Validation markers in introduction and results and discussion sections of research articles from four disciplines
الموضوعات : نشریه مطالعات آموزش زبان انگلیسیSeyed Foad Ebrahimi 1 , Aziz Eshmidian Nejad 2
1 - Department of English, Shadegan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shadegan, Iran.
2 - English Department, Abadan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Abadan, Iran
الکلمات المفتاحية: genre, discipline, Research Article, introduction section, results and discussion section, validation markers,
ملخص المقالة :
In the last three decades, genre of research article, among other genres of academic writings, hasreceived the greatest attention. This attention is due to the vital role that research article plays inthe legitimating of claims and disciplines. Johns and Swales (2002) relate this attention to theintensive review process that research article goes through before getting “valorized and ratifiedby the very fact of being published” (p.13). Research article also plays a significant role in thecirculation of academic knowledge that requires meeting the often-stringent requirements of adisciplinary community. The mentioned importance has provoked this study to investigate howwriters validate the ideas, claims, arguments and findings reported in introduction and results anddiscussion sections of research articles across four disciplines namely; Applied Linguistics,Psychology, Chemistry, and Environmental Engineering. To this end, 40 introduction and resultsand discussion sections were extracted from 40 research articles published in high-impactjournals from four disciplines (10 from each discipline). The data were analyzed and the findingsreported some disciplinary differences concerning the frequency and discourse functions ofvalidation markers. The differences could be attributed to the disciplinary conventions of writingor rhetorical functions of introduction and results and discussion section of research article. Theresults of this study might act as a guide for novice writers from four disciplines to plot howsuccessful writers validate their ideas, arguments, findings and claims in introduction and resultsand discussion sections of research articles.
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.
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(2),
134-144.
Berkenkotter, C. & Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication:
Cognition/culture/power. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific
Purposes 13(1), 47-59.
Davies, F. (1988). Reading between the lines: Thematic choices as a device for presenting
writers viewpoint in academic discourse. The Especialist 9 (2), 173-200.
Ebrahimi, S. F., Chan, S. H. & Ain, N. A. (2014). Discourse functions of grammatical subject in
result and discussion section of research article across four disciplines. Journal of Writing
Research 6 (2), 125-140.
Fries, P. H. (1994). Theme, method of development, and texts . World Englishes 21(2), 317- 359.
Fries, P. H. & Francis, G. (1992). Exploring theme: Problems for research. Occasional Papers in
Systemic Linguistics 6, 45-60.
Gillaerts, P. & Van de Velde, F. (2010). Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts.
Journal of English for Academic purposes 9(2), 128-139.
Gosden, H. (1992). Discourse functions of marked theme in scientific research articles. Journal
of English for Specific Purposes 11, 207-224.
Gosden, H. (1993). Discourse functions of subject in scientific research articles. Applied
Linguistics 14(1), 56-75.
Halliday, M.A.k. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Britain: Edward
Arnold.
Harwood, N. (2005). ‘Nowhere has anyone attempted… In this article I aim to do just that’: A
corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four
disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics 37(8), 1207-1231.
Holmes, R. (1997). 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), 321-337.
Hunston, S. (1994). Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse.
Advances in written text analysis, 191-218.
Hu, G. & Cao, F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A
comparative study of English-and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of pragmatics 43
(11), 2795-2809.
Hyland, K. (1996). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied
linguistics 17(4), 433-454.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University
of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for
specific purposes 27(1), 4-21.
Jalilifar, A. R. (2009). Research article in Applied Linguistics: A gender-based writing guide.
Ahwaz: Shahid Chamran University Press.
Jalilifar, A. (2010). The status of theme in applied linguistics articles. The Asian ESP Journal 6
(2), 7-39.
Johns, A. & Swales, J. (2002). Literacy and disciplinary practices: Opening and closing
perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 1(1), 13-28.
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for
specific purposes 24 (3), 269-292.
Kashiha, H. & Chan, S.H. (2014). Discourse functions of formulaic sequences in academic
speech across two disciplines. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies 14(2), 15-27.
Khedri, M., Ebrahimi, S. J. & Chan, S. H. (2013). Interactional metadiscourse markers in
academic research article result and discussion sections. The Southeast Asian Journal of
English Language Studies 19(1), 65-74.
Lores, R. (2004). On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organization. Journal of
English for Specific Purposes 23, 280-302.
Martinez, I.A. (2003). Aspects of theme in the method and discussion sections of biology journal
article in English. Journal of English for Academic Purpose 2, 103-123.
Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System
30(4), 479-497.
Ruiying, Y. & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to
conclusion. Journal of English for Specific Purposes 22 (4), 103-123.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research setting. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Williams, I.A. (1999). Results Sections of Medical Research Articles: Analysis of Rhetorical
Categories for Pedagogical Purposes. English for Specific Purposes 18(4), 347-366.
