ArticleFrontiers in psychology2025
A cross-lingual analysis of attitudinal meaning in publicity discourses of Anglo-American and Chinese universities: a psychological insight from the appraisal system.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: University publicity discourse is pivotal to global communication, embodying institutional values and cultural identities. While linguistic research on its embedded attitudinal meaning abounds, cross-lingual (English-Chinese) comparative exploration-especially systematic analysis of attitudinal resources in such discourses-remains limited, forming the core focus of this study. Methods: Drawing on the Appraisal System (a robust framework in Systemic Functional Linguistics), this research conducted a comparative analysis of English and Chinese university publicity discourse samples. It extracted and categorized attitudinal resources (Affect, Judgment, Appreciation) and compared their distribution and expressive differences via qualitative and quantitative methods. Results: Significant cross-lingual disparities emerged: English discourse used richer emotional expressions (Affect/Appreciation) to enhance affinity, while Chinese discourse prioritized objectivity and authority with restrained emotions. No notable differences were found in Judgment resources. English discourse emphasized moral constraints, whereas Chinese discourse focused more on legal constraints. Discussion: This study uncovers distinct attitudinal meaning patterns across cultural-linguistic contexts, filling cross-lingual research gaps and refining the Appraisal System. Beyond linguistic theory, it offers practical guidance for universities to optimize cross-cultural publicity and boost global communication effectiveness.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.