Abstract :
"This presentation comes from a study tracking the writing of a history PhD student for whom English is an additional language attending a US research university. Through a text history of writing related to the student's dissertation project, contextualized by rich ethnographic data, the study aims toward a grounded theory of how scholarly writers from the geolinguistic periphery can exploit the fluidity and performativity of identity and the co-constructedness of discourse when bidding for uptake as knowledge producers in their desired disciplinary communities. The presentation centers on three sequential drafts in the writer's application for a prestigious research fellowship. It introduces conversation analysis (CA) as part of the text history method. CA of linguistic brokerage between the researcher and writer in transitions between drafts exposes pragmatic concerns underlying grammatical choices as well as the delicate negotiations by which writers may cede linguistic authority while maintaining agency over the emergent text.Preliminary CA suggests that grammatical indexing of disciplinary identity and stance occurs over a wider range of linguistic forms and is more dynamic and context-dependent than previous studies (e.g. Hyland & Jiang, 2018) have recognized. More broadly, the analysis reveals a novice scholar scaffolding linguistic limitations to assert their disciplinary voice through strategically-timed enlistment of literacy brokers with varying expertise [Lillis & Curry, 2006] as well as code-meshing, sampling and imitation, embrace of multiple identities, and a flexible, collaborative, and creative orientation to the work of encoding meaning. Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2018). In this paper we suggest"": Changing patterns of disciplinary metadiscourse. English for Specific Purposes, 51, 18-30.Lillis, T., & Curry, M. J. (2006). Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars. Written Communication, 23(1), 3-35"
