readingDear Jennifer,
Thank you very much for sending your conceptual framework. Am really looking forward to talking more about your project on Wednesday.
In the meantime, here are some references you might like to consider as you develop your literature review: (This will be in the UNE library if not already – very soon.)     Not there yet but got 2 articles (in Mendely)

Hood, S.E. 2016, ‘Systemic Functional Linguistics and EAP’ in Hyland, K. & Shaw, P. (eds), The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes, Routledge, pp. 193-205. I have seen this somewhere – check Shaker’s office or the library [In fact you might like to glance through all Sue’s publications to see if any others are of interest: ].

Hood, S. 2009, ‘Texturing interpersonal meanings in academic argument: pulses and prosodies of value’ in Forey, G. & Thompson, G. (eds), Text Type and Texture, Equinox, London, UK, pp. 214-233.
View/Download from: UTS OPUS

Hide description –

There is a very extensive research literature on the organisational structuring of academic texts as genres, both from a pragmatic perspective (e.g, Swales 1990; Dudley-Evans 1994; Paltridge 1997; Hyland 2002), sometimes referred to as EAP genre theory (d. Hyon 1996), and from genre theory within Systemic Functional linguistics (SFL) (e.g, Drury 1991; Schleppegre112004; Coffin et at. 2005). Theoretical differences in the conception of genre translate into different practices in the analysis and justification of stages, but from both theoretical perspectives resultant descriptions have had an important impact on academic literacy programs. However, such descriptions do not in themselves exhaust the process of analysis in how meanings pattern and unfold in texts.     looks interesting. – ordered digitisation from library.
De Silva Joyce, H.C. & Hood, S. 2009, ‘English for community membership: planning for actual and potential needs’ in Diane Belcher (ed), English for Specific Purposes in Theory and Practice, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, pp. 244-263.
View/Download from: UTS OPUS

Hide description –

Amajortension underlies the design of English language programs for enabling community membership. On the one hand there is a pressure to respond to a diverse range of specific and immediate needs for language use. At the same time there is an imperative to build the potential of learners to use language beyond specific instances. This chapter explores one response to this tension in the form of a large-scale curriculum designed for adult immigrants in Australia. The chapter articuiates the underlying theory of the curriculum and illustrates in practical examples how such theory is enacted.     Also looks interesting but I can’t find it  for free.  Sue Hood appears to be on top of all this free link stuff – no way to get cited – must feel she is famous enough.
Hood, S. 2005, ‘The co-patterning of attitude and field in academic writing: what gets evaluated how?’, Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, vol. S, no. 19, pp. 23-40.
View/Download from: UTS OPUS

Hide description –

This study explores the ways in which academic writers employ expressions of attitude in the construction of evaluative stance in the introductory sections of research papers. The study draws on the theoretical base of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) (Halliday, 1994, Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004), and in particular on Appraisal theory as a modelling of interpersonal meaning at the level of discourse semantics (Martin 1992, 2000, Martin & Rose, 2003, Martin & White, forthcoming). Attitude is explored from two perspectives: how it is expressed in the discourse, and what it is employed to evaluate. In addressing the second issue, the focus is on the general field (subject matter being constructed in the text) rather than on specific entities. The study is also concerned therefore with how different fields are identified in the texts, and how they relate one to another. The research contributes some significant dimensions to the modelling of attitudinal meanings in the register. Firstly analyses reveal that the register of academic research writing is characteristically constructive of two fields, the knowledge domain being investigated and the research activity conducted in relation to that domain; that these fields are in a relationship of projection one to the other; and that each field is evaluated in quite different ways. The findings contribute at a theoretical level to explaining the apparent contradiction between the dual demands of persuasion and ‘objectivity’ in the register, and at a practical level by providing a new dimension to frameworks for deconstructing and negotiating evaluative stance with novice academic research writers.     Can’t find 
There is a rich source of EAP learning resources on this website: Many of these resources have been developed by those applying social semiotics/SFL to EAP.  Overwhelmingly long list of links to learning resources – doubtlessly some good teaching links.  Sent to my e-mails to look through one day 😦   _ This is the 1st book I got.  I was told to get it when I went in and met the supervisors for the 1st time.  This is how I realised I would have to do Systemic Functional Linguistics.  This is how I felt at the time: shock
Having now done further reading I think I probably need this:
There’s also all the work being done in the area of Legitimation Code Theory by A/Prof Karl Maton and colleagues at the University of Sydney.      Oh Oh I have been ignoring everything to do with legitimate code theory because I thought it had nothing to do with me.  Well I think they have a conference coming up in Spain which can’t be a bad thing.   You can access  his book ‘Knowledge and Knowers’ as an e-book via the UNE library.   I have it on my laptop now but am reluctant to begin reading it until the Methedrine arrives.  
These are very general suggestions – but once I have a more focused understanding of your area of interest and the questions you are pursuing, I’ll be able to provide better targeted support.
With very best wishes

Add a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: