1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Languages in Contrast
  4. Volume 26, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 26, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6759
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9897
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Studies on cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary differences in employing rhetorical moves and stylistic features in research article abstracts (RAAs) are scant. This study explores (a) dominant rhetorical moves in international and local applied linguistics abstracts, (b) differences between Anglo-American (English) and Iranian (Persian/English) abstracts in applied linguistics, and (c) cross-disciplinary discrepancies between applied linguistics and civil engineering abstracts by Anglo-American (English) and Iranian (Persian) writers. To this end, 300 abstracts were analysed in two disciplines (applied linguistics and civil engineering) and two languages (English and Persian). The findings unfold that internationally-published article abstracts discuss research findings significantly more. English applied linguistics abstracts describe the research methodology and potential utility of the research significantly more than abstracts in Farsi. Interdisciplinary differences were found in terms of describing the methodology and discussion of the findings. Tense use varied across different moves of the abstracts giving an indication to the reader about where the writers have got to in their abstracts. A preponderance of present tense in ‘presenting the study’ move in most abstracts by civil engineers and applied linguists was found. Attended forms of demonstratives were the most used by civil engineers. Implications for English for academic writing instruction and research will be discussed.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
2025-08-26
2026-05-14

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bondi, M. and Lorés Sanz, R.
    (eds) 2014 Abstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change. Bern: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0701‑2
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0701-2 [Google Scholar]
  2. Burrough-Boenisch, J.
    2003 Examining Present Tense Conventions in Scientific Writing in the Light of Reader Reactions to Three Dutch-Authored Discussions. English for Specific Purposes22(1): 5–24. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(01)00049‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00049-7 [Google Scholar]
  3. Busch-Lauer, I.
    1995 Abstracts in German Medical Journals: A Linguistic Analysis. Information Processing and Management31(5): 769–776. 10.1016/0306‑4573(95)00024‑B
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4573(95)00024-B [Google Scholar]
  4. Dahl, T.
    2004 Textual Metadiscourse in Research Articles: A Marker of National Culture or of Academic Discipline?Journal of Pragmatics36(10): 1807–1825. 10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004 [Google Scholar]
  5. Dietrich, R., Klein, W. and Noyau, C.
    1995 The Acquisition of Temporality in a Second Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sibil.7
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sibil.7 [Google Scholar]
  6. Duszak, A.
    1994 Academic Discourse and Intellectual Styles. Journal of Pragmatics21(3): 291–313. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)90003‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)90003-5 [Google Scholar]
  7. Feltrim, V. D., Aluísio, S. M. and Nunes, M. G. V.
    2003 Analysis of the Rhetorical Structure of Computer Science Abstracts in Portuguese. Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics. Lancaster, United Kingdom. 212–218.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Friginal, E. and Mustafa, S. S.
    2017 A Comparison of U.S.-Based and Iraqi English Research Article Abstracts Using Corpora. Journal of English for Academic Purposes251: 45–57. 10.1016/j.jeap.2016.11.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.11.004 [Google Scholar]
  9. Fryer, D. L.
    2012 Analysis of the Generic Discourse Features of the English-Language Medical Research Article: A Systemic-Functional Approach. Functions of Language19(1): 5–37. 10.1075/fol.19.1.01fry
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.19.1.01fry [Google Scholar]
  10. Gillaerts, P. and Van de Velde, F.
    2010 Interactional Metadiscourse in Research Article Abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes9(2): 128–139. 10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  11. Gráf, T.
    2018 English-Language Abstracts Written by Czech Linguists: How Are We Doing?Linguistica Pragensia28(1): 71–85.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gray, B. and Cortes, V.
    2011 Perception vs. Evidence: An Analysis of This and These in Academic Prose. English for Specific Purposes30(1): 31–43. 10.1016/j.esp.2010.06.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2010.06.004 [Google Scholar]
  13. Hardy, J. A. and Römer, U.
    2013 Revealing Disciplinary Variation in Student Writing: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora8(2): 183–207. 10.3366/cor.2013.0040
     https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2013.0040 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hatzitheodorou, A.
    2014 A Genre-Oriented Analysis of Research Article Abstracts in Law and Business Journals. InAbstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change, M. Bondi and R. Lorés Sanz (eds), 175–198. Bern: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Hinkel, E.
    2004 Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Hu, G. and Cao, F.
    2011 Hedging and Boosting in Abstracts of Applied Linguistics Articles: A Comparative Study of English- and Chinese-Medium Journals. Journal of Pragmatics43(11): 2795–2809. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007 [Google Scholar]
  17. Huckin, T. N.
    2001 Abstracting from Abstracts. InAcademic Writing in Context: Implications and Applications. Papers in Honour of Tony Dudley-Evans, M. Hewings (ed.), 93–103. Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Hyland, K.
    2000 Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Harlow: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 2004 Disciplinary Interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 Postgraduate Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing13(2): 133–151. 10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001 [Google Scholar]
  20. 2005 Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies7(2): 173–192. 10.1177/1461445605050365
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  21. 2006 Disciplinary Differences: Language Variation in Academic Discourses. InAcademic Discourse across Disciplines, K. Hyland and M. Bondi (eds), 17–45. Bern: Peter Lang. 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0446‑2
     https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0446-2 [Google Scholar]
  22. 2023 Academic Publishing and the Attention Economy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes641. Article 101253. 10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101253
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101253 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyland, K. and Jiang, F.
    2017 Is Academic Writing Becoming More Informal?English for Specific Purposes451: 40–51. 10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hyland, K. and Tse, P.
    2005 Hooking the Reader: A Corpus Study of Evaluative That in Abstracts. English for Specific Purposes24(2): 123–139. 10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  25. Jiang, F. and Wang, F.
    2018 ‘This is because …’: Authorial Practice of (Un)attending This in Academic Prose across Disciplines. Australian Journal of Linguistics38(2): 162–182. 10.1080/07268602.2018.1400499
     https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2018.1400499 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kafes, H.
    2012 Cultural Traces on the Rhetorical Organization of Research Article Abstracts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications3(3): 207–220.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Kanoksilapatham, B.
    2005 Rhetorical Structure of Biochemistry Research Articles. English for Specific Purposes24(3): 269–292. 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003 [Google Scholar]
  28. Lee, J. J., Tytko, T. and Larkin, R.
    2021 (Un)attended This/These in Undergraduate Student Writing: A Corpus Analysis of High- and Low-Rated L2 Writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes501. Article 100967. 10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100967
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100967 [Google Scholar]
  29. López-Arroyo, B. and Méndez-Cendón, B.
    2007 Describing Phraseological Devices in Medical Abstracts: An English/Spanish Contrastive Analysis. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs52(3): 503–516. 10.7202/016735ar
     https://doi.org/10.7202/016735ar [Google Scholar]
  30. Lorés, R.
    2004 On RA Abstracts: From Rhetorical Structure to Thematic Organisation. English for Specific Purposes23(3): 280–302. 10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001 [Google Scholar]
  31. Martín-Martín, P.
    2003 A Genre Analysis of English and Spanish Research Paper Abstracts in Experimental Social Sciences. English for Specific Purposes22(1): 25–43. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(01)00033‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00033-3 [Google Scholar]
  32. Melander, B., Swales, J. M. and Frederickson, K. M.
    1997 Journal Abstracts from Three Academic Fields in the United States and Sweden: National or Disciplinary Proclivities?InCulture and Styles of Academic Discourse, A. Duszak (ed.), 251–272. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110821048.251
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110821048.251 [Google Scholar]
  33. Paltridge, B.
    1997 Genre, Frames and Writing in Research Settings. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.45
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.45 [Google Scholar]
  34. Pérez-Llantada, C.
    2015 Genres in the Forefront, Languages in the Background: The Scope of Genre Analysis in Language-Related Scenarios. Journal of English for Academic Purposes191: 10–21. 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.005 [Google Scholar]
  35. Petch-Tyson, S.
    2000 Demonstrative Expressions in Argumentative Discourse: A Computer Corpus-Based Comparison of Non-Native and Native English. InCorpus-Based and Computational Approaches to Discourse Anaphora, S. P. Botley and T. McEnery (eds), 43–64. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.3.02pet
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.3.02pet [Google Scholar]
  36. Pho, P. D.
    2008a Research Article Abstracts in Applied Linguistics and Educational Technology: A Study of Linguistic Realizations of Rhetorical Structure and Authorial Stance. Discourse Studies10(2): 231–250. 10.1177/1461445607087010
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607087010 [Google Scholar]
  37. 2008b How Can Learning about the Structure of Research Articles Help International Students?Paper presented at the19th International Conference on English for Specific Purposes (ESP), Auckland, New Zealand.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Salager-Meyer, F.
    1990 Discoursal Flaws in Medical English Abstracts: A Genre Analysis per Research- and Text-Type. Text — Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse10(4): 365–384. 10.1515/text.1.1990.10.4.365
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1990.10.4.365 [Google Scholar]
  39. Samraj, B.
    2002a Disciplinary Variation in Abstracts: The Case of Wildlife Behaviour and Conservation Biology. InAcademic Discourse, J. Flowerdew (ed.), 40–56. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. 2002b Introductions in Research Articles: Variations across Disciplines. English for Specific Purposes21(1): 1–17. 10.1016/S0889‑4906(00)00023‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5 [Google Scholar]
  41. 2005 An Exploration of a Genre Set: Research Article Abstracts and Introductions in Two Disciplines. English for Specific Purposes24(2): 141–156. 10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001 [Google Scholar]
  42. Santos, M. B. D.
    1996 The Textual Organization of Research Paper Abstracts in Applied Linguistics. Text & Talk16(4): 481–499. 10.1515/text.1.1996.16.4.481
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1996.16.4.481 [Google Scholar]
  43. Swales, J. M.
    1981 Aspects of Article Introductions. Aston ESP Research Reports No. 1. Birmingham: Language Studies Unit, University of Aston.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. 2005 Attended and Unattended This in Academic Writing: A Long and Unfinished Story. ESP Malaysia11(1): 1–15.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Swales, J. M. and Feak, C. B.
    2004 Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. 2009 Abstracts and the Writing of Abstracts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. 10.3998/mpub.309332
     https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.309332 [Google Scholar]
  47. Tankó, G.
    2017 Literary Research Article Abstracts: An Analysis of Rhetorical Moves and their Linguistic Realizations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes271: 42–55. 10.1016/j.jeap.2017.04.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.04.003 [Google Scholar]
  48. Tardy, C. M. and Swales, J. M.
    2014 Genre Analysis. InPragmatics of Discourse, K. P. Schneider and A. Barron (eds), 165–187. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110214406‑007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110214406-007 [Google Scholar]
  49. 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 Purposes371: 13–26. 10.1016/j.esp.2014.06.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.06.002 [Google Scholar]
  50. Tseng, F.
    2011 Analyses of Move Structure and Verb Tense of Research Article Abstracts in Applied Linguistics. International Journal of English Linguistics1(2): 27–39. 10.5539/ijel.v1n2p27
     https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v1n2p27 [Google Scholar]
  51. Van Bonn, S. and Swales, J. M.
    2007 English and French Journal Abstracts in the Language Sciences: Three Exploratory Studies. Journal of English for Academic Purposes6(2): 93–108. 10.1016/j.jeap.2007.04.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.04.001 [Google Scholar]
  52. Yakhontova, T.
    2006 Cultural and Disciplinary Variation in Academic Discourse: The Issue of Influencing Factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes5(2): 153–167. 10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  53. Yang, W.
    2011 Can Genre-Based Instruction Be ‘Promising’ for Transferability?English for Specific Purposes World33(11): 1–10.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Zhao, J. and Wu, T.
    2013 A Genre Analysis of Medical Abstracts by Chinese and English Native Speakers. Journal of Medical Colleges of PLA28(1): 60–64. 10.1016/S1000‑1948(13)60018‑0
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S1000-1948(13)60018-0 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
Loading
A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study of rhetorical moves in research article abstracts
Languages in Contrast 26, 28 (2026); https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
/content/journals/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): abstracts; cross-disciplinary; cross-linguistic; English/Persian; rhetorical move

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error