An Analysis of the Commenting on Results Move in Applied Linguistics Research Articles
2
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
초록
The purpose of the study is to provide a fine-grained description of the rhetorical strategies, linguistic indicators, and semantic resources employed in the Commenting on Results move in the Discussion section of research articles (RAs). 30 RAs in the field of Applied Linguistics were used as the data of the study. All the Result-Comment Sequences were extracted from the data and analyzed for the identification of the steps and sub-steps embedded in the Commenting on Results move. The analysis of the data reveals that comments in the Result-Comment Sequences were enacted to realize five broad rhetorical strategies of interpretation, explanation, comparison, evaluation, and suggestion. Typical linguistic indicators used for realizing the rhetorical purposes were also identified in the study. The analysis of the sub-steps which primarily concerns semantic resources used to make knowledge claims in each rhetorical step indicates that various combinations of semantic resources (literature, observation of the data, design features of the study, the author’s own logical inference, etc.) were utilized for each step and those resources were found to contribute to the construction of the knowledge claims made in the Commenting on Results move. The findings of the study have pedagogical implications for English for Academic Purposes instruction.
Abstract
The purpose of the study is to provide a fine-grained description of the rhetorical strategies, linguistic indicators, and semantic resources employed in the Commenting on Results move in the Discussion section of research articles (RAs). 30 RAs in the field of Applied Linguistics were used as the data of the study. All the Result-Comment Sequences were extracted from the data and analyzed for the identification of the steps and sub-steps embedded in the Commenting on Results move. The analysis of the data reveals that comments in the Result-Comment Sequences were enacted to realize five broad rhetorical strategies of interpretation, explanation, comparison, evaluation, and suggestion. Typical linguistic indicators used for realizing the rhetorical purposes were also identified in the study. The analysis of the sub-steps which primarily concerns semantic resources used to make knowledge claims in each rhetorical step indicates that various combinations of semantic resources (literature, observation of the data, design features of the study, the author’s own logical inference, etc.) were utilized for each step and those resources were found to contribute to the construction of the knowledge claims made in the Commenting on Results move. The findings of the study have pedagogical implications for English for Academic Purposes instruction.
참고문헌 (32)
- Andrews, R., "Models of argument in educational discourse", Text, 25(1), pp.107~127 (2005)
- Basturkmen, H., "Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in Language Teaching", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), pp.241~251 (2009)
- Berkenkotter, C., "Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication" (1995), Lawrence Erlbaum
- Bitchener, J., "Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(1), pp.4~18 (2006)
- Chang, P., "Taking an effective authorial stance in academic writing : Making the linguistic resources explicit for L2 writers in the social sciences", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(3), pp.140~151 (2011)
- Cheng, F., "Stance-taking as negotiating academic conflict in applied linguistics research article discussion sections", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 24, pp.43~57 (2016)
- Flowerdew, L., "Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics", pp.11~36 (2004), John Benjamins
- Holmes, R., "Genre analysis and the social sciences : An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines", English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), pp.321~337 (1997)
- Hood, S., "Appraising research: Taking a stance in academic writing", pp.2004
- Hopkins, A., "A genre-based investigation of the discussion sections in articles and dissertations", English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), pp.113~121 (1998)
- Hudson, T., "Teaching second language writing" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Hunston, S., "Text & technology: In honor of John Sinclair", pp.115~133 (1993), John Benjamins
- Hyland, K., "Hedging in scientific research articles" (1998), John Benjamins
- Hyland, K., "Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic writing" (2004), University of Michigan Press
- Le, T. N. P., "Phraseology used to comment on results in the Discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles", English for Specific Purposes, 39, pp.45~61 (2015)
- Lim, J. M. H., "Commenting on research results in applied linguistics and education : A comparative genre-based investigation", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), pp.280~294 (2010)
- McEnery, T., "Corpus-based language studies: An advanced resource book" (2006), Routledge
- Parkinson, J., "The discussion section as argument : The language used to prove knowledge claims", English for Specific Purposes, 30(3), pp.164~175 (2011)
- Patridge, B., "Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors" (2007), Routledge
- Peacock, M., "Communicative moves in the discussion section of RAs", System, 30(4), pp.479~497 (2002)
- Posteguillo, S., "Schematic structure of computer science research articles", English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), pp.139~160 (1999)
- Salager-Meyer, F., "Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse", English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), pp.149~170 (1994)
- Salager-Meyer, F., "Referential behavior in scientific writing", English for Specific Purposes, 18(3), pp.279~305 (1999)
- Samraj, B., "Form and function of citations in discussion sections of mater’s theses and research articles", Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(4), pp.299~310 (2013)
- Sheldon, E., "Knowledge construction of discussion", conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1writers, 2019, pp.37, 1~10
- 심은숙, "Hedges and Boosters in Academic Writing", 현대영어교육, 18(3), pp.71~90 (2017), 현대영어교육학회
- Planning, designing, and reporting research, "Struwing, F. W.", Pearson Education, ~ (2007)
- Swales, J. M., "Aspects of article introductions", University of Aston Language Studies Unit, ~ (1981)
- Swales, J. M., "Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings" (1990), Cambridge University Press
- Swales, J. M., "Research genres: Exploration and applications" (2004), Cambridge University Press
- Thompson, G., "Evaluation in the reporting verbs used in academic papers", Applied Linguistics, 12(4), pp.365~382 (1991)
- Yang, R., "Research articles in applied linguistics : Moving from results to conclusions", English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), pp.365~385 (2003)