AN SFL ANALYSIS OF INTERTEXTUAL STRATEGIES: AUTHORIAL STANCE IN MPHIL LINGUISTICS LITERATURE REVIEWS

Abstract

The literature review is a high-stakes challenge for novice researchers. They must demonstrate mastery of a field while also carving out their own intellectual space. This challenge is particularly acute for students writing in English as an Additional Language (EAL), yet few studies have explained precisely how their specific language choices create an authorial stance. To bridge this gap, this study provides a deep linguistic analysis of literature reviews from ten MPhil theses in a Pakistani university context. Grounded in Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) and the powerful lens of the Appraisal framework, our approach decodes the subtle strategies writers use to position themselves about prior scholarship. The findings reveal a consistent and sophisticated authorial persona: the Apprentice-Scholar. This identity is constructed through a dominant Attributive-Reporting Stance, where writers meticulously map the field rather than entering its debates. This is achieved by strategically reporting others’ work using neutral language, avoiding direct personal judgment, and—most revealingly—embedding subtle evaluations within seemingly objective descriptions. Ultimately, this study provides robust linguistic evidence for viewing the EAL writer's rhetorical caution not as a lack of critical ability, but as an intelligent, functional response to their role as an apprentice in a new academic community. The model of the ‘Apprentice-Scholar’ developed here offers significant insights for academic writing instruction, suggesting a shift away from simply teaching citation rules towards fostering a critical awareness of how language contributes to the development of a scholarly voice.