The Recycling of Objective Move in English Research Articles’ Discussion Sections

Authors

  • Davud Kuhi Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran
  • Kimia Soltani Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5782/2223-2621.2022.25.2.90

Keywords:

Disciplinary variation, Discussion section, Move recycling, Research article, soft science

Abstract

While numerous studies have scrutinized the rhetorical structures of Research Articles (RAs) through move analysis, it appears that Move Recycling (MR) across RA sections has received little attention. The current study sought to fill this gap by investigating whether the recycling of Objective move (study purposes/questions/hypotheses) in RA Discussion sections, which was previously used in the Introduction, is vulnerable to disciplinary differences. To achieve the study’s objective, 600 English RAs published between 2006 and 2018 in six Soft Science disciplines, with an equal number in each discipline were selected. The move model developed by Weissberg and Buker (1990) served as a road map for analyzing RAs. After identifying the Objective move in RA Introductions, the frequency of its recycling in RA Discussions was calculated and compared across disciplines. The data analysis revealed that disciplinary variations do not result in variations in the recycling of this move in the RA Discussions. It was concluded that the recycling of the Objective move has been established in the sample RA Discussion sections to achieve certain rhetorical functions. The findings may help students, novice researchers, and English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing instructors understand how Objective move spans in Soft Science RA Discussions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Afshar, S.H., Doosti, M., & Movassagh, H. (2018). A genre analysis of the introduction section of applied linguistics and chemistry research articles. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21(1), 163-214.
  2. Amnuai, W., & Wannaruk, A. (2013). Investigating move structure of English applied linguistics research article discussions published in international and Thai journals. English Language Teaching, 6, 1-13.
  3. Annesley, T.M. (2010). The discussion section: Your closing argument. Clinical Chemistry, 56(11), 1671-1674.
  4. Atai, M.R., & Falah, S. (2005). A contrastive genre analysis of result and discussion sections of applied linguistic research articles written by native and non-native English speakers with respect to evaluated entities and ascribed values. Retrieved from http://www.paaljapan.org/resources/proceedings/PAAL10/pdfs/atai.pdf
  5. Basturkmen, H. (2009). Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 241-251.
  6. Basturkmen, H. (2012). A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 134-144.
  7. Becher, T. (1994). The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education, 19(2), 151-161.
  8. Behnam, B., & Golpour, F. (2014). A genre analysis of English and Iranian research articles abstracts in applied linguistics and mathematics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 3(5), 173-179.
  9. Behnam, B., & Nikoukhesal, A. (2017). Contrastive study of move structure in the introduction section of physical versus social sciences research articles in English. The Asian ESP Journal, 13(2), 180-212.
  10. Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move. Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    Carrell, P. L. (1985). Facilitating ESL reading by teaching text structure. TESOL quarterly, 19(4), 727-752.
  11. Chalak, A., & Norouzi, Z. (2013). Rhetorical moves and verb tense in abstracts: A comparative analysis of American and Iranian academic writing. International Journal of Language Studies, 7(4), 101-110.
  12. Cushing, S. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Ershadi, S., & Farnia, M. (2015). Comparative generic analysis of discussions of English and Persian computer research articles. Culture and Communication Online, 6(6), 15-31.
  13. Ge, D. M., & Yang, R. Y. (2005). A genre analysis of research article abstracts. Modern Foreign Languages, 28(2), 38-46.
  14. Ghasemi, T., & Alavi, S. M. (2014). A comparative move analysis study of theses abstracts written by Iranian MA students of TEFL and English literature. Online International Journal of Arts and Humanities, 3(1), 5-15.
  15. Harwood, N. (2005). "We do not seem to have a theory…The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap": Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 343-375.
  16. Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 141-152). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
  17. Hyland, K. (2002). Genre: Language, context, and literacy. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 113-135.
  18. Hyland, K. (2007). Genre pedagogy: Language, literacy and L2 writing instruction. Journals of Second Language Writing, 16, 148-164.
  19. Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
  20. Hyland, K., & Bondi, M. (2006). Academic discourse across disciplines. Bern: Peter Lang.
  21. Jalilifar, A., & Dastjerdi, H. (2009). A contrastive generic analysis of thesis and dissertation abstracts: Variations across disciplines and cultures. Journal of the Faculty of Letters and Humanities, 26(23), 20-50.
  22. Joseph, R., & Lim, J. M. H. (2018). Background information in the discussion sections of forestry journals: A case study. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 18(1), 198-216.
    Keshavarz, M. H., Atai, M. R., & Barzegar, V. (2007). A contrastive study of generic organization of research article introductions written by Iranian and non-Iranian writers in applied linguistics. Teaching English Language and Literature Society of Iran, 1(2), 13-34.
  23. Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 269-292.
  24. Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Rhetorical moves in biochemistry articles. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T.A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (pp. 73-119). Amsterdam: John Benjamin.
  25. Kanoksilapatham, B. (2015). Distinguishing textual features characterizing structural variation in research articles across three engineering sub-discipline corpora. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 74-86.
  26. Lim, J. M. (2006). Method sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 25, 282-309.
  27. Lim, J. M. (2012). How do writers establish research niches? A genre-based investigation into management researchers’ rhetorical steps and linguistic mechanisms. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 229-245.
  28. Loi, C. K., Evans, M. S., Lim, J. M. H., & Akkakoson, S. (2016). A comparison between Malay and English research article discussions: a move analysis. Sage Open, 6(2), 1-11.
  29. Lyons, C., J. (2007). Community (dis)organization and racially motivated crime. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 815-863.
  30. Malmir, B., Khany, R. & Aliakbari, M. (2019). Journal article highlights in applied linguistics: An exploration into the rhetorical moves and their lexico-grammatical features. Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 49-63.
  31. Moreno, A.I. (2003). Matching theoretical descriptions of discourse and practical applications to teaching: The case of causal metatext. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 265-295.
  32. Moshiri, S., & Moghaddam, M. B. (2018). The effects of oil price shocks in a federation; The case of interregional trade and labor migration. Energy Economics, 75, 206-221.
  33. Nwogu, K.N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and function. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-137.
  34. Ozturk, I. (2007). The textual organization of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 26, 25-38.
  35. Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the language learning classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  36. Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative move in discussion section of research articles. System, 30, 479-497.
  37. Peacock, M. (2011). The structure of the methods section in research articles across eight disciplines. Asian ESP Journal, 7(2), 99-144.
  38. Pennycook, A. (2001). Critical applied linguistics: A critical introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
  39. Pennycook, A. (2008). English as language always in translation. European Journal of English Studies, 12(1), 33-47.
  40. Posteguillo, S. (1999). The schematic structure of computer science research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2), 139-160.
  41. Rezaee, A.A., & Sayfouri, N. (2009). Iranian ISI and Non-ISI medical research articles in English: A comparative ESP/EAP move analysis. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 52(2), 136-160.
  42. Rolls, H., & Rodgers, M.P.H. (2017). Science-specific technical vocabulary in science fiction-fantasy texts: A case for ‘language through literature’. English for Specific Purposes 48, 44-56.
  43. Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21(1), 1-17. doi:10. 1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5
  44. Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141-156.
  45. Sheldon, E. (2019). Knowledge construction of discussion/conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. English for Academic Purposes, 35, 13-40.
  46. Shirani, Sh., & Chalak, A. (2016). A genre analysis of Iranian EFL learners’ master theses with a focus on the introduction section. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(10), 1982-1987.
  47. Soltani, K., Kuhi, D., & Hadidi, N. (2021a). Move recycling in soft science research articles authored by native speakers of English vs. Iranian researchers. Journal of Language Horizons (in press).
  48. Soltani, K., Kuhi, D., & Hadidi, N. (2021b). Intercultural study of move recycling in discussion sections of soft science research articles. Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 13(27), 171-191.
  49. Staples, Sh. (2015). Examining the linguistic needs of internationally educated nurses: A corpus-based study of lexico-grammatical features in nurse–patient interactions. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 122-136.
  50. Stoller, F. L., & Robinson, M. S. (2013). Chemistry journal articles: An interdisciplinary approach to move analysis with pedagogical aims. English for Specific Purposes, 32, 45-57.
  51. Swales, J.M. (1981). Aspects of article introductions in ESP research reports. Birmingham, UK: Aston University Press.
  52. Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  53. Swales, J.M. (2004). Research genres: Exploration and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  54. Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students: A course for non-native speakers of English. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
  55. Tavakoli, G.M., & Tabatabaei, O. (2018). A structural move analysis of the abstract section of ISI articles of Iranian and native scholars in the field of agricultural engineering. International Journal of Research, 7(3), 109-122.
  56. Tessuto, G. (2015). Generic structure and rhetorical moves in English-language empirical law research articles: Sites of interdisciplinary and interdiscursive cross-over. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 13-26.
  57. Weissberg, R., & Buker, S. (1990). Writing up research: Experimental research report writing for students of English. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
  58. Widdowson, H.G. (1979). Explorations in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  59. Yakhontova, T. (2006). Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 153-167.
  60. Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365-385.
  61. Yazdanpanah, Z., Nemati, M., & Zand-Moghadam, A. (2021). Exploring the rhetorical structure of written personal narratives: A move analysis of Persian and English narratives. International Journal of Language Studies, 15(2), 93-126.
  62. Zand-Vakill, E., & Kashani, A.F. (2012). The contrastive move analysis: An investigation of Persian and English research articles’ abstract and introduction parts. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 4(2), 129-138.

Downloads

Published

2023-02-12

Issue

Vol. 25 No. 2 (2022): Khazar Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

Section

Articles