Given the unsettled debate about the role of nativeness and/or expertise in academic writing, we compared the first language (L1)-English expert writers and the Second language (L2)-English (Chinese L1) expert writers with a similar expertise level in the use of stance complement that-clauses. For our analysis, we selected equal numbers of published research articles written by the L1 and the L2 experts in the field of Telecommunications. We found considerable differences between the two groups of writers in terms of frequency, range, and semantic classes of words controlling that-clauses. First, although both the L1 experts and the L2 experts overwhelmingly used verb + that-clauses, they demonstrated relatively different syntactic preferences for stance construction. The L2 experts used more verb + that-clauses than the L1 experts, while the L1 experts utilized more noun + that-clauses. Second, the L2 experts were more likely to express greater certainty towards the claims in that-clauses than the L1 experts. Third, the L2 experts employed a narrower range of words controlling that-clauses than the L1 experts in all the semantic classes. These findings suggest that the nativeness status of academic writers still influences their use of evaluative that-clauses even at an advanced level.

中文翻译：

---

通过电信研究文章中的那个子句构建立场：L1 和 L2 专家作家的比较

鉴于关于母语和/或专业知识在学术写作中的作用的争论尚未解决，我们比较了具有相似专业水平的第一语言（L1）-英语专家作家和第二语言（L2）-英语（中文 L1）专家作家姿态补语的使用那-条款。对于我们的分析，我们选择了由电信领域的 L1 和 L2 专家撰写的相同数量的已发表研究文章。我们发现两组作者在控制词的频率、范围和语义类别方面存在相当大的差异那-条款。首先，尽管 L1 专家和 L2 专家都绝大多数使用动词 +那- 从句中，他们表现出相对不同的立场构建句法偏好。L2 专家使用更多的动词 +那- 从句比 L1 专家多，而 L1 专家使用更多的名词 +那-条款。其次，L2 专家更有可能对中的主张表示更大的确定性那-从句比 L1 专家。第三，L2 专家使用更窄范围的词控制那- 从句比所有语义类中的 L1 专家。这些发现表明，学术作家的本土身份仍然影响他们对评价性词汇的使用那-条款甚至在高级水平。