“Contrary to findings from previous studies …”: Paradigmatic and ethnolinguistic influences on disagreement negotiation in research article discussions

Academic disagreement is integral to knowledge construction in academic writing. The present study reports on a two-level analysis of academic disagreement in discussion sections from an integration of cross-linguistic and cross-paradigmatic perspectives. Based on a corpus of 80 applied linguistic research articles (RAs), this study examined whether functional components and engagement realizations of academic disagreement differed between Chinese and English RAs and between quantitative and qualitative RAs. Results demonstrated that English RAs negotiated with alternative views more often than Chinese RAs. Quantitative RAs more frequently settled academic disagreement with detailed explanations or supportive evidence than qualitative RAs. Chinese qualitative RAs differed markedly from other RA groups. These differences were attributable to culturally preferred discursive strategies, paradigmatically valued epistemological norms, and socially oriented views of the scientific approach. This study sheds light on how to implement interpersonal strategies to manage scholarly disagreement in different varieties of academic writing.