Marwito Wihadi, Eva Tuckyta Sari Sujatna, Ypsi Soeriasoemantri, Eni Karlieni



Working on writing argumentative essay instructions has been practices in a non-formal language learning settings. Yet, its students’ pursued claims are not fully explored as an evaluativion of how student-writers interact as conveying arguments with the readers. Investigating the linguistic resources on which they develop and evaluate these, two selected English Language essays were looked into regarding to exploitation of macrostructures in them. Subsequently, they were captured within the framework of appraisal theory as to emerge various trends relative to the employment of engagement resource types, combined with the other resources in confirming claims: graduation and attitudinal ones. It was pinpointed that the essays were low-graded notifying substantial numbers of monoglossic resources with low-considered attitudinal items. They failed to recognise other voices and alternative positions. Their construction of evaluative meanings provided feedbacks, enhancing classroom teachers’ awareness of typical features in genre-based instructions.





argumentative, hortatory, essays, appraisal theory, low-graded

Full Text:



Anonymous. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. (2nd ed). London: Continuum.

Coffin, C. (2004). Arguing about how the world is or how the world should be: The role of arguments in IELTS tests. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(3) ,229246.Available[Online]: Accessed on June 25th, 2016.

Eggins, S. (2005). Introduction to systemic functional linguistics. (2nd ed). London: Continuum.

Halliday, M.,A.,K. (1978). Language as social semiotic. London: Edward Arnold.

Ho, V.L. (2011). Non-native Argumentative Writing By Vietnamese Learner of English: A Contrastive Study. P.hD Thesis: Washington, DC.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. (2nd ed). London: Edward Arnold.

Hyland, K. (1990). A genre description of the argumentative essay. RELC Journal, 21(1), 6678.Online[Available] on May, 11th 2015.

Jalilifar, A. & Hemmati, A. (2013). Construction of evaluative meanings by Kurdish-speaking learners of English: A comparison of high-and low-graded argumentative essays. Issues in Language Teaching, 2(2), P.57-84.

Jacobs, H., Zingraf, S., Wormuth, D., Hartfiel, V.F., & Hughey, J. (1981). Testing ESL composition: A practical approach. MA : Newbury House Publisher.

Lee, S.H. (2008). Attitude in undergraduate persuasive essays. Prospect, 23(3), pp 43-58.

Liu, X.(2013). Evaluation in Chinese University EFL students’ English argumentative writing: An APPRAISAL study Online[Available]http: // Acessed on November , 7th2016.

Martin, J.R. (2000). Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English. In S. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp. 142-177). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2003). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. (1st ed). London: Continuum.

Martin, J.R.,& White, P. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Indexed and abstracted in:






This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

LLT Journal DOI:

p-ISSN: 1410-7201 (since 12 March 1998); e-ISSN: 2579-9533 (since 16 May 2017)

LLT Journal Vol 22, No 1 (current edition), publication date: 10 April 2019

View My Stats

Free counters!

  LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching is published by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Eduation Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.