universidade federal de santa catarina pós-graduação em letras ...

87this issue in relation to variations of scientific status across disciplines. He states that in‘not so well-established disciplines where members do not amply share a complex oftheories such as in the humanities‘ (ibid.:483), reviewers face the challenge of writingBRs, constructing a disciplinary context to frame the new book for the reader. Wileyemphasizes an asymmetrical perspective between linguistics writers and readers. Hisadvice is that reviewers should not assume too much common knowledge with thereadership, having in mind that readers may lack relevant information on the topic of thebook, on research methodologies commonly adopted in the treatment of the topic, or stilllack knowledge of the literature evoked by the reviewer (ibid.:482).In fact, L points out that although the readership for her journal can be seen as‘sophisticated’, the material she publishes will pose a variable amount of difficultiesaccording to the reader’s expertise in the field:[L]Readership of the journal: people interested in second language acquisition. Lessoften, though, SSLA also publishes book reviews on discourse, bilingualism,teaching, child language acquisition, linguistics, etc. SSLA is aimed at asophisticated audience, with no articles/reviews designed for specificbackgrounds, although clearly some articles/reviews will presuppose more orless knowledge than others, and therefore will be harder or easier to understandthan others.E sees his readership as a large group of people with variable expertise, fromsenior scholars (like himself) to graduate students: