A Corpus-Based Contrastive Analysis of Cohesive Devices in Academic Writing: Insights from Arab and English Research Articles in Education and Medicine
Raghda Naeem Khudair
1
(
Department of English, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran
)
Sousan Sattar Boroujeni
2
(
English Department, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
)
Bahram Hadian
3
(
Department of English, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Isfahan, Iran
)
کلید واژه: cohesion, contrastive analysis, corpus linguistics, academic writing, EFL instruction,
چکیده مقاله :
This study investigated cohesive devices in AEW and NEW texts through a comparative case study indicating patterns in their convergence. This was done through Halliday and Hasan's (1976) model with examples of grammatical and lexical cohesion in Education and Medicine. It drew on a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature and made use of AntConc software to help quantify the numbers of cohesive devices in different contexts. The findings indicated significant cultural and linguistic impacts on cohesion use. Native-English writers of Arabic background often made use of repetition and third-person pronouns, following the rhetorical traditions of Arabic, which emphasize thematic coherence. Conversely, native English writers made more use of collocation, lexical variety, and clear logical connectors, adhering to Western norms of clarity and linear development. These findings have a number of implications. The findings, therefore, imply a need for tailored EFL instruction in which the cultural preferences of the Arab learners are aligned with the English academic norms. Educators should adopt strategies that will also promote the use of cohesive ties, such as collocations and conjunctions, showing respect for the rhetorical identity of the Arab students. Tools like AntConc will help students to improve their writing and make them more self-aware of their writing. The greatest non-pedagogical value of this study would be its contribution to cross-cultural understanding in academic writing. The findings also enhance the understanding of cohesion in academic writing and provide practical suggestions on how to improve EFL instruction and effective cross-cultural communication in today's interconnected academic landscape.
چکیده انگلیسی :
This study investigated cohesive devices in AEW and NEW texts through a comparative case study indicating patterns in their convergence. This was done through Halliday and Hasan's (1976) model with examples of grammatical and lexical cohesion in Education and Medicine. It drew on a systematic review of peer-reviewed literature and made use of AntConc software to help quantify the numbers of cohesive devices in different contexts. The findings indicated significant cultural and linguistic impacts on cohesion use. Native-English writers of Arabic background often made use of repetition and third-person pronouns, following the rhetorical traditions of Arabic, which emphasize thematic coherence. Conversely, native English writers made more use of collocation, lexical variety, and clear logical connectors, adhering to Western norms of clarity and linear development. These findings have a number of implications. The findings, therefore, imply a need for tailored EFL instruction in which the cultural preferences of the Arab learners are aligned with the English academic norms. Educators should adopt strategies that will also promote the use of cohesive ties, such as collocations and conjunctions, showing respect for the rhetorical identity of the Arab students. Tools like AntConc will help students to improve their writing and make them more self-aware of their writing. The greatest non-pedagogical value of this study would be its contribution to cross-cultural understanding in academic writing. The findings also enhance the understanding of cohesion in academic writing and provide practical suggestions on how to improve EFL instruction and effective cross-cultural communication in today's interconnected academic landscape.
Abu-Rabia, S., & Shany, M. (2013). The effect of culture on the use of cohesive devices in writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(2), 123–135.
Al-Ali, M. (2017). Cohesion in Arabic academic writing: A contrastive analysis. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(1), 45–60.
Al-Ruwayshed, A. (2012). Cohesive devices in Arabic and English: A comparative study. Arab World English Journal, 3(3), 56–73.
Barton, E. (2013). Cohesion and coherence in academic writing: A study of English and Arabic texts. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(5), 1001–1010.
Betti, F., & AlFartoosy, A. (2019). Reiteration and lexical cohesion in academic writing: A comparative study. International Journal of Language Studies, 13(4), 67–82.
Carter, R., & McCarthy, M. (2006). Cambridge grammar of English: A comprehensive guide. Cambridge University Press.
Cho, H., & Shin, D. (2014). The role of cohesive devices in academic writing: Insights from Korean EFL learners. Asian EFL Journal, 16(1), 45–67.
Coulmas, F. (1992). The writing systems of the world. Blackwell.
Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
Flowerdew, J. (1999). Academic listening: Research perspectives. TESOL Quarterly, 33(3), 407–412.
Fitriati, R., & Yonata, Y. (2017). Cohesion and coherence in English texts: A study on Indonesian students’ writings. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(2), 245–254.
Ghazala, H. (2008). Translation as problems and solutions. Dar Al-Ma’aref.
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1996). Theory and practice of writing: An applied linguistic perspective. Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman.
Hidayat, S. (2016). The role of conjunctions in achieving coherence in written discourse. Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 5(2), 34–45.
Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In T. Miller (Ed.), Text and context: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on academic discourse (pp. 55–70). University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K., & Shaw, P. (2016). The importance of coherence in academic writing: Evidence from a corpus-based study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 23, 1–12.
Kaplan, R. B. (1987). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. In Language and culture (pp. 9–24). University Press of America.
Kuo, C.-L. (2013). Cohesion in academic writing: A contrastive study between Chinese and English texts. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 23(1), 45–60.
Liu, J. (2006). Cohesion and coherence in Chinese EFL learners' writing: A contrastive analysis with native speakers' writing. Asian EFL Journal, 8(4), 40–54.
Nunan, D. (1993). Introducing discourse analysis. Routledge.
Oshima, A., & Hogue, A. (2006). Writing academic English. Pearson Longman.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. A. (2001). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Blackwell Publishing.
Smith, R., Garcia, P., & Lee, J. (2021). Professional development for EFL teachers: Bridging the gap in pragmatics instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 55(2), 300–320.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. University of Michigan Press.
Taguchi, N. (2015). Pragmatic competence in English as a foreign language: A review of the literature and implications for teaching. Language Teaching Research, 19(4), 435–454.
Tanawong, K. (2014). Collocation and lexical cohesion. International Journal of Language Studies, 8(1), 15–24.
Wang, L. (2009). Cohesion and coherence in academic writing. Asian EFL Journal, 11(4), 25–38.
Yakhontova, T. (2001). Cross-cultural communication in academic discourse. Journal of Language and Culture, 3(2), 12–20.
Zamel, V. (1997). Toward a model of transculturation. In C. Connor (Ed.), Writing across languages and cultures: Issues in contrastive rhetoric. Routledge.
