The paper "The Interpersonal Meanings of Texts the English Language" is a perfect example of an annotated bibliography on education. This paper consists of analyses of 6 readings that deal with the issue of the English language. The issues discussed here include academic purposes, academic writing, systematic functional linguistics, textual analysis, grammatical metaphors, and English vocabulary. This paper analyses these articles in the following order: The first two articles examine the interpersonal meanings of texts; the next two articles focus on the management of textual resources while the last two articles are only concerned with the pedagogically-oriented exploration of academic writing. Hood, S.
2004. The managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: a focus on the introductions to research reports. In Ravelli, Louise J.; Ellis, Robert A. 2005. Analyzing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks, London: Continuum. This article is a study of the realization of interpersonal meanings. In this article, Hood explores the way the evaluative stance is performed in the challenging environment of preliminary sections of the research papers. She argues that it is in this part that the writer needs to evaluate the domain of research and her/his personal work using interpersonal resources.
Hood uses two parallel corpora to illustrate her points. The main corpus consists of undergraduate students writing whereas the other is a control corpus which involves expert writing. She uses a qualitative methodology to carry out her research and places her article in the appraisal theory. Hood explores the attitude values in academic writing. Hood uses the appraisal theory to describe the numerous ways of linguistic comprehension of interpersonal meanings in English language use. He uses attitude, in particular the effect, judgemental, and appreciation sub-system of this theory, to evaluate the language by attitudinally positioning in text.
Hood found out that a variety of attitudinal values, especially affect and judgment, are evident in students’ essays or texts. Captivatingly, she claims that there is a pressing need to conduct further research to differentiate between grammar and genre. Hood attempts to start responding to this claim because her findings demonstrate how attitude varies when assessing the researched domain or else other research and materials. She believes that this all-inclusive stance has not been extensively advocated because it entails more complex models and clarifications and more hardly relevant results for leaning academic writing.
She argues that the systemic functional model needs to be integrated with a genre-based approach. This article gives a clear clue of the aim of research in the systematic functional theory and credibly demonstrates how effective this model is in analyzing academic writing. In this article, Hood postulates that academic writing can only be properly analyzed from a non-expert writing perspective. Moreover, she argues that it is only within this perspective that analyzing academic writing manages to maintain a positive balance between practice and theory, between theoretically-based tentative answers and pedagogically-triggered questions. Hood included language one as well as language two writing and present contributions from various research centers and countries to strengthen her arguments.
However, she primarily focuses on English within an academic context. Nevertheless, she could have presented a broader, more inclusive perspective by including some researches on other languages apart from English.