Узданица XX 2 (2023) (стр. 21-33)

АУТОР(И) / AUTHOR(S): Ana Lj. Vučićević, Aleksandra D. Rakić


Download Full Pdf   

DOI: 10.46793/Uzdanica20.2.021V


Book reviews are highly evaluative academic genre as they essentially convey the assessment of the novel academic content within disciplinary communities. In terms of the (rhetorical) structure of the review, it has been observed that certain sections that contain fo- cused evaluation (i.e. evaluation of the specific aspects of the reviewed book that is generically called Move 3) might be central to the evaluative rhetorical purpose of the genre. Having in mind that the evaluation in book reviews in Serbian is scarcely researched, this paper explores the positions and functions of Move 3 in the academic book reviews published in the prestigious Serbian journal South Slavic Philologist. The principal aims are to provide qualitative accounts of Move 3 and introduce possibilities for the rhetorical implementation of this section as illus- trated in expert writing in Serbian. Motta-Roth’s (1996) four-move framework as well as Biber et al.’s (2007) steps from top down corpus analysis approach were used to determine the general rhetorical patternings of the reviews as well as the specific realisations of Move 3. The results show that, aside from being a part of the regular pattern (M1‒M2‒M3‒M4) that is widely rec- ognised in literature, Move 3 also interacts with Moves 1 and 2. Move 3 interacts with Move 1 so that it either merges with it or follows it. When it comes to the interactions with Move 2, Move 3 either precedes it or combines with it in information cycles.


academic book reviews, South Slavic Philologist, rhetorical structure, focused evaluation, Move 3


  • Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse analysis and corpus lin- guistics. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 1–20). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Flowerdew, L. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 321–332. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.09.002
  • Gea Valor, M. L. (2000–2001). The pragmatics of positive politeness in the book review. RESLA, 14, 145–159.
  • Gea Valor, M. L., & Del Saz Rubio, M. M. (2000–2001). The coding of linguistic politeness in the academic book review. Pragmalingüística, 8–9, 165–178. doi: 10.25267/ Pragmalinguistica.2000.i8.08
  • Giannoni, D. S. (2009). Negotiating research values across review genres: A case study in Applied Linguistics. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Re- view genres in university settings (pp. 17–33). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Groom, N. (2009). Phraseology and epistemology in academic book reviews: A corpus-driven analysis of two humanities disciplines. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (pp. 122–139). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Hunston, S. (2022). Corpora in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- versity Press.
  • Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing.
  • Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
  • Itakura, H., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2011). Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1366–1379. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023
  • Junqueira, L. (2013). A genre-based investigation of applied linguistics book re- views in English and Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 203–213. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2013.05.001
  • Koester, A. (2010). Building small specialised corpora. In A. O’Keeffe & M. Mc- Carthy (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics (pp. 66–79). London: Rout- ledge.
  • Lorés Sanz, R. (2009). (Non-)Critical voices in the reviewing of history discourse:
  • A cross-cultural study of evaluation. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings (pp. 143–160). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Moreno, A. I., & Suárez, L. (2008a). A framework for comparing evaluation re- sources across academic texts. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Dis- course & Communication Studies, 28(6), 749–769. doi: 10.1515/TEXT.2008.038
  • Moreno, A. I., & Suárez, L. (2008b). A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 15–26. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.009
  • Moreno, A. I., & Suárez, L. (2009). Academic book reviews in English and Span- ish: Critical comments and rhetorical structure. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings (pp. 161–178). Basingstoke: Palgrave Mac- millan.
  • Motta-Roth, D. (1996). Same genre, different discipline: A genre-based study of book reviews in academe. The ESPecialist, 17(2), 99–131.
  • Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., & Pabón Berbesí, M. (2007a). Collegi- ality, critique and the construction of scientific argumentation in medical book reviews:
  • A diachronic approach. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(10), 1758–1774. doi: 10.1016/j.prag- ma.2006.06.003
  • Salager-Meyer, F., Alcaraz Ariza, M. Á., & Pabón, M. (2007b). The prosecutor and the defendant: Contrasting critical voices in French- and English-written academic book reviews. In K. Fløttum (Ed.), Language and Discipline Perspectives on Academic Discourse (pp. 109–128). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Shaw, P. (2009). The lexis and grammar of explicit evaluation in academic book reviews, 1913 and 1993. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (pp. 217–235). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Suárez, L., & Moreno, A. I. (2008). The rhetorical structure of academic book re- views of literature: An English-Spanish cross-linguistic approach. In U. Connor, E. Nagel- hout, & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 147–168). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2006a). Gender and discipline: Exploring metadiscourse variation in academic book reviews. In K. Hyland & M. Bondi (Eds.), Academic Discourse Across Disciplines (pp. 177–202). Bern: Peter Lang.
  • Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2006b). ‘So what is the problem this book addresses?’: Inter- actions in academic book reviews. Text & Talk: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Language, Discourse & Communication Studies, 26(6), 767–790. doi: 10.1515/TEXT.2006.031
  • Vučićević, A., & Rakić, A. (2020). Textual Metadiscourse in Academic Book Re- views in Serbian and English. Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini, 50/3, 269– 292. doi: 10.5937/ZRFFP50-23692
  • Vučićević, A., & Rakić, A. (2023). Building (academic) voices of power: A case study of academic book reviews. In. B. Mišić Ilić, V. Lopičić, I. Mitić, S. Ignjatović (Eds.), Jezik, književnost, moć. Language, Literature, Power: Tematski zbornik radova (pp. 299– 312). Niš: Filozofski fakultet. doi: 10.46630/jkm.2023.18

сотверски алатиjelen