Chapter 8: Making reasonable claims
In this chapter, adapted from a journal article and a research report, you can read about the need for writers to express their claims appropriately.You can develop your skills in these areas:
Focus A: Reading
A.1 Looking ahead
A.2 Understanding and responding
Focus B: Learning language
B.1 Different ways of expressing modality
B.2 Identifying examples of modality
Focus C: Writing
C.1 Adding appropriate degrees of caution to peer writing
C.2 Writing a newsletter article
Focus D: Researching
D.1 Using primary, secondary and tertiary sources
Focus E: Studying
E.1 Recording cautious language
Focus F: Applying to your own subject
F.1 Identifying modality in subject-related articles
F.2. Redrafting with appropriate caution
Focus A: Reading
A.1 Looking ahead
[….] hedging assists writers to avoid overstating an assertion and to establish a relationship with readers.
Kuo, 1999: 133
In this chapter, you can read a journal article about the need to make claims with an appropriate degree of caution in your writing. This is sometimes referred to as ‘hedging’. You will also read about the kind of language that can help you to do this.
Ø When writers and researchers make claims, they do so based upon various sources or evidence. Sources and evidence can vary in terms of their adequacy. For example, what evidence are you aware of for the following claims? How adequate is this evidence?
· Milk comes from cows.
· The first coca-cola was green.
· The penguin is the only bird that can swim but cannot fly.
· Some trees have roots that grow deep into the ground.
· Money notes are made mostly from a blend of cotton and linen, not paper.
· There are 354 steps to the crown of the Statue of Liberty.
· Honey is the only food that does not spoil.
· Women blink nearly twice as much as men.
· Some rocks grow.
· Dolphins sleep with one eye open.
· People prefer blue toothbrushes to red ones.
· Men are more likely to be struck by lightning than women.
Ø Do you believe all of the claims above? Work with another student. Find out which ones he or she believes to be true, and why; and find out which ones he or she doubts, and why.
Ø The strength of your belief in the claims above will depend on your level of confidence in the evidence for each. From the list above, select one claim that you believe in strongly and another that you have doubts about. Repeat each claim to another student, using language that indicates your degree of confidence in it.
Ø Work with another student and identify language that you can use when you have a high degree of confidence in the claim and language that you can use to suggest a lack of confidence. Make two lists and discuss them with another pair of students and your tutor.
Ø Read, annotate and take notes on article 8. When you have finished, compare your annotations and notes to those of another student, and use his or her ideas to improve or complement your own.
Article 8:
Making Reasonable Claims in Academic Writing
Roger Nunn
Associate Professor,
The Petroleum Institute, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates
Page 13 of 23
Brandt, RRW, Chapter 8: Making reasonable claims
Post pilot, Dr 1
Introduction
Grice’s maxim of quality (1989, pp.26-27 [1975, p.45]) includes the statement: “Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence”. In academic communication what we mean by “adequate evidence” in support of statements about knowledge or information is of great importance. The way to talk about the quality of evidence is through words like ‘may’, ‘might’, ‘possibly’ or ‘seems’. This area of language is called ‘modality’.
This paper will mainly consider the importance of ‘modality’ in EAP, arguing that it is a particularly useful concept for both developing academic competence and for analysing academic texts. It can help us address some of the most critical questions in academic communication:
· What is the relationship between language form and language use?
· What is the relationship between the language choices that academic writers make and the content of their message?
· What is the role of evidence in supporting arguments and what means are available to competent writers to express their evidence?
Modality and Commitment to Knowledge Claims
Modality is defined by Halliday and Matthiessen (2004, p.618) as "the area of meaning that lies between yes and no – the intermediate ground between positive and negative polarity.” Modality is the way we use language to express how true our claims about our research evidence are. Baggini and Stangroom (2004, p.3) suggest that, “in many ways the history of philosophy can be seen as the quest to establish how we can know anything at all and the extent to which such knowledge can be certain”. As Baggini and Stangroom (p.3) point out, “we should only seek the degree of certainty each subject matter allowed”.
Modality is not important only in academic writing. We meet it every day in all communication genres. It is very common in news reports, for example. We cannot not use modality, so whether consciously or not, journalists have to express their confidence in the truth of the stories they are reporting, and students cannot not express their level of confidence in the truth of their research results. Look at this short example from a BBC report. The modal language tells us that the reporter is not very certain about what happened:
What happened last night was, of course, wrapped in secrecy and still only a few details have emerged. What I have been told is that at least a hundred US special forces including army rangers entered Southern Afghanistan under cover of darkness. Now, where they came from is classified information, but they could have been flown in from warships in the Arabian Sea and then transferred to C130 aircraft at air bases nearer by. There were apparently two targets: an airfield near Kandahar and, some distance away, a compound belonging to the Taleban leader, Mullah Omar.
A careful listener or a reader needs to decide how much confidence to place in a report, whether it is news or research. Whether a reporter or journalist is trusted will partially depend on the reader believing that the level of certainty shown in the language fits the evidence. It is possible to suggest that competence in all academic communication is linked to the ability to evaluate the evidence of what we and others are claiming.
Thompson (2004, p.53) links modality directly to academic report writing, suggesting modality is the extent to which a statement is "valid" and "the degree to which the speaker commits herself to the validity of what she is saying" (p.69). Dudley-Evans (1994, p.222), in his analysis of the discussion section of a research paper provides the following example:
It is possible that the cell reaction seen here, in which the contents condense and leave the cell walls, may be a characteristic of recalcitrant seeds generally, while the cells of orthodox seeds may show a more generalized decrease in size, without such damage to the contents.
(My italics to highlight modal language.)
Teachers often say that students make exaggerated claims about their research findings. Awareness of modal language can help us make reasonable claims about the findings of research. It is very useful in the discussion section of a report. As Dudley-Evans points out, claims are often identified with “hedging”: “Claims tend to be presented cautiously, that is, using modal or other hedged phrases” (p.225). However, modality cannot be limited to just “hedging” claims. We use modality all the time to express the level of confidence that the evidence allows. Modality provides us with a range of choices from categorical (absolute) certainty to expressions of absolute doubt.
Dudley-Evans (1994, p.225) also points out that “claim” moves tend to be found in the company of other moves such as moves presenting findings, or moves referring to previous research. This means that claims are frequently followed up by a reference to the authority of previous research which then supports the claim.
The Grammar of Modality
One aspect of competence in a language is the ability to generate all possible forms of the verb and only those forms. This is a computational view of linguistic competence. Palmer (1987, pp.94-95) reduces the structure of English modality to sixteen forms. using one common English verb, "take". It includes simple and complex active forms, such as "will take" and "would have been taking", and simple and complex passive forms, such as "will be taken" and "would have been being taken".
Table 1: The English Modal Verb
Modal auxiliary verb / Infinitive / Past participle of ‘be’ / - ing form / Past participle of main verb *1 / Will / take
2 / Would / take
3 / Will / be / taking
4 / Would / be / taking
5 / Will / have / taken
6 / Would / have / taken
7 / Will / have / been / taking
8 / Would / have / been / taking
9 / Will / be / taken
10 / Would / be / taken
11 / Will / be / being / taken
12 / Would / be / being / taken
13 / Will / have / been / taken
14 / Would / have / been / taken
15 / Will / have / been / being / taken
16 / Would / have / been / being / taken
Fifteen and sixteen are labelled as ‘questionable’. We might note that the nature of the main verb is not considered in this kind of table. Once a verb such as 'go' is substituted, 11 and 12 must be eliminated and 15 and 16 are also more than just questionable. They are just wrong. Substitute ‘die’ and even further restrictions apply (13 and 14, for example, unless we accept ‘a good death will have been died’, and there are many who will enjoy inventing a context to prove this form to be possible). In terms of competence, one relevant question is how we come to know which forms are available for use with which verb.
Different Ways of Expressing Modality
Writers have different choices available to express their degree of commitment to the reliability of the information or evidence that they themselves are presenting or that they are just reporting. Fowler (1991, p.85) suggests that “truth modality varies in strength along a scale from absolute confidence – down through various degrees of lesser certainty.” Fowler (1991, p.64) argues that “writing which strives to give an impression of objectivity e.g.: scientific reporting or certain traditions of ‘realistic’ fiction, tends to minimize modal expressions”. However, Fairclough (1989, p.129) suggests that sentences with no modal verbs still express modality. ‘Ahmed is 16 years old’ expresses absolute, categorical 100% certainty. This is the strongest form of modality. It is important to point out that using an expression like ‘it is certain that…’ is an expression of high certainty but not an expression of absolute 100% certainty. 100% certainty needs no expression that is normally labeled modal, including the word ‘certain’. ‘The sum of the angles of a triangle is 180°” is categorical. ’It is certain that the sum of the angles of a triangle is 180°’ is no longer expressed categorically, because the issue of certainty has now been raised.
Modality is commonly associated with forms such as ‘may’ and ‘might’. However, there are many other choices available, as seen in table two below.
Table 2: Ways of expressing modality (based on Fowler 1986, p.132)
Ways of expressing modality / Example and commentCategorical statements
(no “modal” language) / The sum of the angles of a triangle is 1800.
(This does not permit doubt even to a specialist)
Modal auxiliary verbs; may, might, should, etc. / This might mean that…
(Labelled as ‘subjective’ by some specialists)
Modal adjectives, adverbs or adverbial phrases (e.g. ‘probable’, ‘probably’, ‘in all probability’ ‘possible’, ‘certain’, ‘certainly’, ‘likely’) / While it is possible that these results ...
In all probability, these survey results can be relied upon as they are confirmed by previous research results in this field.
(Labelled as more objective by some specialists)
Evaluative adjectives and adverbs: (e.g. ‘fortunately’, ‘regrettably’, ‘inevitably’) / Regrettably, the conclusions are not supported by irrefutable evidence.
(Often represents value judgements)
Reporting phrases such as ‘claim’, ‘is reported to have said’, ‘according to …’ , ‘state’, ‘argue’, ‘suggest’, ‘imply’, ‘interpret this to mean that...’ / The present author interprets this result to mean that…
The survey results (appear to) suggest that…’
(Can be used to distance oneself from another researcher's statement or idea, not just to report)
Verbs of knowledge, prediction, evaluation (e.g. ‘seem’, ‘guess’, ‘believe’, ‘appear’, ‘predict’, ‘approve’) / It seems likely that these results were not produced by chance.
These initial results appear to suggest that ...
(Often seen as more objective than 'may' or 'might')
Generic statements:
It is commonly stated that…
It cannot be denied that…
It is true that...
It is clear that... / It is commonly stated that plastic waste ...
(Often used to express the author's own position or to prepare for a counter argument)
Reporting verbs have been added to Fowler’s list for this study. Different reporting expressions lead to different levels of commitment to or detachment from the truth claims being made. Reference to external authority is also a means of supporting an author’s own truth claim. Tadros (1994, pp.74-76) classifies reporting verbs into ‘factives’ (prove, show) and ‘non-factives’ (claim, suggest). A verb like ‘claim’ is a non-factive because it implies that the author is not in agreement with a statement made by an author whereas ‘indicate’ or ‘show’ expresses agreement.
Evaluating the Use of Modality in a Report by Students
In the following sample (1a), the writer makes an assumption that research done in the UK will automatically be relevant to a study to be done in the UAE.