IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/eltjnl/v11y2018i11p122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Study on Engagement Resources in American and Chinese CSR Reports

Author

Listed:
  • Chen Pinying

Abstract

Based on Martin and White’s (2005) heteroglossic engagement system of Appraisal Theory, adopting UAM Corpus Tool and Chi-Square test, this study aims to explore authorial stance and distinctive rhetorical strategies that have been employed to realize interpersonal meaning by the application of engagement resources in American and Chinese CSR reports. It can be concluded that all types of engagement resources are widely employed in both American and Chinese corpus, with contraction resources significantly different in two corpora. It also finds that American CSR reports employ each type of engagement markers equally, while Chinese CSR reports tend to highly use expansion resources to enhance authorial voice. Besides, American CSR reports employ contraction resources in a more diversified and flexible way than Chinese CSR reports writers do. Lastly, they are also different in acknowledging what kinds of external propositions as expansion resources. This study confirms that engagement system is an important tool to help CSR reports writers to align authorial voices with readers, thereby accomplishing promotional and persuasive purposes. It may give some implications to CSR report addressers, addressees, business English teaching and reading.

Suggested Citation

  • Chen Pinying, 2018. "A Comparative Study on Engagement Resources in American and Chinese CSR Reports," English Language Teaching, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(11), pages 122-122, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:11:y:2018:i:11:p:122
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/0/0/37175/37344
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/0/37175
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bonsall, Samuel B. & Leone, Andrew J. & Miller, Brian P. & Rennekamp, Kristina, 2017. "A plain English measure of financial reporting readability," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(2), pages 329-357.
    2. Luo, Le & Tang, Qingliang, 2014. "Does voluntary carbon disclosure reflect underlying carbon performance?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 191-205.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Omaima A.G. Hassan & Peter Romilly, 2018. "Relations between corporate economic performance, environmental disclosure and greenhouse gas emissions: New insights," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(7), pages 893-909, November.
    2. Pinto, Inês & Morais, Ana Isabel & Quick, Reiner, 2020. "The impact of the precision of accounting standards on the expanded auditor’s report in the European Union," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 40(C).
    3. Umar, Tarik, 2022. "Complexity aversion when SeekingAlpha," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2).
    4. Helfaya, Akrum & Aboud, Ahmed & Amin, Essam, 2023. "An examination of corporate environmental goals disclosure, sustainability performance and firm value – An Egyptian evidence," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    5. Kentaro Azuma & Akira Higashida, 2024. "Climate change disclosure and evolving institutional investor salience: Roles of the Principles for Responsible Investment," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(4), pages 3669-3686, May.
    6. Chychyla, Roman & Leone, Andrew J. & Minutti-Meza, Miguel, 2019. "Complexity of financial reporting standards and accounting expertise," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 226-253.
    7. Xiaowen Lin & Muhammad Afzaal & Hessah Saleh Aldayel, 2023. "Syntactic complexity in legal translated texts and the use of plain English: a corpus-based study," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-9, December.
    8. Bui, Dien Giau & Chen, Yehning & Chen, Yan-Shing & Lin, Chih-Yung, 2023. "Managerial ability and financial statement disaggregation decisions," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    9. Minxing Sun & Weike Xu, 2024. "Short selling and readability in financial disclosures: A controlled experiment," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 59(2), pages 265-292, May.
    10. Qian, Wei & Schaltegger, Stefan, 2017. "Revisiting carbon disclosure and performance: Legitimacy and management views," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(4), pages 365-379.
    11. Tantawy Moussa & Amir Allam & Said Elbanna & Ahmed Bani‐Mustafa, 2020. "Can board environmental orientation improve U.S. firms' carbon performance? The mediating role of carbon strategy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 72-86, January.
    12. Antonio J. Mateo-Márquez & José M. González-González & Constancio Zamora-Ramírez, 2021. "Components of Countries’ Regulative Dimensions and Voluntary Carbon Disclosures," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-22, February.
    13. Curti, Filippo & Kazinnik, Sophia, 2023. "Central bank communication and website characteristics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1216-1241.
    14. Cory A. Cassell & Lauren M. Cunningham & Ling Lei Lisic, 2019. "The readability of company responses to SEC comment letters and SEC 10-K filing review outcomes," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 1252-1276, December.
    15. Xitong Li & Hongwei Zhu & Luo Zuo, 2021. "Reporting Technologies and Textual Readability: Evidence from the XBRL Mandate," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 1025-1042, September.
    16. Zhang, Yi & Hu, Ailing & Wang, Jiahua & Zhang, Yaojie, 2022. "Detection of fraud statement based on word vector: Evidence from financial companies in China," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 46(PB).
    17. repec:arp:tjssrr:2019:p:117-127 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Chen, Chen & Hanlon, Dean & Khedmati, Mehdi & Wake, James, 2023. "Annual report readability and equity mispricing," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    19. Sanjiv Das & Xin Huang & Soji Adeshina & Patrick Yang & Leonardo Bachega, 2023. "Credit Risk Modeling with Graph Machine Learning," INFORMS Joural on Data Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 197-217, October.
    20. Li, Xiaoyu & Zou, Lin, 2024. "Does mandating narrative disclosure of innovation help unveil the curtain of R&D expenditure? Evidence from regulation change in China," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    21. Cameron Truong & Thu Ha Nguyen & Thanh Huynh, 2021. "Customer satisfaction and the cost of capital," Review of Accounting Studies, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 293-342, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:11:y:2018:i:11:p:122. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.