 -
Table 26 Lexical density in NS and NNS

Lexical density Group
Ratio of content words to total NS year 1 NNS year 1
number of words
Minimum .39 .42

Maximum .59 .75
Mean .46 .50
As illustrated in the table, the results did not uncover a great deal of difference between groups
Although the maximum lexical density in the NNS group is higher than that of the NS group, the
minimum and mean scores were much the same. On further examination of the scripts, the
problem was found to be more complex than initially supposed. First of all, many of the native
speakers adopted a fairly dense, note-like style in order to pack as much information as possible
into each exam answer. This style is illustrated in example 6.21, below.
(6.21) This scenario is very similar to Wagon Mound case, defendant released oil in
harbour, plaintiff was using welder nearby, spark from welder hit piece of cotton in oil
causing fire damaging wharf. Defendant held not liable as damage not foreseeable.
(P870)
In this style many of the structural words, particularly articles and auxiliaries, are omitted.
Furthermore, the NS text tended to include a larger number of adjectives, embedded clauses and
postmodification, all of which added to the lexical density. An example of this is given below.
(6.22) There is a breach of that duty because as Putt specialises in research and
development of industrial chemicals, a reasonable person should have foreseen
possible explosions and taken proper precautions to prevent substantive damage.
(P1780)
Finally, the problems in the NNS text derived not only from a lack of functional lexis, but also
from the rather confused way in which this was used.
(6.23) There is a negligence owes to DHL by Duffer. Because this from what Duffer
did can classify as negligence because there is a duty of care, and also Duffer
breached. Also the careless cause the destroy of DHL’s premises and it is not too far
remote. (P840)
- 105 -
In example 6.23, many of the problems derive from grammatical confusion and error. All the
pieces of the puzzle are there, but the students still have difficulty assembling them. Such
difficulties were very common in the NNS text.
One further statistical test was performed, to see whether there was a correlation between lexical
density and either question mark or exam mark. As one might expect, no correlation between any
of the groups was found.
PART THREE: DISCUSSION OF HYPOTHESES
This discussion is divided into two distinct levels. Firstly, a number of the differences between
groups could be attributed to differences in rhetorical organisation. For example, the year 2
students used the statement of law much more frequently than the year 1 students (see 5.2). As a
result, there was a correspondingly high number of expressions of necessity in this group.
Where differences could not be attributed to rhetorical organisation, they were taken to arise as a
result of the participants’ variable awareness of the requirements of the legal pedagogical register.
For example, even though the number of opinion moves employed by NNSs was high, the amount
of hedging was low (see figure 9, page 66 and table 23, page 100). This is attributed to a lack of
awareness of appropriate register.
Both of these levels, rhetorical organisation and register, are considered in conjunction with the
remaining hypotheses, 4, 5 and 6.
6.5 HYPOTHESIS FOUR
Native speakers use more appropriate grammar and lexis than non-native speakers.
- 106 -
Rhetorical differences in grammar and lexis
There was some evidence that the NSs made greater use of the statement of law move, as
suggested in the schematic structure analysis (5.2). The fact that NSs used more functional lexis in
this move (table 19, page 93) supports this proposition.
Register differences in grammar and lexis
Modality and hedging
It has already been established that modality and hedging are necessary elements of the opinion
move (Howe 1990 and see 6.2). The results showed that the NSs and NNSs used a considerably
different combination of modal auxiliaries in the opinion move (table 22, page 99). The NNSs
tended to overuse can and the effect of this was to produce a less hedged text. Furthermore, the
expression of epistemic modality in the NNS group was more or less restricted to modal
auxiliaries (table 23, page 100). The NS group used a greater range of hedging devices and
hedging was much more common with the NSs. This suggests that the NNSs are either unaware of
the need for hedging, or that they lack the necessary linguistic resources to perform this function.
Nominalisation
Nominalisation was established as a grammatical strategy and in order to signal register (see 6.2).
A number of nominal forms were found to occur as evaluation lexis in the opinion move (see table
24, page 102). The number of such forms occurring in the NS sample was markedly higher than in
the NNS sample, where verbal forms were preferred.
Passivisation
A number of different functions were identified for the passive voice (see 6.2). With the exception
of the lexical set use, apply, administer (see table 19, page 93) the results consistently showed that
the NSs made greater use of the passive than their NNS counterparts. While the NNSs do make
use of the passive, they do not appear to be fully aware of the appropriate use of passivisation in
this context.
- 107 -
Features of textual organisation such as discourse signalling were identified as important features
in the forecast, statement of issue and application of law to facts moves (see 6.2). In this study, the
NSs were found to use a slightly greater range of semi-technical signalling vocabulary, and a
slightly greater range of causal conjunction (see table 17, page 89 and table 21, page 97). In
addition, NNSs used more advance labelling devices than NSs (table 17, page 89). It was however
noted that very little explicit organisation occurred in the text. As a result, neither NSs nor NNSs
made great use of these features.
General grammatical differences
Some general problems in basic sentence construction were anticipated for the NNSs. It was felt
that the NNSs would not use adequate functional lexis to properly construct sentences. However,
the results showed that under the pressure of a time limit, both NSs and NNSs tended to omit
functional lexis such as articles and auxiliary verbs. In addition, the difference between NSs and
NNSs was reduced by additional modification and embedded clauses in the NS text. Finally, it
was found that the difficulties NNSs experienced came not so much from a lack of functional
lexis, but a tendency to misuse it. It should be noted that aspects of language such as verb
morphology, syntax and on a higher level, grammatical cohesion, play a definite role in the
comprehensibility of NNS text.
Summary
The results support the hypothesis advanced. Of the differences in grammar and lexis found, only
one is attributed to the variation in rhetorical organisation between the two groups. Most tend to
demonstrate that the NSs had a greater awareness of language appropriate to the register. Their
greater use of nominalisation, passivisation and hedging demonstrate a better understanding of
community expectations. Interestingly, there was little variation in lexis between the two groups.
Although the NNSs seemed to lack some of the variety of the NSs this effect was not pronounced.
Similarly, there was little difference in the use of textual organisation. This is attributed to the
peculiar demands of the genre: explicit organisation is obviously a low priority in the writing of
- 108 -
examination answers. In spite of these last two findings, the NSs in this sample clearly
demonstrated a more appropriate selection of grammar than their NNS counterparts.
6.6 HYPOTHESIS FIVE
More experienced students use more appropriate grammar and lexis than others.
Rhetorical differences
The majority of the differences found here were attributed to differences in the task or the
different rhetorical organisation at year 1 and year 2. The various language features are grouped
here according to the rhetorical move they occurred in.
Statement of law: Deontic modality and expressions of necessity
It was found that year 2 students used statements of law much more frequently than year 1
students (5.2). As a result, there was a much greater amount of deontic modality and expression of
necessity in the year 2 group (table 18, page 91). In addition to this quantitative difference, there
were some differences in quality as well. Firstly, there were a greater range of expressions of
necessity in the year 2 group (table 18, page 91). Secondly, the choice of modal auxiliary also
varied between levels. Whereas the year 1 group made much use of have to and need to, the year 2
group almost exclusively used the more appropriate must (table 18, page 91).
Authority
The nature of the task played a clear role in the kind of authority used by the two groups. While
the year 2 task involved both statute and case law, the year 1 task was limited to case law alone. In
addition, the year 2 students tended to give more details with their cases, using more locative and
marked authority. It was suggested that the kind of case law cited depended at least partly on how
closely the fact situation in the problem resembled the facts of a previous case (see pages 96-97).
- 109 -
Opinion: Epistemic modality and hedging
The year 2 group made much less use of the opinion move than the year 1 group (5.2).
Consequently, the amount of epistemic modality and hedging in the year 2 group was much lower.
It was further noted that the nature of the task tended to encourage hedging more at year 1 (pages
100-101). The distribution of hedging devices was more varied in the year 2 sample and this was
taken as a sign of linguistic maturity. It is not clear whether it can be interpreted as being more
appropriate.
Opinion: Evaluation lexis
Because they used less opinion moves, the year 2 group made much less use of evaluation lexis
than the year 1 group (see table 24, page 102). The distribution of lexis was also somewhat
different: because the focus of the year 2 task was on outcome, the year 2 participants used
assessment of result lexis more frequently than the year 1 group (table 24, page 102).
Register differences
The only other features that remain to be commented upon are nominalisation, passivisation and
textual organisation. There does not appear to be a great deal of difference between the year 1 and
year 2 groups here.
Summary
Many differences were found between the year 1 and year 2 groups. However, this did not
necessarily lead to the conclusion that one group used more appropriate grammar and lexis than
the other. The more experienced students clearly did make a more appropriate choice of rhetorical
moves, and this was in turn expressed in the grammar and lexis. The use of nominalisation and
passivisation found in the year 2 sample confirmed the notion that this grammar was appropriate.
The variation in hedging was primarily a function of rhetorical choice. Perhaps the only example
of a more appropriate lexico-grammatical feature in the year 2 text was the predominant use of
must in the expression of necessity. With regard to hypothesis 5 the results are rather inconclusive.
- 110 -
6.7 HYPOTHESIS SIX
More successful students use more appropriate grammar and lexis than others.
Rhetorical differences
Statement of law: Deontic modality and expression of necessity
There was considerable evidence to suggest that the high scorers and low scorers used the
statement of law differently. Firstly, both low-scoring groups used either very little or no deontic
modality and no other expression of necessity (table 18, page 91). Secondly, both high-scoring
groups used more expressions of necessity than the corresponding NS and NNS year 1 sample
(table 18, page 91). The NS HS group scored particularly high on this measure, almost as high as
the year 2 students. It appears that in the NS sample, greater use of the statement of law move was
a feature of the high-scoring responses.
Statement of law: functional lexis
High scorers and low scorers also seemed to use functional lexis differently here. Whereas the
high-scoring group made much use of prove, show, establish, the low-scoring group appeared to
favour use, apply, administer. It was suggested that this reflected the different strategies adopted
by the two groups (see pages 93-94).
Authority
The low-scoring groups scored particularly low on this move. By comparison, both high-scoring
groups were relatively high. However, only the NS HS group was significantly higher than the
corresponding NS year 1 group. A relationship between authority and content mark in the NS HS
sample appears to be made out (see page 96).
Opinion: Evaluation lexis
Both low-scoring groups used more evaluation lexis than the NS and NNS year 1 groups (see
table 24, page 102). This difference reflects a tendency by the low-scoring groups to overuse the
opinion move at the expense of the statement of law and authority moves.
- 111 -
Register differences
Epistemic modality and hedging
We have already seen that NSs tend to use these features significantly more than NNSs. Within
the NS group, it was further evident that the high-scoring group used more hedging than any of
the other groups. There was also a greater range of hedging devices in the NS HS group (table 23,
page 100).
Nominalisation
It was also found that the NS HS group used nominalisation much more frequently than the other
groups. Once again, this result did not extend to the NNS HS sample. Nominalisation is a feature
of the better answers only in the NS sample.
Passivisation
The results with regard to passivisation are not conclusive. A number of measurements were made
for passivisation (see tables 19 and 25, pages 93, 104). The difference between groups tends to
vary only slightly and it is not possible to conclude that any one group uses more or less
passivisation than the others.
Earlier comments about the general lack of discourse organisation apply here also (see page 90).
There did not appear to be any significant difference in this pattern even in the better answers.
Summary
These results partly support hypothesis 6. As in the macro study, the findings clearly indicate that
the high-scoring NSs make more appropriate rhetorical choices than the low-scoring NSs. No such
variation was found in the NNSs. In addition, high-scoring NSs also use more appropriate
grammar than low-scoring NSs (in particular, hedging and nominalisation). Although there is no
clear difference in the use of passivisation, this nonetheless remains a feature of the discourse in
- 112 -
the NS HS group. Once again there were no similar differences in the NNS group. There appears
to be a stronger relationship between appropriate language and content score in the NSs than in
the NNSs.
6.8 CONCLUSION
This study was designed to test hypotheses 4, 5 and 6. The results support the following
propositions:
HYPOTHESIS FOUR:
• Native speakers use more appropriate grammar than non-native speakers.
HYPOTHESIS FIVE:
• More experienced students use different grammar to less experienced students.

However, it is not possible to say whether or not it is more appropriate.
• Choice of grammar is heavily influenced by rhetorical considerations and task.
HYPOTHESIS SIX:
• More successful students use more appropriate grammar than less successful
students.
• The relationship of appropriate language to content score is more pronounced in

native speakers than in non-native speakers.
The implications of these results are discussed in the following chapter.
- 113 -
7 Final discussion
OVERVIEW
The broad questions outlined at the beginning of this research are as follows:
(1) How do NSs and NNSs differ in their use of language in the university setting?
(2) How do more experienced students and less experienced students differ in their use
(3) How do successful students and less successful students differ in their use of
This chapter summarises the findings of previous chapters and considers their implications for
teaching. First, the three research questions are considered in light of findings from the study.
Next, the implications for language teaching and course design are examined. This is followed by
some comments on research methodology and an evaluation of the usefulness of genre and
register in ESP target language analysis. Finally, some suggestions for future research are made.
7.1 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH QUESTIONS
How do NSs and NNSs differ in their use of language in the university setting?
With regard to the variable of student language background, the following findings were
established (see hypothesis 1 (5.7) and hypothesis 4 (6.8))
• Native speakers tend to use more appropriate schematic structure than non-native
speakers
• Nevertheless, the special pedagogical genres present problems to both native

speakers and non-native speakers.
• Native speakers use more appropriate grammar than non-native speakers.
Thus, both studies confirmed that NSs write more appropriately than NNSs. There are three
possible reasons for the difficulties that NNSs experience. Firstly, they may be unaware of the
rhetorical need for particular schematic structures and lexico-grammar. Secondly, they may not be
Chapter 7: Final discussion
proficient in the appropriate forms. The third possibility is some combination of the above, i.e.
NNSs may to some extent be unaware of the need for particular forms, and to some extent
unaware of the forms themselves.
How do more experienced students and less experienced students differ in their use
With regard to the variable of experience in subject area the following findings were established
(see hypothesis 2 (5.7) and hypothesis 5 (6.8)):
• More experienced students use more appropriate schematic structure than less
experienced students.
• However, certain subject areas may lend themselves better to the realisation of
special pedagogical genres.
• More experienced students use different grammar to less experienced students.

However, it is not possible to say whether or not it is more appropriate.
• Choice of grammar is heavily influenced by rhetorical considerations and task.
In this case, only the study of schematic structure demonstrated that students who are more
experienced with a genre write more appropriately. These results must be treated with caution
because they involved a comparison of two different tasks. However, the difference between
groups was dramatic enough to be confident that it was in part due to the difference in level. The
result demonstrates that increased exposure to the target genre improves performance: students are
learning to write by writing.
How do successful students and less successful students differ in their use of
With regard to this background variable, the following propositions were established (see
hypothesis 3 (5.7) and hypothesis 6 (6.8)):
• Overall, the use of appropriate schematic structure is not a decisive factor in the
awarding of marks.
• However, the use of appropriate schematic structure is a factor in the awarding of

marks at the upper end of the scale.
- 115 -
• More successful students use more appropriate grammar than less successful
students.
• The relationship of appropriate language to content score is more pronounced in

native speakers than in non-native speakers.
These results suggest that overall, good language is not sufficient to obtain a good content score
(see 5.2). However, in order to achieve a high score, it was necessary to use appropriate schematic
structures, grammar and lexis (see 5.2, 6.3, 6.4). In fact, it was the language features that were
missing from the NNS sample which occurred in greater abundance in the high scoring responses.
It was not possible to determine a causative link between language use and content score.
However, it is likely that the use of appropriate language is a necessary ingredient of a good
response. To be successful, students both need to ‘know the answer’ and express it appropriately.
Thus, NNSs may be suffering directly from their inability to use appropriate schematic structure,
grammar and lexis.
7.2 IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING AND COURSE DESIGN
The results summarised above (7.1) have implications for teaching and course design with regard
to both NSs and NNSs. In this section, the needs of NSs are considered first, followed by the
needs of NNSs.
Native speaker needs
Schematic structure
A good grasp of the genre of problem question appears to be an important element of ‘getting the
answer right’. While the NSs used a more appropriate schematic structure than the NNSs, they
nevertheless lacked a clear understanding of the genre themselves (see 5.2). There is therefore
scope for a greater focus on developing the writing skills of NSs in the early stages. However, this
must be weighed against the finding that students appear to be improving at higher levels (see
5.2). A further consideration, which is not addressed by this study, is what form such writing
development should take. On the one hand, the need identified could be addressed directly,
- 116 -
through writing programs with an explicit focus on the target form. On the other hand, it may
simply be that more practice in the genre is sufficient to raise the standard.
Non-native speaker needs
Schematic structure
The results showed that NNSs used less appropriate schematic structures than NSs (see 5.2). This
suggests that some kind of focused writing instruction targeted at NNSs and catering to their
specific needs, might be necessary.
Little difference between NSs and NNSs was found in the lexical signalling of textual
organisation examined in this study (see 6.3). While this was rather surprising at first, it can be
explained by the peculiar nature of the exam task. Students were writing under time pressure and
may not have had enough time to plan their answers and signal organisation. Thus, the result
obtained should not be taken to mean that the kind of lexical signalling examined is unnecessary
in English for Academic Legal Purposes.
Grammar and lexis
NNSs also demonstrated a less appropriate range of language at the lexico-grammatical level (see
6.3, 6.4). In particular NNSs used less nominalisation, passivisation and hedging than NSs. These
features were found to occur in greater abundance in the high-scoring responses (see 6.3, 6.4) and
this suggests that they are an important aspect of writing in this genre.
The results show that courses in writing skills for NNSs must attend to both high-level discourse
structure, and low-level grammar and lexis as well. As suggested above (7.1), there are two
aspects to this. NNSs must be made aware of the rhetorical need for particular lexico-grammatical
forms. They must also be given practice in producing the forms themselves. Courses for NNSs
need to focus on both function and form.
- 117 -
The study showed that NNSs had a rather limited repertoire of hedging devices, restricted mainly
to modal auxiliaries (see table 23, page 100). In teaching hedging, it is therefore necessary that the
full range of hedging devices is made available to learners. Furthermore NNSs used a less
nominalised style than NSs (see table 24, page 102) and there is therefore a need to raise student
awareness of nominalisation and passivisation. The general principle suggested here is that
students must be made aware of situationally appropriate items of grammar and their functions. It
is also important to ensure that a full range of functional grammar and lexis is presented to
students, as one function is often realised by numerous forms.
Finally, it was evident from the study of lexical density, that NNS difficulties are by no means
limited to appropriate lexico-grammatical structures (see 6.4). Basic sentence construction
remains a problem and strategies are required to address this as well.
Like the schematic structures, these lexico-grammatical features can be taught either implicitly or
explicitly. This study does not give any insights into this question. However, it does identify a
definite need at the lexico-grammatical level and this should be addressed in a systematic manner.
The particular problems that NNSs have with grammar and lexis demonstrate the need for courses
in ESP to provide a focus at that level.
7.3 IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Some of the problems encountered in the study have implications for work in research
methodology. Many of the differences found between the year 1 and year 2 samples could be
attributed to the difference in the nature of the task and subject area. Thus, different instances of
the same genre had rather different schematic structure, grammar and lexis because of a difference
in task. Features of genre and register are obviously very sensitive to task and subject area
variables.
In the present study, the two tasks differed in a number of ways. The year 2 task was primarily
concerned with statute law whereas the year 1 task was primarily concerned with case law (see
- 118 -
page 96). In addition, the year 2 task involved a more straightforward application of law, with a
less complex schematic structure, fewer sub-issues and so on. As a result, the target schematic
structure was more directly elicited at year 2. This variation occurred in spite of a rigorous
assessment of the two tasks (see page 36). Furthermore, many of the grammatical differences were
also attributable to task. For example, the greater use of modality in the year 1 task reflected the
greater discretion of the court in the year 1 problem (see pages 100 to 101). Thus, even in the
same genre and under similar writing conditions, considerable differences can occur in language
use. Both schematic structure and grammar are highly susceptible to rhetorical purpose and task.
This highlights the importance of using the same task for purposes of comparison. In future,
studies that contrast the writing of subjects with different levels of experience should ensure that
the various groups use exactly the same task. In the present study, the results were harder to
interpret because of the different tasks employed at the different levels.
A further implication of this concerns the identification of genres and registers. Studies of genre
and register must be careful to ensure that language features and functions identified are not the
product of aberrant examples of the genre or register. A wide survey of text involving large
quantities of data can overcome this problem. With the wider availability of computer
concordancing tools and so on, this is now possible. Other strategies that can be used include the
use of a specialist informant who may be able to identify typical functions in the data. Similarly,
reference to specialist literature of the discourse community under investigation provides useful
functional insights. The problem of unpredictable variation is minimised if a broad sample of
linguistic and non-linguistic data is analysed.
7.4 IMPLICATIONS FOR ESP
On the whole this analysis also demonstrated the usefulness of language analysis to identify areas
of concern for students. The forms predicted by genre and register were both problematic to
students and necessary elements of a good response. This supports the proposition that an
approach to ESP based on principles of language analysis is justified. Thinking of ESP as the
- 119 -
teaching of a special language defined in terms of genre and register is a valid approach for this
subject field.
7.5 FURTHER RESEARCH
This study has identified a number of problem areas for NNSs attempting to write for academic
legal purposes. However, there is much that we still do not understand about the difficulties that
NNSs encounter with particular genres. The present study did not consider, for example, more
subtle aspects of textual organisation. This includes given-new information structure (see Halliday
1994) or aspects of grammatical and lexical cohesion (see Halliday and Hasan 1976; Halliday
1994). It would be interesting to know whether and to what extent such textual organisation has an
influence on grade awarded. Other aspects of functional language could also be considered in the
light of university demands, to develop a thorough understanding of student language needs.
From the point of view of the local university setting studied (i.e. the Commerce Faculty,
University of Auckland), it is now necessary to broaden the analysis. Other subject areas must be
studied with a view towards identifying language functions that 1. are important to success in
academic writing; 2. cause difficulties for students. For the purposes of NNS students the
grammatical and lexical realisation of such functions must also be identified. Such information
can be employed in programs aimed at raising the general standard of English language for both
NSs and NNSs. It would also be extremely useful for the development of valid and reliable testing
instruments, capable of making accurate predictions of students’ performance in the university
environment.
Finally, there is a need to consider the question of how the findings of this research can best be put
to use in the classroom. One of the more important issues that faces us as we learn more and more
about genre and register is the role of such explicit knowledge in teaching and learning.
- 120 -
List of References
Adams, Penny, Heaton, Brian and Peter Howarth (eds.), 1991. Socio-cultural issues in English for
Academic Purposes. London: MacMillan. Simultaneously published as Volume 1,
number 2 of the journal series Review of English Language Teaching. Modern English
Publications and the British Council.
Atkinson, Dwight and Douglas Biber, 1994. ‘Register: A review of empirical research’. In Biber
and Finegan (eds.), 1994; 351-385.
Bakhtin, M.M., 1986. ‘The problem of Speech Genres’. In Emerson and Holquist (eds.); 60-102.
de Beaugrande, Robert and Wolfgang Dressler, 1981. Introduction to text linguistics. New York:
Longman.
Belcher, Diane and George Braine, 1995. Academic writing in a second language: Essays on
research and pedagogy. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Company.
Berkenkotter, Carol and Thomas N. Huckin, 1995. Genre knowledge in disciplinary

communication: cognition/culture/power. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bhatia, Vijay K., 1987. ‘Language of the law’. Language Teaching, 20,4; 227-234.
Bhatia, Vijay K., 1993. Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. New York:
Longman.
Biber, Douglas, 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Biber, Douglas, 1994. ‘An analytical framework for register studies’. In Biber and Finegan (eds.);
31-58.
Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan (eds.), 1994. Sociolinguistic perspectives on register. New
York: Oxford University Press.
Bloor, Meriel and Thomas Bloor, 1991. ‘Cultural expectations and socio-pragmatic failure in
academic writing’. In Adams, Heaton and Howarth (eds.); 1-12.
List of references
Brown, Penelope and Colin Fraser, 1979. ‘Speech as a marker of situation’. In Scherer and Giles
(eds.); 33-62.
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson, 1987. Politeness: Some universals in language usage.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Christie, F. (ed.), 1984. Children writing: Reader. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press.
Cole, P. (ed.), 1978. Syntax and semantics 9: Pragmatics. New York: Academic Press.
Cole, P. and J.L. Morgan (eds.), 1975. Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic
Press.
Conway, Darren, 1997. A case for ESP: The science of register and the register of science.
Unpublished Master’s thesis, Macquarie University: Sydney.
Cope, Bill, Mary Kalantzis, Gunther Kress and Jim Martin (compiled by Lorraine Murphy), 1993.
‘Bibliographical essay: Developing the theory and practice of genre-based literacy’. In
Cope and Kalantzis (eds.); 231-247.
Cope, Bill and Mary Kalantzis (eds.), 1993. The powers of literacy: A genre approach to teaching
writing. London: Falmer Press.
Coulthard, Malcolm (ed.), 1994. Advances in written text analysis. New York: Routledge.
Couture, Barbara (ed.), 1986. Functional approaches to writing: Research perspectives. London:
Frances Pinter (Publishers).
Crombie, Winifred and Rika-Heke, Powhiri, 1991. ‘ESP: Fact or fiction?’. Revista Alicantina de
Estudios Ingleses, 4; 25-36.
Crompton, Peter, 1997. ‘Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems’. English for
Specific Purposes, 16, 4; 271-287.
Crystal, David and Derek Davy, 1969. Investigating English style. New York: Longman.
Devitt, Amy J., 1993. ‘Generalising about genre: New conceptions of an old concept’. College
Composition and Communication, 44, 4; 573-586.
- 122 -
List of references
Di Pietro, Robert J. (ed.), 1982. Linguistics and the professions. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing
Corporation.
Dudley-Evans, Tony, 1994. ‘Genre analysis: an approach to text analysis for ESP’. In Coulthard
(ed.); 219-228.
Dudley-Evans, Tony and Maggie Jo St John, 1998. Developments in English for Specific
Purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Emerson, Caryl and Michael Holquist (eds.), 1986. Speech Genres and other late essays. Austin,
Texas: University of Texas Press.
Field, Yvette, 1994. ‘Cohesive conjunctions in the English writing of Cantonese speaking students
from Hong Kong’. ARAL, 17,1; 125-139.
Field Yvette and L.M.O Yip, 1992. ‘A comparison of internal conjunctive cohesion in the English
essay writing of Cantonese speakers and native speakers of English’. RELC Journal
23,1; 15-28.
Firth, J.R. 1957. Papers in Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Freedman, Aviva, 1987. ‘Learning to write again: Discipline-specific writing at university’.

Carleton Papers in Applied Language Studies, 4: 95-115.
Freedman, Aviva and Peter Medway (eds.), 1994a. Genre and the new rhetoric. London: Taylor
and Francis.
Freedman, Aviva and Peter Medway (eds.), 1994b. Learning and Teaching Genre. Portsmouth,
NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.
Giglioli, P.P. (ed.), 1972. Language and social context. Harmondsworth, Middx.: Penguin Books.
Grice, H.P., 1975. ‘Logic and conversation’. In Cole and Morgan (eds.); 41-58
Grice, H.P., 1978. ‘Further notes on logic and conversation’. In Cole (ed.); 113-128.
Grunwell, P. (ed.), 1988. Applied linguistics in society: British studies in applied linguistics no. 3.
London: CILT/BAAL.
- 123 -
List of references
Halliday, M.A.K., 1978. Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K., 1985. Spoken and written language. Geelong, Victoria: Deakin University
Press.
Halliday, M.A.K., 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). London: Edward
Arnold.
Halliday, M.A.K., 1998. ‘Things and relations: regrammaticising experience as technical

knowledge’. In Martin, James R. and Robert Veel (eds.); 185-235.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan, 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan, 1989. Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a
social-semiotic perspective (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Halliday, M.A.K., A. McIntosh and P.D. Strevens, 1964. The linguistic sciences and language
teaching. London: Longman.
Halliday, M.A.K. and J.R. Martin, 1993. Writing Science: Literacy and Discursive Power.
London: The Falmer Press.
Hasan, Ruqaiya and Geoff Williams (eds.), 1996. Literacy in Society. New York: Addison Wesley
Longman.
Herrington, Anne J., 1985. ‘Writing in academic settings: A study of the contexts for writing in
two college chemical engineering courses’. Research in the teaching of English, 19, 4;
331-359.
Hoey, Michael, 1983. On the surface of discourse. London: George Allen and Unwin.
Hoey, Michael, 1994. ‘Signalling in discourse: A functional analysis of a common discourse

pattern in written and spoken English’. In Coulthard (ed.); 26-45.
Holmes, Janet, 1988. ‘Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks’. Applied Linguistics, 9, 1; 21-44.
Howe, Pat, 1990. ‘The problem of the problem question in English for Academic Legal Purposes’.
English for Specific Purposes, 9; 215-236.
- 124 -
List of references
Howe, Pat, 1993. ‘Planning a presesssional course in English for Academic Legal Purposes’. In
Blue (ed.); 148-157.
Hyland, Ken, 1994. ‘Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks’. English for Specific
Purposes, 13; 239-256.
Hyland, Ken, 1995. ‘The author in the text: Hedging scientific writing’. Hong Kong Papers in
Linguistics and Language Teaching, 18; 33-42.
Hyland, Ken, 1996. ‘Nurturing hedges in the ESP curriculum’. System, 24, 4; 477-490.
Hymes, Dell, 1964. ‘Towards ethnographies of communicative events’. In Giglioli (ed.)
Hyon, Sunny, 1996. ‘Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL’. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 4;
693-722.
Lakoff, G., 1972. ‘Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts.’ Chicago
Linguistic Society Papers, 8; 183-228.
McCarthy, Michael and Ronald Carter, 1994. Language as discourse: Perspectives for language
teaching. New York: Longman.
Malinowski, B., 1923. ‘The problem of meaning in primitive languages’. Supplement to Ogden,
C.K. and I.A. Richards.
Martin, James R., 1984. ‘Language, register and genre’. In Christie (ed.); 21-29.
Martin, James R., 1992. English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins
Publishing Company.
Martin, James R., 1993. ‘Genre and literacy - modelling context in educational linguistics’.
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13; 141-172.
Martin, James R. and Robert Veel (eds.), 1998. Reading science: Critical and functional
perspectives on discourses of science. London: Routledge.
Miller, Carolyn R, 1984. ‘Genre as social action’. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70; 151-67.
Reprinted in Freedman, A. and Medway, P. (eds.), 1994a.
- 125 -
List of references
Myers, Greg, 1989. ‘The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles’. Applied Linguistics, 10, 1;
1-35.
Nattinger, James R. and Jeanette S. DeCarrico, 1992. Lexical phrases and language teaching.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ogden, C.K. and I.A. Richards, 1923. The Meaning of meaning. London: Kegan Paul.
Paltridge, Brian, 1993. ‘Writing up research: a systemic functional perspective’. System 21, 2;
175-192.
Prince, Ellen F., Joel Frader and Charles Bosk, 1982. ‘On hedging in physician-physician
discourse’. In Di Pietro (ed.); 83-98.
Rounds, P. L., 1982. ‘Hedging in written academic discourse’. Mimeo.
Salager-Meyer, Françoise, 1994. ‘Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English
written discourse’. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 2; 149-170.
Scherer, Klaus R. and Howard Giles (eds.), 1979. Social markers in speech. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Sebeok, Thomas A. (ed.), 1960. Style in language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Skelton, John, 1988a. ‘The care and maintenance of hedges’. ELT Journal, 42,1; 37-43.
Skelton, John, 1988b. ‘Comments in academic articles’. In Grunwell (ed.); 98-108.
Swales, John M., 1982. ‘The case of cases in English for Academic Legal Purposes’. IRAL, 20, 2;
139-148.
Swales, John M., 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Tadros, Angele A., 1985. ‘Prediction in text’. Discourse Analysis Monograph No. 10,
Birmingham: English Language Research, University of Birmingham.
Tadros, Angele A., 1994. ‘Predictive categories in text’. In Coulthard (ed.); 69-82.
- 126 -
List of references
Tarone, Elaine, Sharon Dwyer, Susan Gillette and Vincent Icke, 1981. ‘On the use of the passive
in two Astrophysics journal papers’. The ESP Journal, 1, 2; 123-140.
University of Auckland, Sub-Committee of Deans Committee, September 1995. English

Language and Entrance. Unpublished report: University of Auckland.
Ventola, Eija, 1987. The structure of social interaction: A systemic approach to the semiotics of
service encounters. London: Frances Pinter (Publishers).
Wells, Rulon, 1960. ‘Nominal and verbal style’. In Sebeok (ed.); 213-220.
Widdowson, H.G., 1979. Explorations in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Winter, Eugene O., 1977. ‘A clause-relational approach to English texts: A study of some
predictive lexical items in written discourse’. Instructional Science, 6,1; 1-92.
Winter, Eugene O., 1994. ‘Clause relations as information structure’. In Coulthard (ed.); 46-68.
- 127 -
Appendices
- 128 -
Appendix A: Participant information
1. Participant information for students

To all commerce students:
My name is Christoph Hafner and I am a Master's student at the University of Auckland enrolled for a degree in the
Institute of Language Teaching and Learning. This year I am writing a thesis on the subject of academic writing, or more
specifically, student awareness of academic genre and register (that is, academic style) in academic writing. I have chosen
this field because of the great demand amongst students and teachers alike for more information in the area of teaching
academic writing skills.
You are invited to take part in my research and I would appreciate any assistance you can give me. As part of my thesis I
am doing an analysis of essay writing in the Commerce faculty to determine how student writing changes and improves
over time. This will involve large numbers of students, at a range of levels, native speakers and non-native speakers. For
this study, I would like to analyse the writing you do in your test and exam for this course this semester. I would also like
you to fill out a background information questionnaire and allow me to find out the grades that you score on your test and
exam. Filling out the questionnaire and consent form should take about five to ten minutes. You are, however, in no way
obliged to take part in this research.
If you would like to take part in this study, please fill out a questionnaire and consent form and return it to me. You
should also make your test available to me by leaving it with the Commerce faculty secretaries (Commerce B) so that a
copy can be made. I will contact the Commerce faculty in order to obtain relevant parts of your exam scripts. All data
(exams, tests and questionnaires) will be stripped of name and student ID number, in order to protect your identity as
much as possible. Naturally, all the information obtained in this study is strictly confidential and your name will not be
used.
Thank you very much for your time and help in making this study possible. If you have any queries or wish to know more
please phone me at home at the number given below or write to me at:
Christoph Hafner,
c/o Institute of Language Teaching and Learning,
The University of Auckland,
Private Bag 92019,
Auckland.
Home phone: (09) 575 9689
My supervisor is: The Head of Department is:

Dr. Helen Basturkmen, Dr. Scott Allan,
Institute of Language Teaching and Learning, Institute of Language Teaching and Learning,
University of Auckland, University of Auckland,
Private Bag 92019, Private Bag 92019,
Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x7809 Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x7078
For any queries regarding ethical concerns please contact:

Dr. Dennis Moore,
Chair, The University of Auckland Human Subjects Ethics Committee,
c/o Finance Registry,
University of Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x8939
APPROVED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND HUMAN SUBJECTS ETHICS COMMITTEE on 14/5/98 for a period
of 2 years, from 22/4/98 to 22/4/2000
Reference: 1998 / 057
2. Participant information for legal professionals
- 129 -
To Teachers of law / Practitioners of law,
My name is Christoph Hafner and I am a Master’s student in the Institute of Language Teaching and Learning at the
University of Auckland. I am currently writing a thesis on the topic of student writing in law in the department of
Commercial Law at the University. This study will provide detailed information about the linguistic progress of both
native and non-native students studying Commercial Law at the University of Auckland.
As part of the study it is necessary for me to consider the difference between the writing of trained lawyers and
students. This will involve a small-scale study of a number of lawyers’ writing. The task will be taken from a stage I
Commercial Law exam from the first Semester in 1998 and will consist of one problem question which will be
completed within a time limit of 30 minutes. In answering this question it will be possible to refer to any resources
normally used in the course of writing a legal opinion, provided that the actual time of writing is limited to 30
minutes.
In addition, I would like to establish what kind of writing lawyers prefer in legal opinions. In order to do so I will be
asking a number of lawyers to evaluate and rank a group of five short extracts from Commercial Law exams for me.
Reading and assessing these extracts should take around ten minutes.
You are invited to participate in this research and I would appreciate any assistance you can give me. If you wish to
take part, please let me know by filling in the short background information questionnaire attached and returning it to
me, or alternatively by contacting me by phone or email (details below). Naturally, all the information obtained in
this study is confidential and your name will not be used.
Thank you very much for your time and help in making this study possible. If you have any queries or wish to know
more please phone me at home at the number given below or write to me at:
Christoph Hafner,
c/o Institute of Language Teaching and Learning,
The University of Auckland,
Private Bag 92019,
Auckland. Home phone: (09) 575 9689
My supervisors are:
Dr. Helen Basturkmen, Dr. Scott Allan,
Institute of Language Teaching and Learning, Institute of Language Teaching and Learning,
University of Auckland, University of Auckland,
Private Bag 92019, Private Bag 92019,
Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x7809 Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x7078
The Head of Department is: Professor Rod Ellis,

Institute of Language Teaching and Learning,
University of Auckland,
Private Bag 90219,
Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x4876
For any queries regarding ethical concerns please contact:

Dr. Dennis Moore,
Chair, The University of Auckland Human Subjects Ethics Committee,
c/o Finance Registry,
University of Auckland. Ph: 373 7599 x8939
APPROVED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND HUMAN SUBJECTS ETHICS COMMITTEE on 14 May for a
period of 2 years, from 22/4/98 to 22/4/2000
Reference 1998/057
- 130 -
Appendix B: Consent form
CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN MASTER'S THESIS PROJECT
THIS CONSENT FORM WILL BE HELD FOR A PERIOD OF SIX YEARS
Title of project: A comparative study of writing for academic purposes
Researcher: Christoph Hafner
I have been given and have understood an explanation of this research project. I have had an
opportunity to ask questions and have them answered. I understand that I may withdraw myself or
any information traceable to me at any time up to the end of the first semester, 1998, without
giving a reason.
I agree to take part in this research.
Signed:
Name:
(Please print clearly)
Date:
APPROVED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF AUCKLAND HUMAN SUBJECTS ETHICS

COMMITTEE on 14 May for a period of 2 years, from 22/4/98 to 22/4/2000: Reference
1998/057
- 131 -
Appendix C: Background information questionnaires
1. Background information for students

Study of Academic Writing
Background Information Questionnaire
Part I: Personal background COMMERCIAL LAW STAGE I/II

1. Age (circle) 16-18 19-21 22-24 25-27 28-30 31-35 36-40 41+
2. Gender (circle) Male Female
3. Ethnic background ___________________________________________________
Part II: University Background

4. What degree are you currently studying for? ___________________________
5. What are your subjects? ___________________________________
___________________________________
6. Do you already have a degree/degrees? (circle) Yes No
7. If yes: a) what other degrees do you have?
_________________________________________________________
b) In what country did you complete those degrees?
_________________________________________________________
8. What other countries have you previously studied in at university level?
_________________________________________________________________
9. How many years have you studied at university, including 1998? (e.g. if this is your first
year, write '1').
_________
10. Are you a full-time or part-time student? (circle)

Full-time Part-time
11. Have you done any academic writing courses at the University of Auckland Student Learning
Centre?
(circle) Yes No
Course name: ____________________ Length of course: __________________
Year: 19________
Part III: School Experience
12. When was your last year at school?
19_______
- 132 -
13. What country did you go to school in? (If more than one country, please specify
dates e.g. Switzerland 1986-1987, New Zealand 1988-1997)
__________________________________________________________________
14. a) What's the highest level of English you have achieved at a New Zealand School?
(circle)
School Certificate Sixth Form Certificate Bursary

English English English
b) when did you achieve this? 19_______

Part IV: Language
15. How long have you lived in New Zealand? ___________________________
16. What is your native language? ___________________________
17. What other languages do you speak fluently? ___________________________
18. What language do you speak with your friends? ___________________________
19. What language do you speak at home? ___________________________
Part V is for non-native speakers of English only
Part V: Formal English instruction

20. How many years of English language lessons have you had? _______________
21. Are you currently enrolled in an English language course? (circle) Yes No
22. At what age did you begin learning English? _______________
23. How many years ago did you last have English language lessons? _________
24. In what country or countries did you have English language lessons? Please specify the length
of time in each country.
_________________________________________________________________
25. Have you sat any exams in English language proficiency? (e.g. IELTS, TOEFL)
Please give details:
IELTS (circle): Yes No Year: 19______ Result: _________
TOEFL (circle): Yes No Year: 19______ Result: _________
Other: __________________________ Year: 19______ Result: _________

26. Have you passed any English language courses at a New Zealand University?
(circle) Yes No
Course name/number: _______________________________________________
Which University? ________________ Year: 19______ Result: ________
- 133 -
2. Background information for lawyers and legal academics
Study of Academic Writing
Background information questionnaire for practising lawyers

and teachers of law
Part I: Personal Background
1. Age (circle) 16-18 19-21 22-24 25-27 28-30 31-35 36-40 41+
2. Gender (circle) male female
Part II: Professional Background
3. What is your position? (circle) tutor lecturer solicitor
other
please specify: _____________________
4. How long have you been practising law? _______ years
5. How long have you been teaching law? _______ years
6. Where did you do your legal training? Law School: _____________________
City: _____________________
Country: _____________________
7. Where have you practised law? Countries: _____________________
________________________________
Thank-you very much for your assistance in this study!
- 134 -
Appendix D: Participant background information
Table 27 Age of participants
Background data Group

NS NS NNS NNS
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 1 Stage 2 Total
Age 16-18 years 15 2 17

19-21 years 20 19 28 1 68
22-24 years 7 7 7 3 24
25-27 years 2 1 4 1 8
28-30 years 1 1 3 1 6
Total 45 28 44 6 123
Table 28 Ethnic background of participants

NS NS NNS NNS
Ethnic European or 36 18 54
background NZ European
New 1 4 5
Zealander
Maori or 1 1 2
NZ Maori
Chinese or NZ 3 3 6
Chinese
Cook Islander 1 1
Samoan 2 2
Tongan 1 1
Indian 1 1
Chinese 7 7
(People’s
Republic)
Hong Kong 18 1 19
Taiwanese 8 3 11
Malaysian 7 1 8
Macau 1 1
Indonesian 1 1
(Chinese)
Japanese 1 1
Korean 1 1
Fijian 1 1
No response 1 1
Total 45 28 44 6 123
- 135 -
Table 29 Gender of participants

NS NS NNS NNS
Gender Male 22 16 13 2 53
Female 23 12 30 4 69
No response 1 1
Total 45 28 44 6 123
Table 30 Time spent in New Zealand by participants

NS NS NNS NNS
Time in NZ up to 1 year 3 3
1-2 years 7 7
2-3 years 14 1 15
3-4 years 7 1 8
4-5 years 6 2 8
5-6 years 6 1 7
6-7 years 1 1
7-8 years 1 1
over 10 years 45 28 73
Total 45 28 44 6 123
Table 31 English qualifications of participants

NS NS NNS NNS
English University 27 18 3 1 49
Qualifications Bursary
Sixth Form 15 10 16 1 42
Certificate
School 2 8 10
Certificate
IELTS 6.0 9 2 11
TOEFL 550 3 3
Other 1 1
None 4 2 6
No response 1 1
Total 45 28 44 6 123
- 136 -
Table 32 Time spent at university by participants

NS NS NNS NNS
Time at 1 year 11 1 11 23
University 2 years 20 6 18 2 46
3 years 7 8 7 2 24
4 years 3 10 4 1 18
>4 years 3 3 4 1 11
no response 1 1
Total 45 28 44 6 123
- 137 -
Appendix E: Examination Questions
1. Paper 610.101 Law, Commerce and Government

Semester 1, 1998, question four
Putt Ltd. specialises in the research and development of industrial chemicals. Putt’s
operations are located in an industrial park. Duffer, a new employee at Putt, is working in
a laboratory one day, testing the properties of a new sterilising chemical. Various
chemicals are apparently incorrectly combined causing a massive explosion.
Burning material from the explosion lands on the neighbouring property, which houses a
warehouse owned and operated by Dendron & Hoe Ltd. (DHL). The owner-operators of
the warehouse, Rhoda and her partner Blythe, on hearing the explosion race outside to see
what has happened. They observe that a nearby section of Putt’s building is damaged and
that smouldering debris lies over the exterior of their own section of the industrial estate.
Rhoda says to Blythe, “We’d better grab the fire extinguisher and put out these embers.”
Blythe replies, “Don’t worry, it rained last night and the grass is still damp. Come on, our
coffee will be getting cold.” An approaching siren can be heard and Blythe adds, “The
fire service is on its way. They’ll take care of everything.” Rhoda and Blythe go back
inside.
In fact, the smouldering material eventually ignites the grass and, fanned by a gentle
breeze, the flames spread to an area just outside the warehouse where used packaging has
been stacked for recycling collection. The heat from the fire results in the spontaneous
combustion of drums of flammable liquid stored nearby at Kemex Ltd. Within a short
time the premises of both DHL and Kemex are completely destroyed.
It is later ascertained that the siren earlier heard was in fact that of an ambulance
summoned to come to the aid of the injured Duffer and that the Fire Service had not been
notified by Putt personnel (after the rapid deployment of fire extinguishers and an
assessment that there was no further fire risk). As well as legitimate losses by DHL and
Kemex, Blythe is personally concerned that he has lost in the fire $20 000 worth of an
illegal drug which had been stored in the warehouse.
Advise the various parties in this scenario of their respective legal positions, of any
claims they might bring for their losses and any liability they might face.
Total for Question Four = 15 marks
2. Paper 610.202 Finance and Property Law

Semester 1, 1998, question four
Bianca has set up a business manufacturing trendy wet suits for women taking part in
water sports. The process uses a special type of flexible, brightly-coloured neoprene
imported from Japan.
The business is booming and she decides to expand. She borrows $150 000 from
Genevieve. The loan is secured by a first registered mortgage over her house property at
Torbay. However, a fall in the value of the New Zealand dollar results in a radical drop in
her profit margin. She struggles to meet her mortgage commitments. Her monthly
payment of principal and interest of $1 750 is due on 10 January 1998 and she is unable
to make it.
- 138 -
On 30 January 1998 Genevieve sends her a letter which says,
“Your payments are in arrears. You must pay what is owing

within one month of receipt of this letter. The property will be
sold.”
The letter was sent to Bianca’s home address by registered post.
On 28 January 1998 Bianca was hit by a car whilst crossing the road. As a result of the
accident she suffered two broken legs, a broken arm and concussion and spent two
months in hospital followed by a period of recuperation at a health farm.
Returning to her home on 29 April 1998 she is shocked to find that arrangements are
underway for a mortgagee sale.
She seeks your advice.
(13 marks)
- 139 -
Appendix F: Instructions and ranking sheet for lawyers
1. Instructions for survey of lawyers' writing
This survey is designed to elicit writing from lawyers so that a comparison between
lawyers and law students working on the same task can be made.
The survey consists of two parts: a writing task and an evaluation of student writing.
Writing task:
1. This fact situation is taken from a stage I Commercial Law examination.
2. Students sitting the exam had around 30 minutes to do this question and you are
therefore asked to complete it within a time limit of 30 minutes.
3. You may use any resources that you normally use in writing a legal opinion and may
wish to spend some time familiarising yourself with the problem and planning your
response before you begin. This is fine, as long as the actual writing time is limited to
approx. 30 minutes.
4. You may use a word processor or write by hand, but please don't dictate the opinion.
Evaluation of student writing:

1. There are five short samples of student writing attached.
2. Please rank these samples from best to worst, according to how appropriate the
answers are (pay particular attention to the kind of information presented and the
organisation of information in the answers).
3. Make a record of your rankings on the sheet provided.
4. In one or two sentences, please explain what influenced you in your selection of the
best sample (i.e. why did you give that particular sample the 'best' ranking?).
Thank-you very much for taking part in this survey.
- 140 -
2. Ranking sheet
• For the purposes of a Commercial Law exam, which of these answers is the most
appropriately written? In considering the samples, pay particular attention to the kind of
information presented and the organisation of the answers.
Please use the following table to rank the writing samples (1=best answer, 5=worst
answer).
Ranking Writing Sample No.
• Why did you give the best ranking to this sample?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________
Thank-you very much for taking part in this survey.
- 141 -
Appendix G: Samples for ranking task
P1690
In an action for negligence a duty of care must be proven. Was Dendron and Hoe a foreseeable
plaintiff? They may have been because Putt Ltd had dangerous chemicals which could cause an
explosion, and were therefore under a duty to be careful, particularly because of the gravity of
risk.
Next it must be proven that Putt breached that duty of care - did they act as a reasonable person
would have? Because of the gravity of risk, the standard of care would be very high and therefore
Putt would be in breach of this duty.
Next causation must be proven - did Putt Ltd.’s actions cause the damage to the plaintiff’s
property? The ‘but for’ test is used here - would the damage have occurred but for the
defendant’s negligence? Causation is therefore established. However, here the defendant Putt Ltd
could argue that Dendron and Hoe Ltd didn’t fulfil their duty to mitigate, as they didn’t take
reasonable care to minimise their damages. In this case Putt Ltd may be able to reduce or dispose
of their liability.
According to the Wagon Mound test, the damage was not too remote. A reasonable person would
expect that type of damage (fire damage) to occur as a result of the explosion (the defendant’s
actions).
So Putt Ltd may be held liable for the damage to Dendron and Hoe Ltd.’s building, and the extent
of liability depends on the plaintiff’s ‘duty to mitigate’.
[...]
P1830
The cause of action against Putt Ltd is ‘negligence’. To succeed in this cause of action, the
plaintiffs have to prove:
1) That Putt Ltd owed a duty of care

2) That Putt Ltd breached that duty
3) Causation i.e. it was Putt Ltd.’s breach which caused the plaintiff’s harm
4) Remoteness
For the first point to be proven the 'foreseeable plaintiff' test is applied. Due to the neighbouring
factories’ geographical proximity it is fair to say that they were owed a duty of care. In the case
of Dorset Yacht v Home Office it was ruled that the yacht club was a foreseeable plaintiff due to
its proximity to the camp for borstal boys.
Whether a breach of the duty of care occurred can be proven by applying the 'reasonable person'
test. As one Canadian judge put it, this test examines “what a reasonable and prudent man would
do”. Again Putt Ltd may be liable here because the probability of harm of this type occurring is
fairly high (especially given that the employee is new). Thus more procedures should be in place
to prevent such an action from occurring.
In order to establish causation the ‘but for’ test is applied. In this case the damage would not have
occurred if the defendants had taken reasonable care and called the fire department.
[...]
P240
In this case Duffer was negligent. He should have been more careful as it is easily foreseeable that
chemicals will cause an explosion if mixed improperly in an industrial park where all the
- 142 -
neighbouring properties are vulnerable to explosion. Since Putt Ltd. is Duffer’s employer, Putt
Ltd. is vicariously liable for Duffer. Putt Ltd. owed others a duty of care.
This made Duffer liable to Dendron and Hoe Ltd. DHL can sue Putt Ltd. for negligence.
However, they themselves contributed to the damage as in the case Helson v McKenzie. Their
own carelessness was a cause of the fire. In addition, the fire was caused by the burning embers
which were spread by the breeze, so Putt Ltd. could argue that the damage is too remote.
Although the fire was a cause of the explosion they could not have reasonably foreseen the
damage. Even if DHL can sue Putt Ltd. for damages, the remedy would be reduced because of the
contributory negligence.
Putt personnel had also been careless not to notify the Fire Service. They should have foreseen the
damage that could be done and can therefore also be sued in negligence.
On the other hand, Kemex Ltd. can sue DHL for damages as Kemex Ltd. is a foreseeable plaintiff
as it is nearby. However, Kemex cannot sue Putt as there was a break in the chain of causation and
Putt cannot therefore be held liable for the damage to Kemex.
[...]
P620
Putt Ltd owed a duty of care to DHL and Kemex not to be negligent and cause a massive
explosion such that Putt Ltd would cause any damage to these firms. But, Blythe and Rhoda (of
DHL) owed a duty to mitigate and try to reduce the damage, if not prevent it. Kemex Ltd had a
duty to keep the ‘drums of flammable liquid’ in a safe place in order to minimise the danger.
Putt has become vicariously liable for the damage that his negligent employee has caused.
However, Putt can argue that Blythe and Rhoda had a duty to grab the fire extinguisher and
prevent the actual scenario from happening. Thus, this leaves Putt with a defence against claims
from both DHL and Kemex, as Kemex Ltd would not have accrued any damage 'but for' the
negligent conduct of Blythe and Rhoda. Putt can also claim against Duffer through his
employment contract. Putt may be liable for the fact that the fire service was not called, as they
made a poor judgement about the fire being under control.
Blythe and Rhoda have a cause of action against Putt in that Putt Ltd (through Duffer) was
negligent in causing the explosion and in not calling the fire service. However, Blythe and Rhoda
had a duty to mitigate by preventing the smouldering debris from turning into what it did. Hence,
DHL may be liable to Kemex Ltd for not acting as a reasonable person would have and ‘put out’
the smouldering debris.
Kemex has a claim against both Putt Ltd and DHL in respect that the damage was caused by both
of their negligence. However, the court may hold that Putt Ltd.’s negligence is too remote and
that only DHL is liable.
[...]
P1720
Putt Ltd can sue Duffer for negligence. A duty of care was owed since he was working in the
laboratory, and because he was working with chemicals, it was foreseeable that if he didn’t do his
job well an accident would occur. There was a breach of this duty as Duffer did not act as a
reasonable person would have. Because of his skill and expertise he should have known how to
prevent the explosion.
Rhoda and Blythe would be liable for negligence to the warehouse owner Dendron and Hoe. This
is because a ‘duty of care’ was owed. Being the owner-operators when the explosion occurred
they should have known that the smouldering debris would catch on fire. They breached this duty
when they left the embers and did not put them out, which a reasonable person would have done.
- 143 -
They are also liable for the fire resulting in the destruction of Kemex Ltd as it was foreseeable that
if the fire continued it could spread, although it was not foreseeable that the drums contained
flammable liquid. The Wagon Mound test only makes them liable for what is foreseeable. They
also breached their duty by not ringing the fire service to make sure that they were on their way.
Putt personnel would also be liable for negligence for not notifying the fire service. Therefore
both Rhoda and Blythe and Putt personnel are liable for this and Kemex could claim damages
from either or both of these parties.
[...]
- 144 -
Appendix H: Issues for analysis
The following issues were considered sufficient for analysis in the year 1 problem:
• Putt Ltd.’s (or Duffer’s) liability in negligence
• Dendron and Hoe Ltd.’s (or Rhoda and Blythe’s) liability in negligence
• Kemex’s rights against DHL and Putt Ltd. in negligence
• The issue of negligence
• The issue of contributory negligence
The following issues were considered sufficient for analysis in the year 2 problem:
• The validity of the notice under section 92 of the Property Law Act (1952)
• The validity of the notice under s 152 of the Property Law Act (1952)
- 145 -
Appendix I: Reliability test results
1. Intra-rater test results for study of schematic structure

In order to test the reliability of the study of schematic structure, an intra-rater test was conducted
by rescoring 12 scripts. The primary and secondary data obtained are reproduced. Where scores
differed, percentage difference was calculated by dividing the lower score by the higher score.
This was repeated for all scores: the difference between the two ratings is summarised in the
following table.
Table 33 Percentage agreement for schematic structure analysis

Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Law Facts Authority Opinion1 Opinion2
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 .75 1.0 .5 1.0
0 1.0 0 0 .5 0 .33 .5
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 .5 0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 .5
1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 1.0 0 .5
1.0 1.0 .67 1.0 0 1.0 .5 0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 .5 1.0 1.0 1.0 .5
.5 0 0 .5 .67 .67 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0
.5 1.0 .5 1.0 .5 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 0 .33 .5 .33 1.0 0
The scores here were added up and divided by the maximum possible total: 69.25/96 = .72.
Thus percentage agreement for these two sets of results is .72.
Considering only pattern types and obligatory moves (law, facts, authority), the percentage
agreement is slightly higher: 55.42/72 = .77.
Table 34 Schematic structure reliability test: primary results

1 0 3 2 3 1 1 1
2 0 0 2 2 1 1 2
0 0 2 0 2 1 2 0
0 0 4 0 4 0 4 1
0 0 3 1 2 1 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0
2 0 3 5 2 4 1 2
1 0 1 2 2 2 0 1
1 0 2 1 3 3 0 2
1 1 1 2 3 3 1 0
1 0 2 3 1 3 0 1
1 0 3 3 2 3 0 0
- 146 -
Table 35 Schematic structure reliability test: secondary results
1 0 3 2 4 1 2 1
0 0 4 0 4 0 3 1
0 0 2 0 2 1 1 1
0 0 4 0 4 1 4 2
0 0 3 0 2 1 2 2
0 0 3 0 2 0 1 1
2 0 3 5 2 4 0 2
1 0 1 1 2 2 0 2
2 0 0 2 2 2 0 2
1 1 1 2 3 3 1 1
2 0 1 3 2 3 0 1
1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1
- 147 -
2. Intra-rater test results for study of functional lexical phrases
A. Identification of functional lexis
In order to test the reliability of the concordancing analysis, an intra-rater test was conducted and
every tenth concordancing entry was rescored. The primary and secondary data obtained are
reproduced below (pages 149-152). Where scores differed, percentage difference was calculated
by dividing the lower score by the higher score. This was repeated for all scores: the difference
between the two ratings is summarised in the following table.
Table 36 Percentage difference in concordancing scores

NNS Y1 NS Y1 NNS Y2 NS Y2 NNS HS NS HS NNS LS NS LS
1.0 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.82 .94 1.0 .89 1.0 .9 1.0 1.0
.5 .63 0 1.0 1.0 .6 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.83 .5 1.0 .4 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.68 .71 1.0 .5 .67 .71 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 0 .27 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.67 .29 1.0 1.0 .5 1.0 1.0 1.0
0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.75 .89 1.0 1.0 1.0 .83 1.0 1.0
1.0 .91 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.94 .97 .5 .94 1.0 1.0 .75 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 .5 .44 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.95 .90 1.0 1.0 .5 .86 1.0 .93
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
.8 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 .67 1.0
1.0 .71 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 .78 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
1.0 1.0 .67 1.0 1.0 0 1.0 1.0
0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
The scores here were added up and divided by the maximum possible total: 226.7 / 248 = .91.
Thus percentage agreement for these two sets of results is .91.
- 148 -
The conventions used in the following table are described in Appendix J
Table 37 Concordancing reliability test: primary results

Target language NNS NS NNS NS NNS NS NNS NS
Y1 Y1 Y2 Y2 HS HS LS LS
Forecast and issue

Metadiscourse signals
establish (=) 0 3 0 0 0 2 0 0
General signalling lexis

the first/second/next/final/last issue = 1 3 0 7 0 0 0 0
issue (first/second/next/final/last)
Reference to parties/cause of
action
this case concerns about (=concern) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Authority
locative case authority = v 17 17 1 8 3 10 0 0
as … in <case> = v (as): as, as in, as 10 8 2 1 1 5 0 0

seen in, as illustrated in, as indicated
in, as found in, as was shown in, as
set out in, as per
according to <statute> = 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0
s1*/s2*/s3*/s4*/s5*/s6*/s7*/s8*/s9*/s/
ss/section/subsection (according)
as (was) Ved in
stated = state* (as) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
held = hold*/held* (this) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
Statement of Law
General/specific subject
has/have/had to (=) 5 5 0 2 2 3 0 0
(Putt*/Duffer*/Kemex*/Rhoda*/Blyth*/
DHL*/Hoe*/Genevieve*/Bianca*)
Necessity clause
Verb phrase of necessity
has/have/had to [active main verb] (=) 13 15 1 4 2 5 0 1
shall [passive main verb] (=) 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
require [participle] (=) 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
Necessity that clause

prove etc that X owed (Y) a duty of 6 7 0 0 2 1 0 0
care (to Y) = duty of care
(prove*/show*/establish*)
prove etc that (the) damage was 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
caused by the breach (of duty (of
care)) = duty of care
(prove*/show*/establish)
Purpose clause
to/in order to prove/show/determine = 4 8 0 0 1 5 0 0
to prove*/show*/establish*/determine*
(~must/~has/~have/~had/~need*)
Use, apply, administer

use <case etc> [active] (= use*) 3 10 0 2 0 0 0 0
- 149 -
Reference to fact situation
in this case = case (in this) 27 20 7 13 4 8 2 1
these facts (=) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Metadiscourse: reason - result

therefore (=) 34 16 6 18 2 2 1 1
so [clause initial] (=) 32 31 1 16 1 4 4 0
consequently [clause initial] (=) 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Opinion
Necessity clause
must [complement] (=) 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
require* (=) 0 1 1 4 0 1 0 0
Modal verbs
could (=) 19 83 1 13 1 12 2 14
Hedging
it is probable that (=) 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
likely [not impersonal] (=) 5 14 1 2 0 3 3 0
Legal action and legal

consequences
i.e. ability, success, liability,
penalty
have a defence, claim a defence etc. 2 7 0 0 1 1 0 0
= defence
(can*/could*/may*/might*/will*/would*/
shall*/should*/must*/ought*/be/to)
have a/no claim, bring a claim, face a 0 9 0 2 0 1 0 0
claim, be liable for a claim = claim*
General features
Pronominal reference
he/she/they/his/her/their/him/her/the 418 566 50 257 33 94 45 63
m (=)
Verbs involving a legal actor

require* [passive] (=) 0 1 3 10 0 0 0 0
examine* (=) 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
- 150 -
Table 38 Concordancing reliability test: secondary results
Target language NNS NS NNS NS NNS NS NNS NS
Y1 Y1 Y2 Y2 HS HS LS LS
Forecast and issue

Metadiscourse signals
establish (=) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
General signalling lexis

the first/second/next/final/last issue = 1 3 0 7 0 0 0 0
issue (first/second/next/final/last)
Reference to parties/cause of
action
this case concerns about (=concern) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Authority
locative case authority = v 14 18 1 9 3 9 0 0
as … in <case> = v (as): as, as in, as 5 5 0 1 1 3 0 0

seen in, as illustrated in, as indicated
in, as found in, as was shown in, as
set out in, as per
according to <statute> = 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0
s1*/s2*/s3*/s4*/s5*/s6*/s7*/s8*/s9*/s/s
s/section/subsection (according)
as (was) Ved in
stated = state* (as) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
held = hold*/held* (this) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Statement of Law
General/specific subject
has/have/had to 6 10 0 5 2 3 0 0
(Putt*/Duffer*/Kemex*/Rhoda*/Blyth*/
DHL*/Hoe*/Genevieve*/Bianca*)
Necessity clause
has/have/had to [active main verb] (=) 19 21 1 8 3 7 0 1
shall [passive main verb] 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0
require [participle] 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 0
Necessity that clause

prove etc that X owed (Y) a duty of 4 2 0 0 1 1 0 0
care (to Y) = duty of care
prove etc that (the) damage was 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
caused by the breach (of duty (of
care)) = duty of care
Purpose clause
to/in order to prove/show/determine = 3 9 0 0 1 6 0 0
to prove*/show*/establish*/determine*
(~must/~has/~have/~had/~need*)
Use, apply, administer

use <case etc> (active) (=use*) 3 11 0 2 0 0 0 0

in this case = case (in this) 27 20 7 13 4 8 2 1
- 151 -
these facts (=) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Metadiscourse: reason - result

therefore (=) 34 16 6 18 2 2 1 1
so [clause initial] (=) 34 32 2 17 1 4 3 0
consequently [clause initial] (=) 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
Opinion
Necessity clause (Opinion)
Verb phrase of necessity (Opinion)
must [complement] (=) 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
require* (=) 0 1 2 9 0 1 0 0
Modal verbs
could (=) 18 92 1 13 2 14 2 15
Hedging
it is probable that (=) 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
likely [not impersonal] (=) 4 14 1 2 0 3 2 0
Legal action and legal

consequences i.e. ability, success,
liability, penalty
have a defence, claim a defence etc 2 5 0 0 1 1 0 0
= defence
have a/no claim, bring a claim, face a 0 7 0 2 0 1 0 0
claim, be liable for a claim = claim*
(can* etc)
General features
Pronominal reference
he/she/they/his/her/their/him/her/them 418 566 50 257 33 94 45 63
(=)
Verbs involving a legal actor

require* (passive) 0 1 2 10 0 1 0 0
examine* 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
- 152 -
B. Reliability of lexical density count
A total of 10 papers were rescored in the lexical density count in order to check for reliability.
Table 39 reports the results on the first and second score and the percentage agreement achieved.
The percentage agreement is obtained by dividing the lower score by the higher score.
Table 39 Lexical density reliability test scores

First score Second score
Subject (number of content (number of content Percentage
words) words) agreement
P290 157 151 .96

P380 66 65 .98
P840 99 97 .98
P850 179 180 .99
P1000 123 120 .98
P1080 162 158 .98
P1300 148 148 1.0
P1390 157 160 .98
P1570 214 212 .99
P1690 217 217 1.0
Average percentage agreement .98
As illustrated in table 39, the percentage agreement achieved was .98
- 153 -
Appendix J: Results to concordancing analysis.
The results of the concordancing analysis are reported here in full. The target language is reported
first, followed by the elicitation method. Where the target language and elicitation method were
the same, this is inmdicated by an ‘equals’ sign, in brackets (=). Brackets indicate context words
where they were used. Information in square brackets concerns the grammatical realisation of
target language
Target language NNS NS Y1 Y2 NNS NS NNS NS

Y1 Y1 HS HS LS LS
Forecast and issue

Sequencing lexis
first/firstly = first* 1.00 0.74 0.86 1.12 0.95 0.31 0.00 1.39
second/secondly = second* 0.50 0.26 0.37 0.88 0.47 0.62 1.71 0.00
third/thirdly = third* 0.12 0.32 0.23 0.08 0.00 1.24 0.85 0.00
fourth/fourthly = fourth* 0.06 0.21 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.85 0.00
then (temporal) = then 0.50 0.58 0.54 0.56 0.47 0.00 0.85 0.00
next (=) 0.19 0.37 0.29 0.08 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
finally (=) 0.25 0.05 0.14 0.08 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
last/lastly (=) 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.08 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
total sequencing lexis 2.68 2.81 2.75 2.88 2.85 4.04 4.27 1.39
issue/issues (=) 1.06 1.22 1.15 1.44 0.00 0.31 0.85 2.09
problem* (=) 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
question* (=) 0.00 0.42 0.23 0.16 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
action* (=) 3.55 5.03 4.35 0.48 1.90 4.67 6.84 8.34
party/parties (=) 1.12 1.01 1.06 0.40 0.95 0.93 1.71 0.70
plaintiff = plaintiff*/p [identifying plaintiff] 0.44 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.70
defendant = defendant*/d [identifying defendant] 0.37 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.70
defence (=) 0.44 0.95 0.72 0.08 1.42 1.56 0.00 0.00
remedy/remedies (=) 2.30 0.48 1.32 5.75 2.37 0.00 0.85 0.70
total semi-technical lexis 9.28 9.76 8.99 8.47 7.59 8.71 10.26 13.21
Advance labelling devices

discuss* (incl discussion) (=) 0.12 0.05 0.09 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
consider* (=) 0.25 0.05 0.14 0.08 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
deal* (with) (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
understand* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
look* (at) (=) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
examine* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
talk* (about) (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
see (=) 0.56 0.05 0.29 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
determine (=) 0.00 0.26 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
establish (=) 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
we will/let us show/prove/establish = 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
show*/prove*/establish* (we will/let us)
introduc* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
conclud* (=) to conclude, we may conclude 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total advance labelling devices 1.12 0.64 0.86 0.64 0.00 1.87 0.00 0.00
Statement of Law
Expression of necessity
- 154 -
<modal> + verb phrase/complement
must (=) 1.25 1.06 1.15 5.99 2.37 1.87 0.00 0.70
must [active main verb] 1.12 0.64 0.86 3.28 1.90 1.24 0.00 0.70
must [passive main verb] 0.12 0.37 0.26 1.76 0.47 0.62 0.00 0.00
must [complement] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
must [other] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
has to/have to/had to = has/have/had (to) 0.81 0.85 0.83 0.48 0.95 1.56 0.00 0.70
has/have/had to [active main verb] 0.81 0.79 0.80 0.40 0.95 1.56 0.00 0.70
has/have/had to [passive main verb] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
has/have/had to [complement] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
need* to (=) 0.81 0.85 0.83 0.40 0.00 2.49 0.00 0.00
need to [active main verb] 0.81 0.53 0.66 0.00 0.00 1.24 0.00 0.00
need to [passive main verb] 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.40 0.00 1.24 0.00 0.00
shall (=) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
shall [active main verb] 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
shall [passive main verb] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
shall [complement] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total <modal> + active main verb 2.80 1.96 2.35 3.84 2.85 4.04 0.00 1.39
total <modal> + passive main verb 0.12 0.74 0.46 2.40 0.47 1.87 0.00 0.00
total <modal> + complement 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total other constructions 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
other verbal expression of necessity

it … necessary to = necessary (it) 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.08 0.00 1.24 0.00 0.00
require* (=) 0.12 0.16 0.14 0.80 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
require [active] 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.24 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
require [passive] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
require [participle] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
nominal expression of necessity

requirement 0.06 0.21 0.14 1.68 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
requirement* (=) [refer back] 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.72 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
requirement* (=) [refer forward] 0.06 0.11 0.09 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total expression of necessity 3.11 3.34 3.23 9.99 3.32 8.09 0.00 1.39
Prove/show/establish
<necessity> prove = prove* 0.93 1.06 1.00 0.08 1.42 3.11 0.00 0.00
(must*/has/have/had/need*/require*/necessary)
<necessity> be proven = prove* (etc) 0.06 0.58 0.34 0.00 0.47 1.87 0.00 0.00
<necessity> show = show* (etc) 0.25 0.32 0.29 0.08 0.47 1.56 0.00 0.00
<necessity> be shown = show* (etc) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
<necessity> establish = establish* (etc) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
<necessity> be established = establish* (etc) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total active voice 1.25 1.43 1.35 0.16 2.37 4.98 0.00 0.00
total passive voice 0.12 0.64 0.40 0.16 0.47 1.87 0.00 0.00
total prove/show/establish 1.37 2.07 1.75 0.32 2.85 6.85 0.00 0.00
Use/apply/administer
use <case, statute, legal test, action, principle, rule> 0.50 0.85 0.69 0.16 0.00 0.31 0.85 1.39
= use*
use <case etc> [active] 0.19 0.53 0.37 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
use <case etc> [passive] 0.31 0.21 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.85 1.39
use <case etc> [infinitive] 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
apply <case etc> = appl* 0.50 0.58 0.54 0.24 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.70
- 155 -
apply <case etc> [active] 0.25 0.32 0.29 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
apply <case etc> [passive] 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.08 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
administer <case etc> = administer* 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
administer <case etc> [passive] 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
total active 0.44 0.85 0.66 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
total passive 0.56 0.58 0.57 0.08 0.00 1.56 0.85 1.39
total infinitive 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total use/apply/administer 1.00 1.54 1.29 0.40 0.00 1.56 0.85 2.09
Authority
case authority = v
parenthetic 0.31 0.32 0.31 0.96 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
locative 0.25 0.53 0.40 0.64 0.47 1.24 0.85 0.00
marked 2.18 1.64 1.89 1.20 2.37 3.73 0.00 0.70
total case authority 2.74 2.49 2.60 2.80 2.85 5.29 0.85 0.70
locative case authority: signalling

in…. 0.31 0.26 0.29 0.48 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
from… 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
under… 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
other 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total in/from/under 0.31 0.32 0.31 0.64 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
locative case authority: main clause

it was held/found/stated or the judge/court 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.40 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
held/found/stated
other 0.19 0.21 0.20 0.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
parenthetic case authority: signalling

in (incl cited in, in the case, as in, as seen in, as 0.68 0.58 0.63 0.24 0.95 2.18 0.00 0.00
illustrated in, as indicated in, as found in, as was
shown in, as set out in, as per)
case (incl case cited, as the case of, from the case 0.37 0.16 0.26 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
of, case reference)
eg/ie 0.25 0.37 0.31 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00
other (incl according to, same like, supported by, 0.19 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
see, refer to)
no signalling 0.68 0.42 0.54 0.72 0.47 0.93 0.00 0.70
total signalling 1.49 1.22 1.35 0.48 1.90 2.80 0.00 0.00
marked case authority: composition

this is established/shown/illustrated/exemplified in/by 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.08 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
<case>
<case> related to/illustrates/establishes this 0.06 0.11 0.09 0.00 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
other 0.19 0.21 0.20 0.56 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
total establish/illustrate/exemplify/show/relate to 0.06 0.32 0.20 0.08 0.47 1.24 0.00 0.00
case signalling
as … in <case> = v (as): as, as in, as seen in, as 0.62 0.42 0.52 0.24 0.47 1.56 0.00 0.00
illustrated in, as indicated in, as found in, as was
shown in, as set out in, as per
case:/case cited (=) 0.25 0.05 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
under <case> = v (under) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
- 156 -
in <case> = v (in/~as): in, in case, in the case*, in the 0.75 0.37 0.54 0.64 0.95 1.56 0.00 0.00
case* of, in the x case)
following <case> = v (following) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
according to <case> = v (according) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
e.g./eg/E.g./Eg <case> = v (e.g./eg/E.g./Eg) 0.19 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00
total case signalling 1.99 1.06 1.32 1.04 2.37 3.42 0.00 0.00
statute authority = 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
s1*/s2*/s3*/s4*/s5*/s6*/s7*/s8*/s9*/s/ss/section/subs
ection
statute signalling
under <statute> = s1* etc (under) 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
as … in <statute> = s1* etc (as) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
following <statute> = s1* etc (following) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
according to <statute> = s1* etc (according) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in <statute> = s1* etc (in/~as) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total statute signalling 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

here = here* 0.68 0.69 0.69 0.56 0.00 0.31 0.00 2.78
in here = here* 0.25 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in this case = case (in this) 1.68 1.06 1.35 1.60 1.90 2.49 1.71 0.70
in this example = example (in this) 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in this scenario = scenario (in this) 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
in this instance = instance (in this) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in this event = event (in this) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
circumstance* (in) (=) 0.12 0.11 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
circumstance* (under) (=) 0.06 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
problem* (in this) (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in this fact situation (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
the facts (=) 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
these facts (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
this case (=) 0.12 0.32 0.23 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00
this situation (=) 0.06 0.11 0.09 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
this example (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
this scenario (=) 0.12 0.21 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total reference to fact situation 3.42 3.18 3.29 2.72 2.85 3.11 2.56 4.87
Metadiscourse: topicalisers
regarding/regard to/with regards to/with regard to/in 0.19 0.16 0.17 0.32 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.70
regard to/as regard to = regard*
in relation to (=) 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
in the concern of (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
as far as … is concerned = concern* (as far as) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
as for (=) 0.19 0.21 0.20 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
total topicalisers 0.37 0.64 0.52 0.32 0.47 0.62 0.00 0.70
Metadiscourse: causal conjunction

therefore (=) 2.12 0.85 1.43 1.92 0.95 0.62 0.85 0.70
therefore, clause initial 2.05 0.69 1.32 1.68 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.00
therefore, mid clause 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.24 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.70
therefore, other 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00
- 157 -
thus (=) 0.44 0.37 0.40 0.48 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.00
thus, clause initial 0.37 0.37 0.37 0.48 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.00
thus, with present participle 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hence (=) 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hence, clause initial 0.06 0.21 0.14 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hence, with noun phrase 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
so, clause initial (=) 1.99 1.64 1.80 1.36 0.47 1.24 3.42 0.00
as a result (=) 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.08 0.47 0.31 0.00 1.39
as a result, clause initial 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
as a result, with noun phrase/gerund 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.08 0.47 0.31 0.00 1.39
then (causal) (=) 0.37 1.01 0.72 0.48 0.95 0.93 0.00 2.09
then (causal) clause initial 0.25 0.90 0.60 0.48 0.95 0.93 0.00 2.09
then (causal) mid-clause 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
as a consequence (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in consequence (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
consequently (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
consequently clause initial 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
because of this (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
in conclusion (=) 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total causal conjunction 5.17 4.56 4.84 4.64 3.80 3.73 4.27 4.17
Opinion
Necessity clause (Opinion)
Verbal expression of necessity

<modal> + verb phrase or complement
must* (=) 0.19 0.05 0.11 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
must [active main verb] 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
must [passive main verb] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
must [complement] 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
has to/have to/had to = has/have/had (to) 0.19 0.32 0.26 0.40 0.47 0.62 0.00 0.00
has/have/had to [active main verb] 0.19 0.32 0.26 0.24 0.47 0.62 0.00 0.00
has/have/had to [passive main verb] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
need* to (=) 0.19 0.16 0.17 0.08 0.00 0.62 0.85 0.00
need to [active main verb] 0.19 0.16 0.17 0.08 0.00 0.62 0.85 0.00
total <modal> + active main verb 0.44 0.53 0.49 0.48 0.47 1.24 0.85 0.00
total <modal> + passive main verb 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total <modal> + complement 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Other verbal expression of necessity

it … necessary to = necessary (it) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
require* (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.40 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
require [passive] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
require [participle] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total verbal expression of necessity 0.56 0.64 0.60 1.04 0.47 1.87 0.85 0.00
Possibility clause (Opinion)
Verbal expression of possibility

may* (=) 6.41 9.06 7.84 2.00 5.70 9.65 0.00 7.65
is allowed to = allowed (is/are/was/were) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
is entitled to = entitled (is/are/was/were/be) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total verbal expression of possibility 6.47 9.06 7.87 2.48 5.70 9.65 0.00 7.65
Modal verbs (Opinion)
- 158 -
may (=) 5.17 7.26 6.30 1.44 5.22 8.71 2.56 4.17
might (=) 0.87 0.26 0.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
can (=) 9.03 3.29 5.93 2.96 8.54 1.87 20.51 0.00
could (=) 1.18 4.40 2.92 1.12 0.47 3.73 1.71 9.74
will (=) 1.87 3.29 2.63 0.40 2.37 5.60 0.85 2.09
would (=) 1.31 2.23 1.80 0.88 3.32 2.18 0.00 0.70
shall (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
should (=) 0.19 0.26 0.23 0.08 0.00 0.00 1.71 0.70
must (=) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
ought to (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total modal verbs 19.67 21.04 20.41 6.95 19.93 22.09 27.35 17.39
Hedging (Opinion)
Lexical verbs
suggest* (=) 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
indicate* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
appear* (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.56 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
propose* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total lexical verbs 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.56 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
Modal adjectives
it is doubtful that (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
it is possible that (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
it is unlikely that (=) 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.08 0.00 0.31 0.00 1.39
it is likely that (=) 0.00 0.37 0.20 0.00 0.00 1.56 0.00 0.70
it is probable that (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total modal adjectives 0.00 0.79 0.43 0.16 0.00 1.87 0.00 2.09
Adverbs
possibly (=) 0.00 0.58 0.31 0.08 0.00 1.56 0.00 0.00
probably (=) 0.31 1.64 1.03 0.48 0.00 0.93 3.42 2.09
perhaps (=) 0.12 0.37 0.26 0.00 0.00 1.56 0.00 0.00
maybe (=) 0.19 0.11 0.14 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
quite 0.12 0.16 0.14 0.08 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
almost 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total modal adverbs 0.75 2.91 1.92 0.80 0.00 4.67 3.42 2.09
total hedging 20.42 24.96 22.87 8.47 19.93 29.56 30.77 21.56
Evaluation lexis
Assessment of process: ability to take action
Verbal forms
sue* (=) [active only] 8.53 6.68 7.53 0.32 9.49 6.22 12.82 13.91
claim that = claim* (can* etc (1)) 0.37 0.11 0.23 0.32 0.00 0.00 2.56 0.70
argue = argue* (can* etc (1)) 1.06 0.95 1.00 0.56 0.95 0.00 0.00 2.09
defend*(=) (can* etc (1)) 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
defence* (v) (=) (can* etc (1)) 0.25 0.00 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
prove*/show*/establish* (=) (can* etc (1)/~must) 0.68 0.95 0.83 0.80 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.70
total verbal forms 10.89 8.85 9.79 2.08 10.44 7.16 15.38 17.39
Nominal form
claim + NP = claim* (can* etc (1)) 0.81 2.23 1.57 0.16 0.47 3.42 1.71 2.09
seek/sought + NP = seek/sought (can* etc (1)) 0.19 0.11 0.14 0.24 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
- 159 -
have a (strong) case, bring a case, have no case = 0.00 0.48 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.70
case* (can*/could*/may*/might*/will*/would*/should*
/has/have*/had)
have a defence, put up a defence, construct a 0.12 0.32 0.23 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
defence etc = defence (can* etc (2))
have a claim, bring a claim = claim* (can* etc (2)) 0.00 0.32 0.17 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
have a cause of action = cause of action (can* etc 0.06 0.16 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
(2))
total nominal forms 1.18 3.60 2.49 0.56 1.42 3.73 2.56 3.48
total ability to take action 12.08 12.45 12.28 2.64 11.87 10.89 17.95 20.86
Assessment of process: liability
Verbal forms
<modal (~will)> be (found/held) liable to/for = liable* 1.25 2.70 2.03 0.00 3.80 0.00 0.00 2.09
(can* etc (1)/to/for)
will be (found/held) liable to/for = liable* (can* etc 0.44 0.58 0.52 0.08 1.90 1.56 0.00 0.70
(1)/to/for)
is (found/held) liable = liable (can* etc (1)) 1.93 1.91 1.92 0.00 0.47 0.62 2.56 1.39
total be liable 3.61 5.19 4.47 0.08 6.17 2.18 2.56 4.17
be sued (=) (can* etc (1)) 1.12 0.64 0.86 0.00 1.90 0.62 0.00 0.00
be charged with (=) (can etc (1)) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
be found guilty = guilty (can* etc (1)) 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
be prosecuted (=) 0.19 0.05 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.85 0.00
be accused = accuse* (can* etc (1)) 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
Nominal forms
face a claim = claim* (can* etc (2)) 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
face prosecution/charges/conviction = face* (can* etc 0.12 0.37 0.26 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
(1))
have liability, face liability, share liability = liabilit* 1.12 0.79 0.94 0.08 0.00 1.24 0.85 0.70
(can etc (2)/must*/ought*)
liability may be found/imposed/decreased/negated = 0.06 0.16 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
liability (can* etc (2)/must*/ought*)
total liability 6.29 7.47 6.93 0.16 8.07 5.60 4.27 4.87
Assessment of result: benefit
Verbal forms
be remedied/paid = be remedied/paid (can* etc (1)) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
be compensated = compensated (can* etc (1)) 0.25 0.05 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Nominal forms
be given remedy = give* (can* etc (1)) 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
receive + NP = receive* (can* etc (1)) 0.00 0.26 0.14 0.00 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
obtain + NP = obtain* ( can* etc (1)) 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
awarded + NP = award* (can* etc (1)) 0.06 0.16 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70
- 160 -
get + NP = get* (can* etc (1)) 0.12 0.26 0.20 0.08 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
gain + NP = gain* (can* etc (1)) 0.12 0.05 0.09 0.24 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
total benefit 0.75 0.79 0.77 0.40 0.47 0.93 0.00 0.70
Assessment of result: obligation
must*/have to/has to/had to/need* to pay* (=) 0.00 0.21 0.11 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
must etc compensate* (=) 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
must etc remedy (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total obligation 0.12 0.21 0.17 0.40 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
General features
Verbs involving a legal actor 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
entitle* (=) 0.00 0.05 0.03 1.60 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
entitle [active] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
entitle [passive] 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
entitle [past participle] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
allow* (=) 0.12 0.05 0.09 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
allow [active] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
allow [passive] 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
require* (=) 0.06 0.21 0.14 2.64 0.00 0.93 0.00 0.00
require [active] 0.00 0.11 0.06 0.48 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
require [passive] 0.00 0.05 0.03 1.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
require [past participle] 0.00 0.05 0.03 1.12 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
require [other] 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
restrict* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
restrict [passive] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
consider* (=) 0.12 0.37 0.26 0.16 0.00 1.87 0.00 0.00
consider [active] 0.12 0.00 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
consider [passive] 0.00 0.26 0.14 0.16 0.00 1.56 0.00 0.00
consider [past participle] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
consider [present participle] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
examine* (=) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
examine [passive] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
see* (=) 0.31 0.21 0.26 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
see [active] 0.31 0.05 0.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
see [passive] 0.00 0.16 0.09 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
deem* (=) 0.00 0.11 0.06 1.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
deem [active] 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
deem [passive] 0.00 0.11 0.06 1.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hold/held (=) 0.75 0.58 0.66 0.64 0.00 0.93 0.85 0.00
hold/held [active] 0.50 0.11 0.29 0.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hold/held [passive] 0.19 0.42 0.31 0.48 0.00 0.93 0.85 0.00
held [past participle] 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
hold/held [other] 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
find/found (=) 0.44 1.38 0.94 0.80 0.47 2.80 1.71 0.00
find/found [active] 0.06 0.26 0.17 0.40 0.00 0.62 0.00 0.00
find/found [passive] 0.25 0.95 0.63 0.40 0.00 2.18 1.71 0.00
found [past participle] 0.06 0.16 0.11 0.00 0.47 0.00 0.00 0.00
found [other] 0.06 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
state* (=) 0.31 0.21 0.26 2.24 0.95 0.62 0.00 0.00
state [active] 0.25 0.16 0.20 2.24 0.95 0.31 0.00 0.00
- 161 -
state [passive] 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
total active 1.25 0.80 1.00 3.44 0.95 1.56 0.00 0.00
total passive 0.62 2.01 1.37 5.91 0.00 4.98 2.56 0.00
total past participle 0.06 0.32 0.20 1.28 0.47 0.31 0.00 0.00
total present participle 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.00 0.00
total other constructions 0.19 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
total verbs requiring a legal actor 2.12 3.18 2.69 10.63 1.42 7.16 2.56 0.00
Notes:
(1) The same context words were used here as for the entry above, 'sue'.
(2) The same context words were used here as for the entry above, 'have a case'
- 162 -

Genre Register and EAP A Comparative Stu

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Genre Register and EAP A Comparative Stu

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Genre, register and EAP:

A comparative study of writing for

Christoph Alexander Hafner

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for

4 RESULTS 1: BASELINE STUDY 59

6 RESULTS 3: FUNCTIONAL LEXICAL PHRASES 83

7 FINAL DISCUSSION 114

LIST OF REFERENCES 121

English for Academic Purposes EAP

universities. A report of a University of Auckland Sub-Committee of Deans Committee

University of Auckland in the following terms:

The sub-committee found depressing evidence that a considerable number of NESB1

(University of Auckland Sub-Committee of Deans Committee, 1995)

native speaker (NNS) students at the University of Auckland.

1Non English-Speaking Background

Purposes (EAP). According to Dudley-Evans and St. John:

(Dudley-Evans and St. John 1998: 4)

academic success or grade awarded.

experience with the genre is gauged.

input to courses in EALP.

needs were considered by an analysis of discourse-level, schematic structures in student writing.

Finally, in order to examine student difficulties at a lower level, a study of lexico-grammatical

perspectives, including ‘linguistics, anthropology, composition research, folklore, rhetoric,

literature is relevant to ESP, as it presents useful analyses of language in a variety of different

followed by a discussion of Swales’ theory of genre.

2.1 REGISTER THEORY

situation. According to Halliday, context of situation can be interpreted using a conceptual

1989). The following definition of these concepts is provided:

(Halliday and Hasan 1989: 12)

Radio I, 18 February, 1999

organised to convey accurate information as quickly and efficiently as possible.

noted however, that a register is usually realised by a particular co-occurrence of lexico-

Field, Tenor, Mode and Systemic Functional Grammar

the language. Halliday notes that:

(Halliday and Hasan 1989: 25)

Furthermore, each of these functions is related to particular lexico-grammatical systems (Halliday

the context of situation can be characterised in terms of lexico-grammatical features.

2.2 GENRE THEORY

A preliminary definition of genre

considerable influence on genre theory is M. M. Bakhtin. His notion of ‘speech genre’ is

The concept of language as related to spheres of human activity is an important one, as it

purposeful action on the other.

Rhetoric, systemic functional linguistics and ESP.

Genre and New Rhetoric

(Devitt 1993: 575-576)

less direct application to language teaching.

Genre and systemic functional linguistics

Halliday and Hasan 1989; Ventola 1987).

regard to these formal elements, Hasan attempts to determine:

1. What elements must occur;

(Hasan in Halliday and Hasan 1989: 56)

Figure 1 A stratified model of language, register and genre

Adapted from Martin (1993: 158)

will prove to be theoretically tenable.

Martin’s approach link schematic structure to context. According to systemic functional

Genre and ESP

(Swales 1990: 58)

common public goals and mechanisms of intercommunication between members. According to

surrounding social context.

2.3 COMPETING THEORIES: REGISTER AND GENRE

cited points of difference are discussed.

Surface features and communicative purpose

(Bhatia 1993: 6. My emphasis CH)