This study analyzes the user-generated reviews of Paris-based Michelin three-star restaurants in terms of how they are discursively constructed. Using the reviews posted in Tripadvisor in 2019 as data, it examines how positive reviews (PR) and negative reviews (NR) are framed with distinct discursive practices. While PR and NR a re both characteriz ed by the discursive practice of highlighting professed culinary expertise of the reviewer, this feature is more foregrounded in NR, where the reviewer is generally more oriented to showing themselves as being entitled to write a review. In terms of communicative styles, PR is also characterized by a heavy use of symbolic and metaphoric language, while more ordinary style of language is used in NR, embedded in the context of critiquing specific items of dish or service. While PR and NR both tend to make references to Michelin star status as a basis of their evaluation, they were shown to differ in terms of the tones or keys used in describing chefs, and also in the way the target of evaluation is formulated. The findings shed light on how and why the members of foodie community construct the language the way they do, and have implications for genre analysis.

Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Data and Methodology
3. Previous Studies
4. Discursive structure of the culinary review
    4.1. What occasioned the visit
    4.2. Doing being a Culinary Expert
    4.3. Explicit mention of establishment's Michelin star status
    4.4. Reference to the encounter with the chef
    4.5. Assessment of food, decor or service: linguistic expressions
    4.6. Reference to service-related trauma in NR
    4.7. Reference to the cost
5. Concluding remarks
References

• Kyung-Hee Suh(Hankuk University of Foreign Studies) Corresponding author
• Taeyoung Yoo(Hankuk University of Foreign Studies)