1 Introduction

We discussed how Chinese companies can respond to challenges through effective communication in a complex and ever-changing international environment, emphasizing the importance of corporate social responsibility reporting in building corporate image, and the role of position markers in conveying emotional attitudes and positions of the company.

2 Literature Review

The definition and classification of "stance" in linguistics were discussed, including epistemic, attitudinal, and discourse style stance markers, as well as the use of modal and semi modal verbs. Hyland proposed a position classification suitable for academic discourse based on Biber's classification, including fuzzy restrictive language, dominant language, attitude markers, and self referential language. Fuoli adjusted the position analysis framework, categorizing positions into attitude positions, epistemic positions, and modality. The chapter also covers the study of discourse in corporate social responsibility reports, including the research of Zhang Min, Xia Rong, Xu Jun, Deng Liming, Zhou Yun, and Peng Shuhuan, who respectively explored the language resources and communication objectives in corporate social responsibility reports from the perspectives of genre analysis, systemic linguistic framework theory, and intertextuality. The critical discourse analysis method has also been used to analyze corporate social responsibility reports, such as Liu's research. In addition, the chapter points out that previous research has focused more on Western companies, while there is relatively little comparative research on corporate social responsibility reports between China and the United States. Therefore, this article aims to compare the grammatical stance construction in corporate social responsibility reports between China and the United States, and provide more in-depth research for enterprises.

3 Theoretical Framework

Explored the importance of stance in corporate social responsibility reports, viewing it as a way for authors to express emotions, feelings, or evaluations, and as a bridge for communication with audiences. Based on Biber and Fuoli's grammatical position framework, position markers are classified into three categories: attitude, cognition, and modality. Attitude stance focuses on personal emotional tendencies, subjective evaluations, and value judgments, while cognitive stance involves the assessment of information states, while modal stance is divided into three categories based on meaning: permission/ability/possibility, obligation/necessity, and willingness/prediction. The study analyzed various structural types of complementary clauses after the predicate, including the hat clause, wh clause, infinitive clause, and - ing clause, to explore the language mechanism of stance expression.

4 Research questions and methods

This chapter introduces a comparative research method for constructing the stance of corporate social responsibility reporting between China and the United States. Based on the grammar stance framework, this study analyzes the grammar stance markers in the social responsibility reports of the top 500 Chinese and American companies, and explores their role in building a positive corporate image and gaining trust. The research questions include the similarities and differences in grammatical stance expression between Chinese and American companies, as well as how to use stance expression to construct a positive image. Research the self built corpus of corporate social responsibility reports from China and the United States, selecting 20 English versions of the 2023 reports each, covering multiple industries. The report was downloaded from the official website and converted to txt format after format conversion and corpus cleaning. Research on using Python to retrieve the frequency of stance words, manually checking the context with Antconc, and removing irrelevant markers to obtain the frequency of grammatical stance marker structures. To compare accuracy, standardize the frequency to per 10000 words. Using paired log likelihood test to compare the differences in grammatical stance expression between Chinese and American corpora. Finally, based on frequency data, a deep comparison is made between Chinese and American companies in the construction of three types of grammatical positions and their usage in context, exploring their role in social responsibility reporting.

5 Results and Discussion

The results show that the frequency of using grammatical stance structures in American corporate social responsibility reports is higher than that of Chinese companies. Modal stance structure has the highest proportion among all types, followed by attitude stance and cognitive stance structure. In attitude and stance analysis, the frequency of using the "wish/intention/decision verb+infinitive complement" structure in American corporate reports is significantly higher than that of Chinese companies. This structure can stimulate positive emotions and enhance the sense of identification with corporate commitments. American companies use "aim to" more frequently, while Chinese companies use "strip to" more frequently. In terms of expressing emotions, American companies are more direct and use "proud" more to express pride. Cognitive stance analysis shows that Chinese and American companies use possibility structures more frequently than certainty structures, indicating a tendency for companies to use euphemistic language. American companies often use the "believe+predicate clause" structure, while Chinese companies tend to use the "expect" structure. Modal stance analysis shows that the frequency of using modal grammar stance construction in American corporate reports is relatively high, especially in the "permission/possibility/ability" structure, where the use of "can" is extremely high. American companies often use "must" to indicate strict obligations, while Chinese companies often use "should" to convey a sense of relaxed obligations. When expressing "will/estimate", the frequency of using "will" is extremely high. Chinese companies use "shall" in their texts, but it almost does not appear in CSR reports of American companies. American companies use positive modal words "can" and "must" to show confidence, while Chinese companies emphasize obligations with "should", reflecting their emphasis on complying with regulations.

6 Conclusion

This chapter compares the differences in the use of grammatical stance construction in corporate social responsibility reports between China and the United States through corpus and critical discourse analysis methods. Research has found that American companies use three types of grammatical stance constructions more frequently than Chinese companies, with modal stance expressions having the highest usage rate. American companies tend to express themselves emotionally, emphasizing equal communication with readers and showcasing their contributions and value; Chinese companies use a restrained and humble tone to demonstrate their responsibility and mission. Both countries' corporate reports have shaped a positive corporate image. Chinese companies can learn from the expression strategies of American companies in the process of going global, strengthen interaction with overseas readers, avoid excessive use of localized expressions and professional terminology, improve the readability and dissemination effect of reports, and create social responsibility reports with international influence and recognition. This study enriches the research results on corporate discourse, grammatical stance construction, and cross-cultural organizational communication, providing insights for Chinese enterprises to shape a more positive, responsible, and inclusive image.