Article In: SFL Appliability, Visibility and Accessibility
Edited by Claudia E. Stoian, Jorge Arús-Hita and Christian M.I.M. Matthiessen
[Language, Context and Text 7:2] 2025
► pp. 200–233
Construing voice and agency in medical students’ writing
A systemic functional linguistic analysis of research article introductions
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
Abstract
Active-passive voice alternation is central to scientific writing, addressed both in journal style guidelines — often simplistically — and in academic writing instruction, which highlights its rhetorical complexity. Despite existing linguistic descriptions of the passive’s discourse functions, more applied research is needed on how novice writers use it in developing academic writing. This study examines how medical students employ the passive in research article introductions, using systemic functional linguistics theory to analyse variation according to process type, Agent role and rhetorical move. Results show that in Introduction sections, passives are mostly Agent-less relational processes with categorising or literature-review functions and that ergativity — rather than transitivity — better explains passive use in scientific English. They also show how writers align with discourse conventions while simultaneously displaying individual stylistic variation.
Keywords: voice, agency, medical academic writing, SFL
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1voice and agency in IFG4 (Halliday and Matthiessen 2014): Appliability to medical academic writing
- 1.2The Create-a-Research-Space (CARS) model of research article introductions (Swales 1990, 2004)
- 2.Materials and methods
- 2.1Materials
- 2.2Methods
- 3.Results
- 3.1Quantitative findings: Distribution of passive voice verbs in introductions
- 3.2Passive and process preferences
- 3.2.1Individual variation in choice of passive process types
- 3.3Passives and agent roles
- 3.4Passive and rhetorical moves in introductions
- 3.5Comparing passive distribution in the published article Introduction with students’ introductions
- 4.Discussion and conclusion
- Acknowledgements
References
References (31)
Banks, David. 2017. The extent to which the passive voice is used in the scientific journal article, 1985–2015. Functional Linguistics 4(12).
Baratta, Alexander M. 2009. Revealing stance through passive voice. Journal of Pragmatics 411. 1406–1421.
Bartlett, Tom. 2025. Transitivity. 50th International Systemic Functional Linguistics Congress, Pre-conference Institute, 6 July 2025, University of Glasgow.
Christiansen, Stacy L. & American Medical Association. 2020. AMA manual of style: A guide for authors and editors / JAMA network editors, 11th edn. New York: Oxford University Press.
Ding, Daniel D. 2002. The passive voice and social values in science. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 32(2). 138–154.
Gardner, Sheena. 2012. Genres and registers of student report writing: An SFL perspective on texts and practices. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11(1). 52–63.
Gardner, Sheena, Hilary Nesi & Douglas Biber. 2019. Discipline, level, genre: Integrating situational perspectives in a new MD analysis of university student writing. Applied Linguistics 40(4). 646–674.
Halliday, M. A. K. 1978. Language as social semiotic: The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
2008. Working with meaning: Towards an appliable linguistics. In Jonathan Webster (ed.), Meaning in context: Implementing intelligent applications of language studies, 7–23. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London & New York: Routledge.
Herrando-Rodrigo, Isabel. 2022. ‘Is voice inevitable in written texts?’ Animate agents followed by active verbs as writers’ (de)voicing mechanisms in knowledge dissemination practices. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 901. 81–94.
Hyland, Ken. 2008. Disciplinary voices: Interactions in research writing. English Text Construction 1(1). 5–22.
Hyland, Ken & Carmen Sancho Guinda (eds.). 2012. Stance and voice in written academic genres. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) & Ken Hyland. 2023. Exploring authorial voice across academic genres: A multidimensional perspective. Written Communication 40(1). 210–237.
Konopasky, Abigail W. & Kimberly M. Sheridan. 2016. Towards a diagnostic toolkit for the language of agency. Mind, Culture, and Activity 23(2). 108–123.
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 2012. Systemic functional linguistics as appliable linguistics: Social accountability and critical approaches. DELTA 28 (Especial). 435–471.
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. & M. A. K. Halliday. 2009[1997]. Systemic functional grammar: A first step into the theory. Beijing: Higher Education Press.
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. & Winfred Wenhui Xuan. 2024. System networks as a resource in L2 writing education. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL) 63(1). 95–120.
Mhilli, Olga. 2023. Authorial voice in writing: A literature review. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 81. 100550.
Millar, Neil, Brian Budgell & Keith Fuller. 2013. ‘Use the active voice whenever possible’: The impact of style guidelines in medical journals. Applied Linguistics 34(4). 393–414.
Minton, Timothy D. 2015. In defense of the passive voice in medical writing. The Keio Journal of Medicine 64(1). 1–10.
Parkinson, Jean. 2024. The use of the passive voice in science students’ writing. SSRN Electronic Journal. [URL] or
Parkinson, Jean & Lisa Woods. 2025. The use of the passive voice in science students’ writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 771. 101561.
Rodríguez-Vergara, Daniel. 2017. A systemic functional approach to the passive voice in English into Spanish translation: Thematic development in a medical research article. Open Linguistics 31. 1–17.
Sarasso, Elisabetta, Federica Agosta, Noemi Piramide, Andrea Gardoni, Elisa Canu, Michela Leocadi, Veronica Castelnovo, Silvia Basaia, Andrea Tettamanti, Maria Antonietta Volontè & Massimo Filippi. 2021. Action observation and motor imagery improve dual task in Parkinson’s disease: A clinical/fMRI study. Movement Disorders 36(11). 2569–2582.
Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, John M. & Christine B. Feak. 2012. Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
