The article analyzes general and specific types of evaluation actualized in bisubstantive sentences in scientific articles in various specialties. It is noted that bisubstantive sentences are a productive means of expressing evaluative meaning. Although scientific articles have been revealed to express a predominately neutral evaluation, almost 12% of all analyzed examples have positive or negative assessments. The expression of evaluation in sentences with the lexeme “problem” is considered and the use of intensifiers with this lexeme is analyzed. There is a tendency to use emotional evaluation in scientific articles in order to attract the attention of readers. It was determined how frequently the specific evaluative meanings, based on the classification of N. D. Arutyunova, were used in bisubstantive sentences in scientific articles. Of the 593 examples of sentences of this type, 327 have a rationalistic evaluation (utilitarian evaluation – 86 examples, normative – 216, teleological – 34), sensory evaluation is found in 29 examples (psychological – 29, sensory-gustatory – 0), sublimated evaluation is identified in 5 examples (aesthetic – 1, ethical – 4). It is shown that different types of specific evaluation can appear in one sentence, while general evaluation can vary within one sentence only if there are additional means of contrast. Normative evaluation prevails in scientific articles. 40% of bisubstantive sentences are noted to have no specific evaluative meaning. It has been revealed that in scientific discourse diminutives in scientifi c terms do not have evaluative meaning.