Rhetorical Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Discussions: A Comparative Cross-Cultural Analysis

IF 1 Q3 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Language and Education Pub Date : 2022-09-30 DOI:10.17323/jle.2022.12750
L. Ahmadi
{"title":"Rhetorical Structure of Applied Linguistics Research Article Discussions: A Comparative Cross-Cultural Analysis","authors":"L. Ahmadi","doi":"10.17323/jle.2022.12750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Recent years have seen tremendous research efforts in the development of English for academic and research publication purposes, utilising an established approach to comparative genre analysis. This growing interest is primarily driven by the global dominance of Anglophone writing conventions, which necessitates raising awareness among researchers, particularly in non-Anglophone contexts. \nPurpose. This study explored and analysed the communicative intents of the discussion sections in research articles in two different contexts to investigate the effect of nativeness on the structural organisation in this genre. The focus of the study was on the rhetorical structure and employment of Moves in the applied linguistics research article Discussions, written in English by Iranian and native English-speaking researchers. \nMethods. A mixed-methods research study was conducted on two corpora, comprising 40 Discussions written by Iranian scholars and 40 Discussions written by native English-speaking scholars, selected from research articles published in international peer-reviewed journals. \nResults. The comparison of the two corpora revealed similarities and differences in the frequency, type, structure, sequence, and cyclicity of Moves. While there were significant differences in the frequency and sequence of Moves and Steps, both corpora employed the same types. They featured cyclical structures with no evidence of linear patterns across the Discussions. Both groups of researchers found it essential to provide background information and report and comment on the results in the research article Discussions, however, with notable differences in commenting strategies, i.e., Steps. The results indicated that socio-cultural conventions might have influenced the scholars' under- and over-employment of certain Moves and Steps in the research article Discussions. \nImplications. The findings of this study provide research-based evidence to practically and pedagogically assist in the context of English for academic and specific purposes, particularly in teaching English for research publication purposes to non-native English-speaking scholars.","PeriodicalId":37020,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.12750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background. Recent years have seen tremendous research efforts in the development of English for academic and research publication purposes, utilising an established approach to comparative genre analysis. This growing interest is primarily driven by the global dominance of Anglophone writing conventions, which necessitates raising awareness among researchers, particularly in non-Anglophone contexts. Purpose. This study explored and analysed the communicative intents of the discussion sections in research articles in two different contexts to investigate the effect of nativeness on the structural organisation in this genre. The focus of the study was on the rhetorical structure and employment of Moves in the applied linguistics research article Discussions, written in English by Iranian and native English-speaking researchers. Methods. A mixed-methods research study was conducted on two corpora, comprising 40 Discussions written by Iranian scholars and 40 Discussions written by native English-speaking scholars, selected from research articles published in international peer-reviewed journals. Results. The comparison of the two corpora revealed similarities and differences in the frequency, type, structure, sequence, and cyclicity of Moves. While there were significant differences in the frequency and sequence of Moves and Steps, both corpora employed the same types. They featured cyclical structures with no evidence of linear patterns across the Discussions. Both groups of researchers found it essential to provide background information and report and comment on the results in the research article Discussions, however, with notable differences in commenting strategies, i.e., Steps. The results indicated that socio-cultural conventions might have influenced the scholars' under- and over-employment of certain Moves and Steps in the research article Discussions. Implications. The findings of this study provide research-based evidence to practically and pedagogically assist in the context of English for academic and specific purposes, particularly in teaching English for research publication purposes to non-native English-speaking scholars.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
应用语言学研究中的修辞结构——跨文化比较分析
背景。近年来,为了学术和研究出版的目的,人们对英语的发展进行了大量的研究,利用了一种成熟的比较类型分析方法。这种日益增长的兴趣主要是由英语写作惯例的全球主导地位所驱动的,这需要提高研究人员的认识,特别是在非英语环境中。目的。本研究对两种不同语境下研究文章中讨论部分的交际意图进行了探讨和分析,以探讨母语对这类语言结构组织的影响。本研究的重点是应用语言学研究文章《讨论》中的修辞结构和move的使用,该文章由伊朗和母语为英语的研究人员用英语撰写。方法。对两个语料库进行了一项混合方法研究,其中包括40篇由伊朗学者撰写的讨论和40篇由以英语为母语的学者撰写的讨论,这些讨论选自发表在国际同行评审期刊上的研究文章。结果。通过对两种语料库的比较,可以发现两种语料库在动作的频率、类型、结构、顺序和循环性等方面的异同。尽管在动作和步骤的频率和顺序上存在显著差异,但两种语料库使用的类型相同。它们具有周期性结构,在整个讨论中没有线性模式的证据。两组研究人员都认为在研究文章讨论中提供背景信息和报告并评论结果是必不可少的,然而,评论策略(即步骤)存在显着差异。结果表明,社会文化习俗可能影响了学者在研究文章讨论中对某些动作和步骤的使用不足和过度。的影响。本研究的发现提供了基于研究的证据,在实践和教学上为学术和特定目的的英语语境提供了帮助,特别是在为研究出版目的向非英语母语学者教授英语方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Language and Education
Journal of Language and Education Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
33
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
Scrutinizing the Relationship between Vietnamese English Majors’ Intrinsic Motivation and Perceptions Towards Five Components of the 5Ts Framework Examining the Evolution and Components of the Culture of Learning in University Education: A Systematic Scoping Review Predictive Effects of English Classroom Anxiety and Motivation on Chinese Undergraduate EFL Learners’ English Achievement Literary Works and Technology Aids Inclusion in Foreign Language Learning: Case of Kosovo Students’ Approach Teacher Development in Technology-Enhanced Language Teaching: Book Review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1