Аннотация: The research aims to conduct a comparative analysis of self-mention, particularly the usage of self-mention ‘we’, as a means of academic persuasion between Chinese linguistic MA novices and linguistic experts. Self-mentions serve various rhetorical functions in academic persuasion. However, for second language writers, mastering these rhetorical functions represents an advanced writing skill, which is contingent upon a proficient command of the structural aspects of self-mention phrases. In light of this issue, this study undertakes a collocation and chunk analysis. The objective is to analyze the collocation characteristics and chunk features of self-mention ‘we’ in international journal articles (ILJA_C) and Chinese MA theses (CLMA_C). This objective informs the choice of the research subject – identifying similarities and differences in the utilization of self-mention ‘we’ in two databases: ILJA_C and CLMA_C. This study’s methodology utilizes a corpus-driven approach alongside comparative academic discourse analysis within academic writing. The novelty of this research lies in its investigation of the collocation characteristics and chunk features of self-mention ‘we’ in CLMA_C and ILJA_C. This study represents a substantial contribution to the fields of second language acquisition and comparative linguistics by enhancing our understanding of self-mention in academic persuasion. Findings reveal significant disparities in the usage of ‘we’ between Chinese MA novices and linguistic experts. Novices tend to focus on constructing discourse logic, whereas experts prioritize establishing academic positions. Analysis of chunk structures exposes varying approaches to discourse and interpersonal functions, underscoring the necessity for novices to emulate expert usage patterns.

Аннотация: The research is to examine the utilization of maximizers as a strategic tool to attain academic rhetorical hype within the realm of Chinese MA theses (CLMA_C) and international journal articles (ILJA_C). Maximizers, which convey heightened intensity and personal commitment, play a crucial role in shaping rhetorical strategies in academic discourse. The study employs the EUM model (Sinclair’s theory of extended units of meaning). By adopting this model, the research makes a significant contribution to elucidating the intricate linguistic choices within scholarly communication.
The goal is to analyze the collocation features of the maximizers in CLMA_C and ILJA_C. The goal determines the choice of the subject of research – identifying similarities and differences in the use of maximizers in two databases (international journal articles (ILJA_C) and Chinese MA theses (CLMA_C).
The novelty of the research is that the study employs the EUM model to analyze maximizers in CLMA_C and ILJA_C, allowing for a comprehensive examination of both collocational form and contextual meaning. The analysis includes an exploration of lexical patterns, colligation, semantic preference, and semantic prosody, offering a multifaceted understanding of how maximizers contribute to rhetorical strategies.
This research uniquely explores maximizers in collocational form and meaning using the EUM model, offering nuanced insights into their role in rhetorical hype and revealing cross-cultural variations through the similarities and significant differences in CLMA_C and ILJA_C. The study contributes significantly to second language acquisition and comparative linguistics, advancing knowledge on maximizers in academic communication.
Findings show lexical pattern similarities but significant differences in colligation, semantic preference, and semantic prosody. In CLMA_C, “fully” lacks diverse collocates, with varied colligation patterns influenced by L1 transfer. Regarding semantic prosody, experts adopt a commendatory tone, while Chinese MA learners express an affirmative tone.