Texturing interpersonal meanings in academic argument: pulses and prosodies of value

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.