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

126Swales, 1986) that have emphasized the evaluative character of these linguistic features.Citation and identification of concepts have been considered as relevant indicators ofhow a text invokes or responds to context. In his study of the connections between textand context, Bazerman (1988:25) cites four points of analysis:a) The object under study: It can be analyzed in terms of the lexicon used todiscuss it. Among other things, the precision of identification or the tightness of fitbetween name and object;b) The literary tradition of the field: How the genre responds to literary tradition inthe field can be examined considering explicit citation and implicit knowledge;c) The anticipated readership: Citation also functions as indication of how theanticipated readership is viewed in terms of the types of knowledge and attitudes;d) The author’s persona: The way texts respond to context can be studied in termsof how authors represent themselves in their texts through the kind of statements andvalue assumptions they make (ibid.: 26)In BRs, variation in the use of references and exemplification may indicatedifferent roles played by disciplinary knowledge in evaluation (differences in how thebook is considered against the previous literature in the context of the discipline).Variation in these two features can also indicate different positions in relation toknowledge and status of expected readership (e.g., novice or expert members). Finally,variation in the terms used to praise or blame a book or an author, can indicate variationin the projection of the reviewer’s persona in different disciplines in response to featuresin the context.