The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader
Abstract
The view of written texts as embodying interaction between the writer and reader is not well established, and underlies many aspects that may be focused on in the training of novice writers of academic text. In this paper, I argue that interaction can draw on both interactive and interactional resources: interactive resources help to guide the reader through the text, while interactional resources involve the reader collaboratively in the development of the text. I use the concept of the 'reader-in-the-text' (Thompson and Thetela 1995) to explore a central form of interactional resource: the inclusion in the text of a voice that is intended to be attributable to the reader. I identify a particular set of discourse contexts in which this happens - where the writer brings in the reader's view in order to contradict it - and outline the lexico-grammatical features which signal the other voice in those contexts; and I place these in a broader perspective on written text as a stage-managed form of dialogue. The impetus for the study comes from working with novice writers; and I discuss a number of examples where written drafts were improved by exploiting the interactional resources described, and argue for the value of raising students' awareness of these resources.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation
Hyland, K. (2008) · English for Specific Purposes · doi:10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001 · Cited by 1,250
Metadiscourse: Mapping Interactions in Academic Writing
Hyland, K. (2010) · Nordic Journal of English Studies · doi:10.35360/njes.220 · Cited by 276
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2011) · Journal of Pragmatics · doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002 · Cited by 256
What do they mean? Questions in academic writing
HYLAND, K. (2002) · Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse · doi:10.1515/text.2002.021 · Cited by 201
Metadiscourse: Diverse and divided perspectives
Ädel, A., & Mauranen, A. (2010) · Nordic Journal of English Studies · doi:10.35360/njes.215 · Cited by 185
Metadata
- Authors
- Thompson, G.
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2001-03-01
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 58-78
- ISSN
- 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
- 1477-450X
- OpenAlex
- W2049941473
- Cited by
- 559
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 95.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/applin/22.1.58
- The paper
- Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.