Li Yungenre Analisys

AGENREANALYSISOFENGLISHANDCHINESERESEARCHARTICLE
ABSTRACTSINLINGUISTICSANDCHEMISTRY
____________________
AThesis
Presentedtothe
Facultyof
SanDiegoStateUniversity
____________________
InPartialFulfillment
oftheRequirementsfortheDegree
MasterofArts
in
Linguistics
____________________
by
YunLi
Spring2011

iii
Copyright2011
by
YunLi
AllRightsReserved

iv
ABSTRACTOFTHETHESIS
AGenreAnalysisofEnglishandChineseResearchArticle
AbstractsinLinguisticsandChemistry
by
YunLi
MasterofArtsinLinguistics
SanDiegoStateUniversity,2011
Asanimportantpartgenreintheresearcharticle(RA),theabstracthasgained
significantattentionfromtheacademiccommunity.Awellwrittenabstractcanattract
morereadersandincreasethechancesoftheaccompanyingRAbeingindexedand
cited.PreviousgenreanalysesofRAabstractshavetendedtofocusonEnglishand
Europeanlanguages,andonsocialsciencedisciplines,suchaslinguistics.However,
abstractswritteninChineseandinthehardsciences,suchaschemistry,havebeenless
analyzed.
Thisstudyisagenreanalysison40RAabstractswrittenintwolanguages,
EnglishandChineseandfromtwodisciplines,chemistryandlinguistics.Thecross
disciplinaryandcrosslinguisticanalysesrevealthatlinguisticsabstractsfollowa
conventionalscheme,butchemistryabstractsinthesetwolanguagesdonotexhibitthe
usualnormsintermsofmoves.Besides,greaterdifferenceinmovestructureisseen
acrosslanguagesinchemistry.Theabstractsalsomanifestdifferencesinsentencelevel
grammaticalfeaturessuchastheuseofthefirstpersonpronounandthepassivevoice.
TheresultsindicatethatRAabstractsdisplaydifferencesinstructureduetothe
differencesinthewritersdisciplinaryandlinguisticbackground.Theresultsofthis
studycanbedrawnoninacademicwritingcoursesforgraduatestudentsandnovice
writers,especiallythosefromnonEnglishbackgroundsinordertofacilitatetheir
successfulacculturationintothesedisciplinarycommunities.

v
TABLEOFCONTENTS
PAGE
ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................................................................iv
LISTOFTABLES...............................................................................................................................................vii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..............................................................................................................................viii
CHAPTER
1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................1
2 LITERATUREREVIEW......................................................................................................................4
MovestepAnalysisinRA........................................................................................................4
GenreAnalysisofRASections...............................................................................................5
GenreAnalysisofRAAbstracts.............................................................................................6
ContrastiveRhetoricinRAAbstracts.................................................................................7
ContrastiveStudyinChinese.................................................................................................8
CrossdisciplinaryStudyofRAAbstracts.........................................................................9
SummaryoftheLiteratureReview...................................................................................10
3 METHODOLOGY................................................................................................................................12
TheDataSet.................................................................................................................................12
TheAnalyticalFramework....................................................................................................14
MethodofAnalyses..................................................................................................................15
SummaryoftheMethodology..............................................................................................17
4 RHETORICALORGANIZATIONOFABSTRACTS..................................................................18
CrosslinguisticAnalysisofLinguisticsAbstracts.......................................................18
Move1Introduction......................................................................................................20
Move2Purpose...............................................................................................................21
Move3Method.................................................................................................................22
Move4Product................................................................................................................23
Move5Conclusion..........................................................................................................24
CrosslinguisticAnalysisofChemistryAbstracts........................................................24
Move1Introduction......................................................................................................25

vi
Move2Purpose...............................................................................................................27
Move3Method.................................................................................................................28
Move4Product................................................................................................................30
Move5Conclusion..........................................................................................................31
SummaryoftheCrossLinguisticAnalysis.....................................................................31
CrossdisciplinaryAnalysisofRAAbstracts..................................................................32
LinguisticFeaturesAnalysis.................................................................................................36
SummaryoftheCrossdisciplinaryAnalysis.................................................................37
5 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................................................38
SummaryofFindings...............................................................................................................38
PedagogicalImplication.........................................................................................................40
FutureStudy................................................................................................................................41
REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................................................42
APPENDIX
SOURCESOFDATA:ABSTRACTSBYLANGUAGEBYDISCIPLINES............................45

vii
LISTOFTABLES
PAGE
Table1.FourGroupsofAbstracts...........................................................................................................12
Table2.AFrameworkforAbstractAnalysis......................................................................................15
Table3.FrequencyoftheOccurrenceofMovesintheLinguisticAbstracts.........................18
Table4.MoveStructureofTwentyLinguisticsAbstractsinEnglishandChinese.............19
Table5.FrequencyoftheOccurrenceofMovesintheChemistryAbstracts.......................25
Table6.MoveStructureofChemistryAbstractsinEnglishandChinese...............................26
Table7.TheAverageNumberofWordsandSentencesinChemistryAbstracts
andintheMethodMove................................................................................................................29
Table8.SummaryofMoveFrequency...................................................................................................33
Table9.MoveStructureandtheConventionalStructureofAbstractsin
LinguisticsandChemistry............................................................................................................34
Table10.FirstPersonPronounsinAbstracts....................................................................................36

viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Thanksfirstandforemosttomylovingfamilymembersincludingmyhusband
WenxuHong,mylittleangelJoyce,myparentsandmyparentsinlaw.Withouttheir
loveandfirmsupportduringmyentiretimeinschool,andespeciallythroughoutthe
writingofthisthesis,Iwouldhavenevermadeit.
Iwouldliketooffermythankstothemembersofmyentirethesiscommittee,
Dr.BettySamraj,Dr.ZhangZhengshengandDr.ChrisWerry.Drs.ZhangandWerry
dedicatedvaluabletimeandefforttoprovidemewithexpeditiousfeedback.Myutmost
gratitudegoestoDr.BettySamraj,thechairofmythesis,whogeneratedmyinterestin
thistopicandmotivatedmewithherenthusiasmformyproject.Throughoutthe
processofwritingthisthesis,shemadeinsightfulcommentsandpaidattentiontothe
detailsofmythesis.
Ialsotakepleasureinexpressingmyappreciationstomyfellowgraduate
students,especiallyVickyMellos,HirokoTownsend.Throughouttheseveralyearsin
graduateschool,theirfriendshipenabledmypassionforlearning.Iwasveryfortunate
tohavehadtheopportunitytobeoneofthem.

1
CHAPTER1
INTRODUCTION
Theresearcharticle(RA)isproducedtocommunicatenewknowledgeto
membersoftheacademiccommunityandpersuadethemtoaccepttheclaims(Hyland,
2000).Asthemostimportantgenreintheacademiccommunity,theRAhasreceived
broadattentioningenreanalysis.Moststudieshavefocusedontheanalysisofthe
organizationalpatternsofRAsectionsintermsoftheirconstituentmoves,suchasthe
studyoftheintroductionsection(Samraj,2002,2005;Swales,1990,2004),the
methodssection(Lim,2006),theresultssection(Taylor&Chen,1991;Yang&Allison,
2003),andthediscussionsection(e.g.,Yang&Allison,2003).Furthermore,thestudies
sometimeshavebeenaccompaniedbyanalysisofthegrammaticalandstylisticfeatures
thatcharacterizethesemovesonthesentencelevel,suchastheusesofhedging
(Hyland,1996),modality(SalagerMeyer,1992),personalpronouns(Pho,2008),and
citations(Swales,1990).
AgenrehasbeendefinedbySwalesandFeak(2009)asatypeoftextor
discoursedesignedtoachieveasetofcommunicativepurposes(p.1).Theyalso
pointedthattheRAisagenre,andothercomponentsoftheRAarepartgenres,for
example,theabstractoftheRA(Swales&Feak,2009).Theabstract,apartgenreofthe
RA,hasgainedsignificantattentioninrecentyears.Anabstractisabriefsummary
accompanyingtheRA.TheAmericanNationalStandardsInstitute(ANSI)definesitas
follows:[it]isanabbreviated,accuraterepresentationofthecontentsofadocument,
preferablypreparedbyitsauthor(s)forpublicationwithit(Lors2004,p.281).The
importanceofabstractshasbeenincreasinginrecentyearsduetotheexplosionof
informationintheacademicworld.Abstractshavebeenstatedtoconstitutethe
gatewaythatleadsreaderstotakeupanarticle,journalstoselectcontributions,or
organizersofconferencestoacceptorrejectpapers(Lors,2004,p.281).Thisis
especiallytrueintodaysbusyinformationworld.Nowadays,moreandmoreresearch
articlesareaccompaniedbyaninformativeabstract.

2
Moveanalysishasalsobeenemployedincontrastiverhetoric(CR),studying
culturalvariationindiscoursestructure.Kaplanstated,theculturalbackgroundofthe
authormightleadtovariationoftherhetoricalstructuresoftexts,andthatsuch
variationshouldbeconsideredinESLteachingprograms(Taylor&Chen,1991,p.
319).ConsideringthevariationsofRAstructuresamonglanguages,researcherswho
wishtosucceedthroughpublicationintheinternationalcommunitywillneedto
acquireawarenessofcrosslinguisticdifferencesintextstructures.Withthegrowing
internationalizationoftheacademiccommunity,moreandmorenonnativespeakers
(NNS)ofEnglishwanttodevelopawarenessandmasteryoverthewritingconventions
oftheAngloAmericanacademiccommunityinordertoacquireinternational
recognition.Duetothisfact,inthemajorityofcrosslinguisticanalysesoftheRA
structure,EnglishRAshavealwaysbeencomparedwithRAsinotherlanguages.
Asmentionedearlier,NNSsofEnglishtrytoacquireEnglishwritingconventions.
However,rhetoricalvariationsacrossdisciplinescannotbeignored.Uptonow,
discourseanalystshavebeenstudyingRAsinbroaddisciplines,suchasthegenre
analysisofsoftwareengineering,biochemistry,sociology(Brett,1994)andapplied
linguistics(Ozturk,2007).Althoughthesestudiesonlyfocusedonasinglediscipline,
theystillindicateddifferencesamongdisciplines.Inaddition,Samraj(2000)conducted
agenreanalysisonwildlifebehaviorandconservationbiology,twocloselyrelated
disciplines.Inthisinterdisciplinarygenrestudy,shefoundvariationsaswell.
PreviousstudieshaveinvestigatedRAabstractsfromaspecificdiscipline,such
asmedicine(SalgerMeyer,1992),appliedlinguistics(Santos,1996),andpsychology.
However,therehavealsobeenafewcrossdisciplinarystudies.AsfarasIknow,little
comparativeworkhasbeendoneonRAabstractsfromchemistryandotherdisciplines.
ThecurrentcrosslinguisticstudiesofabstractshavemainlyconsideredEnglishand
Europeanlanguageabstractsinspecializedfields,suchasSpanish(MartinMartin,
2003,inexperimentalsocialsciences),andFrench(VanBonn&Swales,2007,in
languagescience).ThecomparisonofthemacroandmicrostructureofChineseand
EnglishRAabstractshasalsobeenverylimitedinnumber(Jiang,2010,inapplied
linguistics;Ju,2004,inlanguagescience).

3
ThewidelyusedframeworkonRAabstractanalysesinpreviousstudieshas
beenIntroduction,Methods,ResultsandDiscussion(IMRD),followingthesectionsofa
RA.Inmystudy,amoreelaboratemodelproposedbyHyland(2000)willbeemployed,
whichincludesfivemoves:Introduction,Purpose,Method,ProductandConclusion.
ComparedwiththeIMRDmodel,thisframeworkdistinguishestheabstractspurpose
fromtheintroduction,becauseithasadifferentrolefromtheintroductionstypical
purposeofprovidingajustificationfortheresearch.Inthisframework,aproductmove
isadoptedinsteadoftheresultmove,asHyland(2000)clarifiedthatthismovecan
betteraccountforabstractsfromthesocialsciencefields,whichsometimesincludenot
onlyastatementofempiricalresultsbutalsoastatementoftheargument.
ThegoalofthisstudyistoexaminetherhetoricalstructuresofRAabstracts
writteninEnglishforaninternationallinguisticsjournalandaninternationalchemistry
journal,andthosewritteninChinese,whichwerepublishedinaChineselinguistics
journalandaChinesechemistryjournal.Theanalysiswillemploythe5move
framework.Followingotherstudiesoncontrastiveacademicwriting,suchasMelander,
SwalesandFredrickson(1997),thispaperdemonstratesthatthereareculturaland
disciplinaryfactorswhichmaycreatepreferencesforcertainrhetoricalstrategiesby
membersofdifferentacademicdiscoursecommunities.ThenIwillalsodiscusssome
variationsatthesentencelevel,suchasthetenseandvoiceoftheverbs,andthe
subjectsofthereportingclauses.BeforediscussingtheMethodsandResultsofthe
presentstudy,IwilldiscussgenreanalysisofRAsandreviewsomepreviousstudiesin
thefieldinChapter2.

4
CHAPTER2
LITERATUREREVIEW
Thispresentstudycanbecalledadualcontrastivegenreanalysis,comparingthe
effectsoflanguagesanddisciplinesonRAabstracts.ItinvolvesfoursetsofRAabstracts
fromtwodifferentdisciplines,linguisticsandchemistry,writtenintwolanguages,
EnglishandChinese.First,generalinformationaboutthemovestepframeworkusedin
researcharticleanalysiswillbeintroduced.Then,previousstudiesthathaveinformed
thispresentstudywillbediscussed.Thesestudiesinvolveanalysesofrhetorical
divisionsofRAs,especiallyRAabstracts.Lastly,areviewofstudiesonthecomparison
ofwritingindifferentlanguagesanddifferentdisciplineswillbepresented.
MOVESTEPANALYSISINRA
Theearlydefinitionofgenreisaclassofcommunicativeevents,themembersof
whichsharesomesetofcommunicativepurposes(Swales,1990,p.58).Thedefinition
showsthatagenreiscategorizedaccordingtoitscommunicativepurpose.A
descriptionoftherhetoricalstructureofagenreintermsofmoveshasplayedan
importantroleinthegenreanalysisfield.Asoneofthepioneers,Swales(1981,1990)
conductedamovestepanalysisonthestructureofRAintroductions.Afterthat,genre
analystshavebeencarryingoutnumerousstudiesofRAdiscourseintermsofthemove
structures,suchasSantos(1996),Samraj(2002,2005),andLors(2004).However,
identifyinggenresaccordingtoSwales(1990)definitionhasbeenproblematic.
AskehaveandSwales(2001)notedthatthecommonpurposeofatextisnotalways
clearandsometextsmayhavemultiplecommunicativepurposes.Evenso,genrestudy
intermsofmovestepanalysishasbeengrowinginimportanceinthelasttwodecades,
becausesuchanalysishasgreatvalueinunderstandingthenatureofdiscourse.In
addition,theresultsofmovestepanalyseshavevaluablepedagogicalimplicationsfor
readingandwritingclasses.

5
Amoveingenreanalysisisdefinedasadiscoursalorrhetoricalunitthat
performsacoherentcommunicativefunctioninawrittenorspokendiscourse(Swales,
2004,p.2289).Pho(2009)indicated,eachmovehasitsowncommunicativepurpose,
which,togetherwithothermoves,contributestothegeneralcommunicativepurposeof
thetext(p.17).Eachrhetoricalmovecanberealizedbyoneormoresteps,butnotall
movescompriseconstituentsteps(Samraj,2009).Bothmovesandstepsarefunctional
units,andcanbeoptionalorobligatoryinagenre.Somemovesorstepsoccurring
regularlyinagenreareconsideredobligatory;othersoccurringlessfrequentlyare
consideredoptional.However,criteriafordefininganobligatoryunitarenotconsistent.
Insomestudies,anobligatorymoveorstep,whichreferstoaunit,occursinover50%
ofasetoftexts,orover60%ofasetoftexts,orevenabove80%ofasetoftexts.
Theidentificationofmovesisacrucialstepinarhetoricalstructureanalysis.
Swales(2004)indicatedthattheidentificationofmoves,andconsequentlythesetting
ofmoveboundaries,isestablishedbyamixedbagofcriteria(Swales,2004,p.229).
Researchershavealsoturnedtolinguisticfeaturestohelpthemidentifymovesand
theirboundaries.TheanalysesofmicrolevelfeaturesofRAshavebeenthesubjectof
manygenrestudies(Lim,2006;Pho,2008).
GENREANALYSISOFRASECTIONS
TheRAisoneofthemostwidelyresearchedgenresinacademicwriting.Within
thestudiesexaminingtheorganizationalpatternsofRAsections,themainfocusof
interesthasbeenontheintroductionsectionofRAs.Asearlyasin1981,Swales
analyzedthestructureofRAintroductionacrossarangeoffields,andclaimedthat
therewasabasicfourmovestructureintheRAintroduction:1.Establishingthe
researchfield,2.Reportingpreviousresearch,3.Preparingforpresentresearch,and4.
Introducingpresentresearch.In1990,Swalesrevisedthestructuretoathreemove
pattern,calledthecreatearesearchspacemodel(CARSmodel):1.Establishinga
territory,2.Establishinganiche,and3.Occupyingtheniche.TheCARSmodelhas
influencednumerouslaterstudiesonthestructureoftheintroduction(Bhatia,1997;
Samraj,2002,2005).AsSwales(2004)said,thebasicallythreepartmodelforEnglish
languageintroductionsinmanyleadingjournalsisorhasbecomeprototypical(p.

6
226).SomescholarslatermodifiedtheCARSmodelinordertoaccountforthetexts
analyzed.Forexample,Samraj(2002)analyzedtheRAintroductionsectionfromtwo
disciplines,conservationbiologyandwildlifebehavior,byusingtheCARSmodel.She
revealedthatoneelementthediscussionofpreviousresearchwasnotonlyfoundin
M1,Establishingaterritory,butalsoplayedanimportantroleintheothertwomoves,
EstablishinganicheandOccupyingtheniche.Shecalleditafreestandingsubstep(p.
16)andclaimed,itcanbeemployedintherealizationofanystepintheintroduction
(p.16).ShepresentedarevisedCARSmodel.
ThemethodsectionisthemoststraightforwardpartoftheRA,butithasgained
theleastattentionfromgenreanalysts.Lim(2006)conductedadetailedmovestep
analysisonthemethodsectionofbusinessmanagementRAsinordertodemonstrate
howthelinguisticfeaturesrelatetothewriterscommunicativeintentionsandhowthe
linguisticchoicesfulfilltheseintentions.Heidentifiedonemovepreviewtheresults,
whichhasneverbeenmentionedinotheranalysesofthemethodsectionofRAs(Brett,
1994).
Therehavebeenseveralstudiesontheresultanddiscussionsections,suchas
Yang&Allison(2003).Holmes(2001)conductedacrosslinguisticanalysisonRA
discussionsectiononagriculturaleconomics,andtheRAswerewrittenbyauthorsfrom
theU.S.,Canada,UnitedKingdom,AustralianandIndia.Hepointedoutthatcultural
variationshadinfluenceonthesequenceofthemoves.YangandAllison(2003)
examinedappliedlinguisticsRAs.Theyidentifiedspecificorganizationalchoiceswithin
thesectionsofresults,resultsanddiscussion,discussion,conclusion,andpedagogic
implications.Theyfoundtherewereprimarymovesinthesections,andalsosome
overlappingmovesbetweensections.
GENREANALYSISOFRAABSTRACTS
MillionsofRAsarebeingpublishedaroundtheresearchworldeveryyear,and
abstractshavebecomeacrucialelementtohelpreadersmakeadecisioninselecting
readings.Lors(2004)hasstatedthatRAabstractsaredifferentfromRAsinthe
followingthreeaspects:function,rhetoricalstructureandlinguisticrealizations.
Becauseoftheincreasinginterestinabstracts,quiteafewanalysesonthepartgenre

7
havebeenconducted(Lors,2004;Pho,2008;Samraj,2005;Santos,1996;VonBonn&
Swales,2007).Santos(1996)chosetoexplorethetextualorganizationofRAabstracts
attwolevels:first,thefeaturesthatconstituteabstractsatthemacroleveloftextual
organization,andsecond,thesentencelevelfeaturesatthemicroleveloftextual
analysis.NinetyfourRAabstractsfromthefieldofappliedlinguisticswereanalyzed.
Usinghismodeloffivemainmoves,heidentifiedtheRAabstractsas:situatingthe
research(M1),presentingtheresearch(M2),describingthemethodology(M3),
summarizingtheresults(M4),anddiscussingtheresearch(M5).Santosreportedthat
M2andM3wereessentiallyobligatorymovesinthegenre,anddifferentmoves
requireddifferentlinguisticresourcestorealizetheirpurposesintermsof
thematization,tensechoice,andvoicechoice.
UsingtheCARSmodelandtheIMRDmodel,Lors(2004)conductedagenre
analysisonacorpusof36RAabstractsfromthefieldoflinguistics.Shefoundthat
about61%ofRAabstractsfollowedtheIMRDstructure,about31%ofthemfollowed
theCARSstructure,and8%displayedthetwostructures.Thethreetypesfulfillthree
differentfunctions:theinformative,theindicative,andtheinformativeindicative
function.Lorsindicatedthattheresultsofthestudymightexplainwhyprevious
studiesdidnotagreeontherhetoricalorganizationsofabstractsanddescribedthemin
veryflexibleterms.
ChineselinguistsalsohaveconductedsomestudiesonEnglishabstractstohelp
postgraduatesimprovetheirEnglishwriting.GeandYang(2005)haveinvestigated
Englishabstractsforthediscoursestructuresandlinguisticfeaturesinthreedisciplines
(engineering,financeandsurgery)usinga5movemodel.Theresultsshowedthatmost
oftheabstractsfollowedthesamemovesequencebuttherewasasignificantdifference
inthefrequencyofmovesinrelationtodisciplinarycharacteristics.Forexample,45%
ofthesurgeryabstractshadamethodmove,butonly14%ofthefinanceabstractshad
thismove.
CONTRASTIVERHETORICINRAABSTRACTS
TheRAabstracthasgainedalotofattentioninthefieldofcrosslinguistic
studies(e.g.,MartinMartin,2003;VanBonn&Swales,2007),becausethereismore

8
andmoreacademiccommunicationamongcountriesinrecentyears.ResearchinCR
hasshownthatwritersexpress,structure,andpresentideasandresearchdifferently
fromeachotherduetothediversityoftheircultureandbackgrounds.
Inagenrestudyoftheabstractsectionofexperimentalsocialsciences,Martin
Martin(2003)comparedRAabstractswritteninEnglishandSpanish.Heinvestigated
themacrostructureofthesetextsbasedontheIMRDmodel.Themaindistinctionwas
thevariationintheconstituentsoftheintroductionsectionandthefrequencyofthe
resultsectioninSpanish.Thegeneralstructuresoftheintroductionweresimilarto
thosewritteninEnglish.HeappliedtheCARSmodeltotheintroductionunit,and
identifiedthreemovesinthissection.SpanishwritersusuallydidnotincludeMove2,
establishinganicheinthefield,inintroductionsintheirabstracts.Heconcludedthat
therhetoricalstructureofscientificdiscourseisnotuniversal.Socioculturalfactors
leadtothedifferencesincommunities,andhesuggestedthatthesourceofthe
rhetoricalvariationlayintherelationshipbetweenwritersandthediscourse
community.
VanBonnandSwales(2007)reportedintheirstudythatEnglishandFrenchRA
abstractsinthelanguagesciencesfollowtheIMRDmodel.Insteadofdifferencesinthe
rhetoricalstructuresoftheRAabstracts,thevariationemergedinlinguisticfeatures,
includingthevoiceoftheverbs,andthechoiceofpersonalpronounsandtransition
words.TheyalsorevealedthatEnglishauthorsjustifytheirresearchbyindicatingwhy
thisresearch(VanBonn&Swales,2007,p.97),butFrenchauthorsusuallyidentifythe
aimoftheirworkbyansweringwhattheresearchattemptstodo(VanBonn&Swales,
2007,p.97).
CONTRASTIVESTUDYINCHINESE
InChina,therehavealsobeensomestudiesonthecomparisonofabstract
writingorotherpartgenrewritinginEnglishandChinese.Duetothedifferent
grammaticalsystemstheybelongto,asfarasIknow,nolinguisticfeaturesanalyses
haveeverbeenconductedonthem.
Ju(2004)conductedacontrastivestudyofabstractsinEnglishandChineseRAs.
Sherandomlyselected20Englishabstractsand20Chineseabstractsinthefieldof

9
languagesciences,andappliedtheIMRDmodeltoidentifytheirgenericstructures.She
foundthatEnglishabstractsusuallyhaveamorecompletestructureincludingallfour
moves,butChineseabstractstendtoomittheintroductionmoveandthediscussion
move.Onestrikingdifferencelayinthewaytostatethepurposeofthestudyinthe
introductionmove.EnglishauthorstypicallyopentheabstractbystatingThispaper
discussesorThispaperexplains,whichcanbeconsideredawriterresponsiblepattern,
whereasChineseauthorschooseamoreindirectwaytodescribeordiscusstheir
purposeinseveralsentences,whichcanbeconsideredareaderresponsiblepattern.
Inaveryrecentstudy,Jiang(2010)conductedacontrastivestudyonthe
rhetoricalstructureofintroductionsinEnglishandChineseappliedlinguisticsRAs.He
modifiedtheCARSmodelbyaddingeightmorestepsaccordingtothedisciplinary
features,andthemodifiedmodelwasusedastheanalyticalframeworkinhisstudy.The
studyshowedthatalthoughEnglishabstractshadamorecomplicatedstructureand
morediversifiedandflexibleoptionsofstepsinMove3,occupyingtheniche,no
significantdifferenceswereidentifiedinbothmacroandmicrostructuresbetween
theintroductionsinthetwolanguages.Healsonoticedthattheliteraturereviewwas
adoptedinEnglishintroductionsmorefrequentlythaninChineseintroductions.
CROSSDISCIPLINARYSTUDYOFRAABSTRACTS
GenreanalystshaveconductedstudiesonthestructureofRAabstractsandthe
variationofthestructuresacrossdisciplines(e.g.,Melander,Swales&Fredrickson,
1997;Pho,2008;Samraj,2005).Thesestudieshavecomparedtherhetoricalstructures
acrossvariousdisciplines,andhaveshowndifferencesingenrestructure.
Samraj(2005)comparedRAabstractsfromtwocloselyrelateddisciplines:
conservationbiologyandwildlifebehavior.Sheanalyzedatotalof24RAabstracts
randomlyselectedfromtwojournals.ShefoundthattheoveralllayoutoftheRA
abstractswassimilar:PurposeMethodsResultsConclusions.However,whenshe
examinedaspectsoftheabstractsbeyondthetraditionalmoves,differencesstoodout.
Therhetoricalstructureinconservativebiologyabstractsincludedsomemoves
ascribedtoRAintroductions,forinstance,centralityclaims,buttheywerenotpresent

10
inwildlifebehaviorabstracts.Sheconcludedthattherhetoricalstructuresofeven
closelyrelateddisciplinescouldvary.
Pho(2008)analyzedtherhetoricalorganization,thelinguisticrealizationof
movesandauthorialstancein30abstractsfromthreejournalsintwodisciplines:
appliedlinguisticsandeducationaltechnology.Henotedthatthreemoves,presenting
theresearch,summarizingthefindingsanddescribingthemethodology,werefoundin
almostalltheabstracts.Healsopointedoutthatthecombinationofcertainlinguistic
featureswouldhelpdistinguishonemovefromtheothermoves,suchasthe
grammaticalsubjects,verbtenseandvoice.Hebelievedthatmoveidentificationshould
bebasedonthesemanticmeaningsofeachmoveratherthanlinguisticfeatureswhich
characterizethemove,becauseitavoidsthecircularityofmoveidentification(Pho,
2008,p.246)andmakesthelinguisticrealizationsofmovesandauthorialstancemore
objective(Pho,2008,p.247).
Melander,Swales&Fredrickson(1997)analyzedRAabstractswritingfrom
threedisciplines:biology,medicineandlinguistics,inEnglishandSwedish.Inthecross
disciplinaryandcrosslinguisticanalysis,theyfoundthatbothdisciplineandculture
playimportantrolesinwriting.Theanswertothequestionastowhetherdisciplineor
culturehasagreaterinfluenceonwritersisdependentonthefields;withinlinguistics
therewerestrongculturaldifferences,withinbiologythetextswereconsistent,and
withinmedicinetheystillhadnoclearanswertothequestion.
SUMMARYOFTHELITERATUREREVIEW
Moveanalysishasbeenbroadlyemployedinidentifyingtheconnectionand
variationamonggenresandpartgenresintheacademicworld.Theinfluencesof
disciplinesandlanguagesonagenresmovestructurehavebeenexploredinquiteafew
previousstudies.Inaddition,genreanalystshaveconductedanumberofstudiesonthe
abstract,animportantpartgenre.However,mostofthestudiesconcerntheabstracts
ofsocialsciences,forexample,thelanguagesciences.Littlehasbeendoneonnatural
sciencessuchaschemistry.Asmentionedearlier,abstractsproducedinEnglishand
Europeanlanguageshavebeenanalyzedinseveralstudies.Chinese,asthemostwidely
usedlanguage,hasseldombeeninvolvedincrossculturalstudiesongenreanalysis.

11
Thisstudyisintendedtofillthegapinthegenreanalysisfieldbyexaminingthe
rhetoricalstructuresofabstractsintwodisciplines,linguisticsandchemistry,and
acrosstwolanguages,EnglishandChinese.Thenextchapter,Chapter3,willpresentthe
methodologyemployedinthestudy.

12
CHAPTER3
METHODOLOGY
Thischapterintroducesthemethodologyemployedinthisstudy.Itbeginswitha
descriptionofthedataset,thentheanalyticframeworkforthestudy,andthe
procedurestodeterminetheabstractsrhetoricalstructure.
THEDATASET
Thetextsinmydatasetincludeintotal40RAabstractsasshowninTable1
fromtwodisciplines,linguisticsandchemistry,intwolanguages,English,thelingua
francaofacademicpublications,andChinese,themostwidelyusedlanguage.
Linguisticsbelongstothesocialscienceorsoftdiscipline(Hyland,2000,p.9),and
chemistrybelongstothenaturalscienceorharddiscipline(Hyland,2000,p.9).
Table1.FourGroupsofAbstracts
Linguistics Chemistry
English AppliedLinguistics(AL) JournalofAmerican
ChemistrySociety(JACS)
Chinese ForeignLanguage
TeachingandResearch
(FLTR)
ACTACHIMICASINICA
(ACS)
RAabstractswererandomlychosenfromrecentpublicationsinleadingjournals
intheirrespectivefields.TheRAabstractsinthedatasetwerepublishedbetween2008
and2010.TheEnglishtextsinclude20RAabstractspublishedintheUnitedStates:10
selectedfromaninternationallinguisticsjournalAppliedLinguistics(AL)and10from
aninternationalchemistryjournalJournalofAmericanChemistrySociety(JACS).
Likewise,theChinesetextsconstitute20RAabstractspublishedinthePeoples
RepublicofChina:10fromalinguisticsjournalForeignLanguageTeachingand

13
Research(FLTR)and10fromachemistryjournalACTACHIMICASINICA(ACS).All
selectedabstractsfromlinguisticjournalsarefromthefieldofappliedlinguistics,and
thechemistryabstractsfocusonorganicchemistry.
Whenconductingstudiesincontrastiveanalysis,Connor,NagelhoutandRozycki
(2008)pointedoutthatitisimportanttoestablishavalidcriterionofcomparison
betweencorpora,inotherwords,toexaminesetsofcomparableoriginaltextswith
maximumsimilaritywrittenintwoormorelanguages.Theselectedjournalsare
leadingjournalsintheiracademicsocieties,andpublicationsinthejournalsarewidely
citedintheirsubjectfield.AlthoughtheinternationalRAabstractswerewrittenby
authorsfromdifferentcountries,includingnativeandnonnativewriters,theirEnglish
writingproficiencycanbetakentobeatanativeornearnativelevelsincethearticles
havebeenpublishedintheseleadingacademicjournals.TheauthorsoftheChineseRAs
wrotetheabstractsintheirnativelanguage,thatis,Chinese.Theexamplesfromthe
ChineseabstractshavebeentranslatedandwillbepresentedinEnglish.
Eachabstractcontainsonesingleparagraph.ThelinguisticsRAabstractsin
Englishhaveanaverageof173.5words,andinChinesetheabstractshave128.95
words(257.9characters)onaverage,whilethechemistryRAabstractscontainan
averageof164.7wordsinEnglishand112.65words(225.3characters)inChinese.
Chinesewordsaretypicallytwosyllables(characters)long,soChineseabstractsare
shorter.Thedifferencebetweenthenumbersofthewordshasnoinfluenceonthe
rhetoricalanalysis.
Usually,amoveunitiscomposedofoneormoresentencesoratleastaclause.
However,inthepresentstudy,therearesomemovesthatappearintheformofanoun
phraseasinExample1:
1. ThisstudyfocusedonaChinesespeakinggraduatestudent[M3Method]in
electricalengineeringwhoanalyzedgenreexemplarsinpreparationforwriting
[M2Purpose].[EnAL8]
1
TheembeddedM3,whichdescribesthesubjectofthestudy,ispartofthemajor
move,M2.Someresearchershavediscussedthisphenomenonintheirstudies.Santos

1
En=EnglishThenumberreferstotheabstractslistedintheAppendix.

14
(1996)foundthatDescribingthemethodologymoveinappliedlinguisticsRAabstracts
mergeswithothermovespartiallyortotally.Pho(2008)foundthatDescribingthe
methodologymovecouldbeembeddedineitherthePresentingtheresearchmoveor
SummarizingthefindingsmoveintheRAabstractsofappliedlinguisticsand
educationaltechnology.Theybothattributedthehybridmovetothecondensed
structureofabstracts.Therefore,fortheRAabstractsinthepresentstudy,amovewill
bedefinedasastructurerangingfromseveralsentencestoaclauseorevenanoun
phrase.
THEANALYTICALFRAMEWORK
Inthisstudy,Hylands(2000)fivemovemodelwasusedtoidentifythe
rhetoricalstructureofthefoursetsoftexts.Eachmoveperformsaspecificrhetorical
function.Accordingtothismodel,thefivemovesare:Introduction(M1),Purpose(M2),
Method(M3),Product(M4),andConclusion(M5).AsshowninTable2,eachmove
representstherealizationofacommunicativepurpose(Hyland,2000).Incontrastto
thetraditionalIMRDmodel,hedistinguishedthewriterspurposefromthe
introductionmove,whereitisoftenlocated.
ThelinearorderofmovescanbeseeninthefollowingEnglishlinguisticsRA
abstractfromAppliedLinguisticsasinExample2:
2. Abstract
Thispaperinvestigateswhetheranydifferenceexistsinthedegreeofsecond
languageattritionbetweentwosiblingsintermsofgrammaticalcomplexity,
grammaticalaccuracy,lexicalcomplexity,andlexicalproductivitybasedontheir
storytellingdatacollectedovertheperiodof31months.[M2Purpose]The
subjects'L1andL2areJapaneseandEnglish,respectively.Thesiblings(one
male,onefemale)havesimilarL2profileswithrespecttoattainedproficiency,
includingliteracy,butdifferinage.[M3Method]Theagesofreturninghome
were7;0,anagereportedtobemorevulnerabletoattritionand10;0,anage
reportedtobemoreresistant.Thesiblingsshowedsimilarattritionpatterns
suggestingthatanattainedhighproficiencylevelincludingtheacquisitionof
literacyskillsisanimportantfactorinthemaintenanceofL2.Oneexceptionwas
grammaticalaccuracy,butthedifferencesurfacedonlyafterthesecondyear,
indicatingthattheperiodofdisusewasdifferentiallyaffectedaccordingtotheir
ages.[M4Product]Theyoungersibling'sdataalsosuggestthatmaturational
factorsmayplayaroleinsuccessfullyhandlinggrammaticalcomplexityand
accuracysimultaneously.[M5Conclusion][EnAL2]

15
Table2.AFrameworkforAbstractAnalysis
Moves Function
1.Introduction Establishescontextofthepaperandmotivatestheresearch
ordiscussion.
2.Purpose Indicatespurpose,thesisorhypothesis,outlinestheintention
behindthepaper.
3.Method Providesinformationondesign,procedures,assumptions,
approach,data,etc.
4.Product Statesmainfindingsorresults,theargument,orwhatwas
accomplished
5.Conclusion Interpretsorextendsresultsbeyondscopeofpaper,draws
inferences,pointstoapplicationsorwiderimplications.
Source:Hyland,K.(2000).Disciplinarydiscourses:Socialinteractionsinacademicwriting.
London:Longman.
METHODOFANALYSES
Intheanalysisofthetexts,firstIexaminedtherhetoricalstructureofabstracts
byexaminingtheoveralltextualorganizationofeachabstractasshowninTable2,
followingHylands(2000)model.AsdiscussedbyAckland(2009),theidentificationof
movesandconsequentlythesettingofmoveboundariesinabstractswereusually
accomplishedthroughtwoapproaches,onewasbasedonthecontentoftheabstract,
calledatopdownapproach,andtheotheroneisbasedonlinguisticsignals,calleda
bottomupapproach.Inthisstudy,thetextualboundariesoftheseunitswere
identifiedprimarilyonthebasisofsemanticcriteria,thatis,thetopdownapproach.
Theidentificationofeachmoveinthedatasetswasquitestraightforwardonthe
whole.However,Ihadahardtimedistinguishingtheboundarybetweentheproduct
unit(M4)andtheconclusionunit(M5)inlinguisticsRAabstracts.Intheend,theunits
thatsummarizetheresultsbyanswering,Whatdidyoufind?werecategorizedasthe
product,whichusuallysummarizebrieflythemainfindingsoftheresearchtogether
withabasicgeneralizationand/orprovidethemainargumentasinExample3;onthe
otherhand,thoseunitsthatdiscusstheresearchbyevaluatingthefindings,relatingthe

16
reportedresearchtothebroadfield,researchorreallifewerecategorizedas
conclusionsasinExample4:
3. Myanalysisofthedatarevealsthisstudent'stwoprominentandinterrelated
waysofanalyzingthediscourselevelgenericfeaturesindisciplinespecific
genreexemplars.Theyare(a)rhetorical,asevidencedinhisconsistentattention
notonlytothegenericfeatures,butalsototheunderlyingrhetoricalparameters,
suchasreader,writer,andpurposeand(b)evaluative,asshowninhis
increasinglysophisticatedevaluationofthediscourselevelgenericfeaturesin
thegenreexemplars.[EnAL9]
4. Thestudent'srhetoricalandevaluativereadingofthegenreexemplars
highlightsthepotentialpowerofgenreasanexplicit,supportivetoolfor
buildingacademicliteracy.[EnAL9]
InthechemistryRAabstractanalysis,itwasnoteasytodistinguishthepurpose
move(M2)fromtheproductmove(M4).Therearetwocriteriaformetofollow:oneis
atthesemanticslevel.Thepurposemoveusuallyanswersthequestion,Whatisthe
studyabout?Incontrast,theproductmoveanswersthequestion,Whatdoyoufind?
Theotherlevelistheuseofpresentationverbs,suchasdiscuss,describe,detail,explore
andaddresstomarkthepurposemove,andtheuseofverbssuchasshow,demonstrate,
findandestablishtoindicatetheresultmove.Examples5and6showthepurposemove
andresultmoverespectively:
5. Thestereocontrolledtotalsynthesisof4hydroxydictyolactoneamemberof
thexenicanediterpenefamilyofnaturalproduxts,isdescribed.[EnJACS6]
6. ThefirsttotalsynthesisoftheAkuamililineakaloidhasbeenaccomplishedin
about1%overallyieldin31steps.[EnJACS5]
Inpreviousstudies,differentresearchershaveusedvariousmeasuresfor
whetheramoveshouldbeconsideredobligatoryasdiscussedinchapter1.Inmystudy,
aparticularmoveisconsideredobligatorywhenithappensinthetextsover80percent
ofthecases.Inthisregard,toberecognizedasaconventionalmove,amovemustoccur
in80%oftheappropriatesectionsinthecorpus.Otherwise,itisconsideredoptional.
Secondly,afewlinguisticfeatures,namelythetenseandthevoiceofverbsand
firstpersonalpronouns,whichcharacterizeeachmoveonthesentencelevelwere
identified.However,LiandThompson(1976)statedthatEnglishisasubjectprominent
(SP)languageandChineseisatopicprominent(TP)language.Thedistinctionsofthe
twolanguagesareinSPlanguages,thestructureofsentencesfavorsadescriptionin

17
whichthegrammaticalrelationsubjectpredicateplaysmajorroles;inTPlanguage,the
basicstructureofsentencesfavorsadescriptioninwhichthegrammaticalrelation
topiccommentplaysamajorrole(Li&Thompson,1976,p.459).Theanalysesofthe
linguisticfeaturesoftheRAabstractsweremainlycarriedouttoidentifythefeaturesin
EnglishlinguisticsandchemistryRAabstractssinceChinesehasasignificantlydifferent
grammaticalsystemfromEnglish(Li&Thompson,1976).
SUMMARYOFTHEMETHODOLOGY
Insummary,40RAabstractsfromtwodisciplinesintwolanguageswere
randomlychosenfromrecentpublishedleadingjournals.First,theoverallorganization
oftheRAabstractswasanalyzedbasedonHylands(2000)fivemovemodel.Then,
certainlinguisticfeaturesofthemoveswereanalyzedintheEnglishabstracts.The
resultsoftheseanalysesarepresentedinChapter4.

18
CHAPTER4
RHETORICALORGANIZATIONOFABSTRACTS
Thischapterdiscussesthevariationinrhetoricalstructureandlinguistic
featuresofRAabstractsacrosslanguagesandacrossdisciplines.Thecrosslinguistic
analysesareconductedintwolanguages:EnglishandChinese,andthecross
disciplinaryanalysesareconductedonRAabstractsintwodisciplines:linguistics,
whichbelongstothesocialscienceorsoftdiscipline(Hyland,2000)andchemistry,
whichisanaturalscienceorharddiscipline(Hyland,2000).Thischapterreportsthe
resultsofthesetwokindsofanalysesinfivesections.
CROSSLINGUISTICANALYSISOFLINGUISTICSABSTRACTS
Hyland(2000)determinedthatmorethan95percentoftheabstractshadall
fivemovesinhisstudyon800abstracts.Similartohisfinding,inthisstudy,mostofthe
linguisticsabstractsonlyhavefourbasicstructuralcomponents:thepurposemove
(M2),themethodmove(M3),theproductmove(M4)andtheconclusionmove(M5)in
bothEnglishandChinese,asshowninTable3.TheM2M3M4M5patternemergesas
theconventionalschemaintheabstractsinbothlanguages.
Table3.FrequencyoftheOccurrenceofMovesintheLinguisticAbstracts
MoveEnglishChinese
1.Introduction4(40%)2(20%)
2.Purpose10(100%)10(100%)
3.Method10(100%)10(100%)
4.Product10(100%)10(100%)
5.Conclusion10(100%)7(70%)
TheresultsinTable3showthatthepurposemove(M2),themethodmove(M3)
andtheproductmove(M4)arethemostfrequentandobligatorymovesinbothgroups

19
ofabstracts.SuchfindingsareinlinewiththoseofSantoss(1996)withthepurpose
moveandthemethodmoveoccurringinalmostalltheabstracts.Incontrast,theother
twomoves,theintroductionmove(M1)andtheconclusionmove(M5)occurless
frequently.
Itisapparentthatnotalloftheabstractsfollowtheconventionalstructure.As
showninTable4,variationsexistinabstractsirrespectiveofauthorshipintermsof
additionordeletionofoneortwomovesorreorderingofmoves.Anembedding
subordinatemovewithinamajormoveisindicatedinTable4bysquarebrackets.
Table4.MoveStructureofTwentyLinguisticsAbstractsinEnglishandChinese
Journal Structure Journal Structure
AL
English
English:
1. M2M3M1M4M5
2. M2M3M4M5
3. M2M3M4M5
4. M2M3M4M5
5. M2M3M4M5
6. M2M3M4M5
7. M2M3M2M4M5
8. M1[M2/M3]M4M5
9. M1[M2/M3]M4M5
10.M1M2M3M4M5
FLTR
Chinese
Chinese:
1. M2M3M4M5
2. M2M3M4M5
3. M2M3M4M5
4. [M2/M3]M4M5
5. [M2/M3]M1M4M5
6. M2M3M4M5
7. M1[M2/M3]M4M5
8. M2M3M4
9. M2M3M4
10.M2M3M4
AfewabstractscontainmorethanoneofthesevariationsasseeninTable4(e.g.,
Chinese5,whichembedsM3withinM2,andreordersthenormalsequencewiththe
insertionofM1).Basically,theM2M3M4M5patternisthemostcommonstructure.Of
the20abstracts,ninefollowit,whichisconsistentwithHylands(2000)result,andsix
haveamorecompletestructurewithM1.Onlyafewtextscontainallfivemoves.This
trendissimilarineachofthetwogroups.Themovedeletionpatternconstitutesthree

20
outofthetwentyRAabstracts(e.g.,Chinese8,9,10).Themovereorderingpatternis
causedbythepostposingofM1(e.g.,Chinese5,English1).
MoveembeddingoccursonlywithM3,andthismoveisusuallyembeddedinM2
asshowninTable4.Santos(1996)referredtotheembeddedmoveasahybridmove
(p.492).Pho(2008)alsonotedtheflexibilityofthisparticularmoveinhisstudyand
statedthat,themethodsofthestudycanbeexpressedinaparticipialphraseatthe
beginningofasentencepresentingtheresearch(p.238).
Themajorityoftheabstractsfollowthesamesequenceofrhetoricalstructure:
M1M2M3M4M5.However,thepostposingofM1resultsinareorderingofthemove
pattern.ThephenomenonofreorderingismorecommoninEnglishabstractsthanin
ChineseabstractsasshowninTable4.
Move1Introduction
Theinitialmoveusuallylocatesthecurrentresearchbystatingcurrent
knowledgeandbyprovidingadiscussionofpreviousresearch.Additionally,theauthor
mayjustifyhis/herresearchafterpresentingaproblemoragap.
ThereareonlysixinstancesofM1foundintheabstracts,fourinEnglish,and
twoinChinese.MostoftheM1sintheabstractsfunctionasastatementofcurrent
knowledgeasshowninExample7and/oridentifyaproblemoragapasshownin
Example8:
7. Thestudybuildsonearlierresearcharguingthatinteractionalroutinesfacilitate
childrensparticipationinsocialactivities,andthereforepromotelanguage
learning.[EnAL5]
8. SomeresearchersbelievethattheESPgenrebasedframeworkofwriting
instructioniseffectiveinteachingdisciplinespecificEnglishEAPwritingtoL2
learners,especiallytoadvancedL2graduatestudents[currentknowledge].
However,studiesexaminingstudents'genrebasedlearninginsuchaframework
arestillunderrepresentedincurrentESPgenrebasedliterature[problem/gap].
[EnAL9]
Samraj(2009)statedthismovecouldeitherserveapersuasiveoraneutral
contextualizingfunction.Ascanbeseenfromthedata,fiveoutofsixM1strytosell
theirresearchtoabusyreadershipexceptforoneM1inChinese.Inordertofulfillthe
persuasivefunction,theseM1sdiscusspreviousresearchorstatecurrentknowledgeto

21
motivatethereaders.OneChineseM1merelyprovidesbackgroundknowledgeto
readerstomaketheabstractmoreaccessibletoreaders,andcontextualizesthestudy.
AsshowninExample9,M1justdefinessyntacticcomplexity:
9. Syntacticcomplexityiscategorizedintounitlength,measuredbyTunitlength
andclauselength,andclausaldensityordegreeofembeddedness,measuredby
Tunitcomplexityratioanddependentclauseratio.)[ChFLTR5]
2
PreviousresearchershaveclaimedthatM1isusuallytheopeningmoveinRA
abstracts,whileinmystudy,onlyfouroccurrencesofM1(3inEnglish,1inChinese)are
initial,andtheothertwoareplacedbeforeM4orafterM3,indicatingvariationinthe
linearorderinRAabstractsinlinguistics.Theauthorshavethefreedomtodecidewhat
movetheywillfirsthighlight.InlinguisticsRAabstracts,authorsusuallypickthe
purposemove(M2)orintroductionmove(M1)astheinitialmove.
M1isincludedin40%oftheEnglishabstracts,butonlyin20%ofChinese
abstracts,indicatingthatinternationaljournalauthorsmayconsidersituatingthe
researchasanimportantpartoftheabstractwhileChineseauthorsdosomuchless.
Move2Purpose
Thepurposemoveisusedtoforegroundthepurposeofthestudy.VanBonn&
Swales(2007)statedthatM2isusuallycategorizedintotwoforms:thedescriptive
form,whichfocusesondescribingthefeaturesofthestudy,orthepurposiveform,
whichismarkedbytheuseofanexpressionsuchastheaimorthegoal.Itis
interestingtoseethatdescriptiveM2sconstituteallofthecasesinthestudyasshown
inExamples10and11.Santos(1996)andVanBonn&Swales(2007)hadsimilar
findingswhentheyanalyzedEnglishabstractsintheirstudy.
10. Thestudyinvestigatestheeffectofexplicitcontrastiveanalysisandtranslation
activitiesontheincidentalacquisitionofsinglewordsandcollocations.[EnAL
4]
11. Thispaperreportsacrosssectionalstudyofthechangingpatternsofsyntactic
complexityintheessaysbyEFLlearnersacrossgradesandwritingquality
levels.[ChFLTR5]

2
Ch=Chinese ThenumberreferstotheabstractlistedintheAppendix.

22
BothChineseandEnglishauthorsshowastrongpreferencetoopentheRA
abstractswithM2;thisoccursinsevenEnglishandnineChineseabstracts.Moreover,
allabstractscontainM2s,whichmeansthatthisisanobligatorymoveinthelinguistics
abstractgenre.
M2softheEnglishabstractsaresignaledbyasubjectthatreferstothestudyor
thepaperitselfwiththedeterminer(this,the)togetherwithaheadnoun(paper,article,
study,research)asshowninExample12.TheM2sinChineseabstractsaremarkedbya
determiner,whichmeansthisorthe,alongwithanounwhichmeanspaperorstudy,
asshowninExample13.ThereportingverbofM2usedinbothdatasetsisusuallyone
ofthefollowing:investigate,report,studyandexamine.
12. Thisarticleexaminestheconceptionsofresearchheldby505teachersofEnglish
from13countriesaroundtheworld.[EnAL1]
13.
Thispaperstudiestheeffectson[ChFLTR2]
Asshownabove,mostoftheauthorsfollowthesamesequencetobeginthe
abstractsregardlessofwhethertheabstractiswritteninEnglishorChinese.The
constructionofM2issimilarinbothgroupsofabstracts:Determiner+study/paper+
reportingverb(activevoice).
Move3Method
Itisusuallyinthemethodmovethattheauthorsoffersomedescriptionofhow
theresearchwasactuallycarriedoutbyindicatingthesubjects,procedures,materials,
instruments,and/orthedesignofthestudy.Inmystudy,M3isanobligatorymovein
thelinguisticsRAabstracts,whichisinlinewithSantoss(1996)andPhos(2008)
findings.TheybothreportedthatalmostallabstractscontainedM3intheirstudies.The
lengthofM3inmystudyrangesfromonephrasetoseveralsentences,andthelongest
M3isinAL9,whichincludesninesentencesandconstitutes2/3oftheabstract.Itisnot
difficulttounderstandbecausetheabstractofAL9reportsonanexperimentalstudy
andusuallythiskindofabstractdevotesmorespacetoM3thanotherkindsof
abstracts.

23
M3canoccurbyitself(e.g.,Example8)ormergewiththeothermainmoves
(e.g.,Example9)asobservedinpreviousstudies(e.g.,Santos,1996).Inmystudy,five
outoftwentyM3sareembeddedinM2,twoinEnglishandthreeinChinese.InExample
14,M2isthemainmoveinthesentencedescribingthepurposeofthestudy,butthe
phrasecontainingthemethodologyofthestudyisembeddedinthismove.Itiseasyto
seethatthecommunicativepurposeofM3differsfromthatofM2inExample15.The
strategyofmergingM3withanothermainmovesuggeststhattheauthorsofRA
abstractsinbothlanguagesusethestrategyduetospaceconstraints.
14. 90ChineselearnersofEnglishatthreeproficiencylevelsand24nativespeakers
ofEnglishparticipatedinthestudy.AnErrorCorrectionTask(ECT)was
developedtoelicitL2learnerbehavior.[ChFLTR1]
15. ThisstudyfocusedonaChinesespeakinggraduatestudent[M3Method]in
electricalengineeringwhoanalyzedgenreexemplarsinpreparationforwriting
[M2Purpose].[EnAL8]
Move4Product
Theproductmovebrieflysummarizesthemainfindingsorresultsofthestudy,
andcanalsoincludethepresentationofanargumentoradescriptionofthe
accomplishmentsofthestudy,asinExample16.ThefrequencyofoccurrenceofM4is
100%inbothlanguages.
16. Theresultsshowthatmodifiedoutputandnoticingaresignificantpredictorsof
EFLquestiondevelopment,whileneitherrecastnorclarificationisasignificant
predictorofEFLquestiondevelopment.ChFLTR10
AninterestingpointtonoteisthatM4occursasthelastmoveinthreeChinese
abstractsasshowninExample17,whileitisneverutilizedasthelastmoveinthe
Englishabstracts.Asfoundinmystudy,describingthefindingsorresultsoftheirstudy
inM4isnotatypicalwaytoselltheresearcharticle,becausethemajorityofthe
abstractsincludeaconclusionmovetopromotetheirresearch,asinExample18:
17. Theresultsshowthatmodifiedoutputandnoticingaresignificantpredictorsof
EFLquestiondevelopment,whileneitherrecastnorclarificationisasignificant
predictorofEFLquestiondevelopment[M4Product].[ChFLTR10]
18. TheCAT(contrastiveanalysisandtranslation)groupsignificantlyoutperformed
theothertwogroupsonallthetests[M4Product].Thesesuperiorresultsare
discussedinlightofthe'noticing'hypothesis,'pushedoutput','taskinduced

24
involvementload',andtheinfluencethatL1exertsontheacquisitionofL2
vocabulary[M5Conclusion].[EnAL4]
TheChineseauthorsmaybelievethattheirstudiesarewellknownenoughto
attractagooddealofattentionintheirdiscoursecommunitywithoutaconclusion.
Anotherpossibilityistheauthorsmaynotfollowtheconventionalrhetoricalstructure,
becauseintheChineseculture,peoplearenotencouragedtoselltheirideas.
Move5Conclusion
Intheconclusionmove,authorsmaketheirfinalclaimsabouttheimportanceof
theirresearchorsummarizetheimplicationsdrawnfromtheresults.Thisunitincludes
theevaluationoffindings,asinExample19,andalsolinksthecurrentstudytothereal
worldorresearchworldatlargeasinExample20.Themainfunctionofthismoveisto
drawthereadersintothearticle.
19. Theresultsconfirmthoseofpreviousstudiesthatteachers'reactionsto
languagepolicyisnotastraightforwardprocessandassuchitisimportantto
understandtheroleteachersplayintheenactmentoflanguagepolicy.[EnAL8]
20. Thefindings,bothquantitativeandqualitative,areinterpretedusingthe
WillingnesstoCommunicateframework;wealsodiscussimplicationsforthe
languageclassroom.[ChFLTR6]
InbothEnglishandChineseabstracts,thereisakindofconclusionthatdoesnot
generalizethefindingsorlinkthefindingstotheresearchworldorrealworld,butonly
indicatesthestructureofthediscussionasshowninExamples21.
21. Thesesuperiorresultsarediscussedinlightofthe'noticing'hypothesis,'pushed
output','taskinducedinvolvementload',andtheinfluencethatL1exertsonthe
acquisitionofL2vocabulary.[EnAL4]
EnglishlinguistsusethismoveconsiderablymoreoftenthanChineselinguists
becauseM5wasfoundin100%oftheEnglishabstracts,butonlyin70%oftheChinese
abstracts.
CROSSLINGUISTICANALYSISOFCHEMISTRYABSTRACTS
Generally,thefivemovesarepresenttosomedegreeinchemistryabstracts.
MovefrequencyisshowninTable5:theintroductionmove(M1)istheleastfrequentin
bothgroupsofabstracts(20%inEnglish,10%inChinese);themethodmove(M3)is
foundin100%oftheanalyzedabstracts;thefrequencyofoccurrenceofthepurpose

25
Table5.FrequencyoftheOccurrenceofMovesintheChemistryAbstracts
MoveEnglishChinese
1.Introduction2(20%)1(10%)
2.Purpose8(80%)1(10%)
3.Method10(100%)10(100%)
4.Product3(30%)10(100%)
5.Conclusion5(50%)8(80%)
move(M2)(80%inEnglish,10%inChinese),theproductmove(M4)(30%inEnglish,
100%inChinese)andtheconclusionmove(M5)(50%inEnglish,80%inChinese)vary
greatlyacrosslanguages.Theanalysisrevealsastrongtendencytoomitthepurpose
moveintheChineseabstracts(10%ofthecasescontainM2),andtheproductmovein
theEnglishabstracts(30%ofthecasescontainM4);thedifferenceintheconclusion
moveisrelativelylesssignificant(50%inEnglish,80%inChinese).
Thelanguageusedinfluencesthefrequencyoftheoccurrenceofthemoves.The
resultsinTable6showthatthechemistryRAabstractsinEnglishbasicallyfollowaM2
M3pattern,andthechemistryRAabstractsinChinesehavetheM3M4M5structureas
theconventionalschema.
Move1Introduction
Inthesampleoftwentychemistryabstracts,theintroductionmoveoccursonly
inthreeabstracts,twoinEnglishandoneinChinese.EachM1isconstitutedbyone
individualsentence,anditcanbeashortandsimplesentenceoralongandcomplex
sentence.AcloseexaminationofthemoverevealsthatM1inchemistryabstractsstates
currentknowledgetoclaimthecentralityofthestudy,butnoneofthemindicatesany
gaporproblem,asshowninExample22and23:
22. Platensimycinistheflagshipmemberofanewandgrowingclassofantibiotics
withpromisingantibacterialpropertiesagainstdrugresistantbacteria.[En
JACS3]
23. Thetopoisomerasebaseddesignanddevelopmentfortheshiftfroman
antibacterialtoanantitumoragenthavebeenanewstrategyinthe
fluoroquinolonefield.[ChACS3]

26
Table6.MoveStructureofChemistryAbstractsinEnglishandChinese
Journal Structure Journal Structure
JACS
English
English:
1.M2M3
2.M2M3M4
3.M1M2M3M5
4.M2M3M5
5.M4M3
6.M2M3
7.M1M2M3M5
8.M2M3
9.M2M3M5
10.M4M3M5
ACS
Chinese
Chinese:
1.M3M4M5
2.M3M4
3.M1M3M4M5
4. M3M4
5. M3M4M5
6. M3M4M5
7. M3M4M5
8. M2M3M4M5
9. M3M4M5
10. M3M4M5
AnexceptiontonoteisthatthereisoneM1inEnglishabstractswhichpresents
currentknowledgebyreferringtothestateofpreviousstudiesandalsonamesspecific
researchers,giveninExample24.Santos(1996)believedthatcitingpreviousresearch
isacommonwaytogaincredibilityfromthepersonwhohasclaimedthestatement
(p.486).Inotherwords,citingpreviousresearchservesapersuasivefunctiontoattract
abiggerreadership.
24. ThebisanthraquinoneantibioticBE43472B[(+)1]wasisolatedbyRowleyand
coworkersfromastreptomycetestrainfoundinabluegreenalgaeassociated
withtheascidianEcteinascidiaturbinateandhasshownpromisingantibacterial
activityagainstclinicallyderivedisolatesofmethicillinsusceptible,methicillin
resistant,andtetracyclinresistantStaphylococcusaureus(MSSA,MRSA,and
TRSA,respectively)andvancomycinresistantEnterococcusfaecalis(VRE).[En
JACS7]
M1s,whentheyarepresentedinabstracts,aretheinitialmove,whichissimilar
toMartinMartins(2003)findingsinexperimentalsocialscienceabstracts.However,in
MartinMartinsfindings,theintroductionunitisthelongestandmostsignificant
rhetoricalunit,whiletwooutofthreeM1sinthisstudyarecomposedofjustonesimple
sentence.

27
Thereisonepossiblereasonforthisdifference.Chemistryisawelldeveloped
andmaturediscipline.Themembersinthediscoursecommunityknowthefieldvery
well,andtheauthorsdonotseemtoneedtoremindthemofthebackground
informationoridentifyanygaporprobleminthefield,whichisacharacteristicof
abstractsinnormalormatureresearchareasinaKuhniansense(Melander,Swales
&Fredrickson,1997,p.258).
Move2Purpose
Thefrequencyoftheoccurrenceofthepurposemoveintheabstractsfromthe
twojournalsemergesasbeingsignificantlydifferent.M2wasconsistentlyfoundin80%
oftheabstractswritteninEnglish.However,only20%wasfoundinChineseabstracts.
AlltheM2sinchemistryabstractsdescribefeaturesoftheresearch,thatistosay,they
fulfilladescriptivefunction,asshowninExamples25and26:
25. Abstractpresentedhereisanewconvenientsyntheticprotocolto(1propynyl)
arenes.[ChACS8)
26. AnaccountofthetotalsynthesisofcelogentinCispresented.[EnJACS2]
Inmostofthecasesinbothsetsoftexts,M2ispresentedinasimpleandbrief
descriptionasinExample26,orinamoreelaboratedconstructionasshownin
Example27,whichincludesmoredetailedinformationsuchasthematerialofthe
experiment.
27. Thestereocontrolledtotalsynthesisof4hydroxydictyolactone(4),amemberof
thexenicanediterpenefamilyofnaturalproducts,isdescribed.[EnJACS6]
ItisfoundthatthemajorityofM2sintheabstractsareclearlykeptimpersonal
withthepresenceofpassiveverbs.Oneofthefollowingreportingverbswasusually
used:describe,detail,reportandpresent,whichservesasasignalofM2asinExample
28.Eightoutofnineabstractswereinapassiveconstruction.Thereisonlyone
exceptioninExample29.Inthissentence,afirstpersonpronounandanactiveverb
describethepurposeoftheabstractandalsoshowtheauthorsstanceinthestudy.
28. AnaccountofthetotalsynthesisofcelogentinCispresented.[EnJACS2]
29. Wereportthedeterminationofthefullstereostructureof()ushikulideA(1),a
spiroketalcontainingmacrolidebytotalsynthesis.[EnJACS4]

28
MostoftheM2saretheopeningmovesinabstracts,exceptfortwowrittenin
English.Basically,M2inthestudyforegroundsthemainpurposeoftheresearchto
readersasdiscussedinmanypreviousstudies(MartinMartin,2003;Santos,1996).
ChineseauthorstendtoomitM2intheirabstracts.Theyprefertopresentthe
procedureoftheirexperimenttoaudienceinM4insteadofstatingthepurpose
beforehand.
Move3Method
Themethodmoveistheonlyobligatorymoveinbothsetsofabstracts.M3in
chemistryRAabstractsoffersadetaileddescriptionofhowtheresearchwasactually
conducted.Itincludesinformationaboutdata,procedures,materials,instruments,and
variablesasshowninExample30:
30. AnovelpotentialplantelicitorNphenylN'(1,3thiazol2yl)1,2,3
benzodthiadiazole7carboxamidinewasdesigned,synthesized,andstructurally
characterizedby1HNMR,IR,MSandelementalanalysis.Thestructure
optimizationandfrequencycalculationwerecarriedoutatB3LYP/6311G*
levelbythedensityfunctionaltheory.[ChACS6]
Inthesampleof20abstracts,itwasfoundthatmostoftheM3sareverylong,
andincludemorethanonesentence.NumerousM3sinbothsetsofabstractsoccurasa
completelyindependentunitandnoembeddingstructureisseeninchemistry
abstracts.AsshowninTable7,ifitismeasuredinthenumberofwords/characters,M3
constitutes72.3%ofEnglishabstracts,and50.3%ofChineseabstracts;ifitismeasured
intermsofthenumberofsentences,M3constitutes67.7%oftheEnglishabstracts,and
47.4%oftheChineseabstracts.Assuch,M3isthemostimportantcomponentof
chemistryabstracts.
Incontrasttowhatwasfoundinsomepreviousstudies(MartinMartin,2003;
Santos,1996),theresultsindicatethat,inchemistry,M3isthelongestandmost
frequentrhetoricalunitandoccupiesconsiderabletextualspace.Themajor
contributionofchemistryRAsliesprincipallyinthemethodologyofthestudy.Amore
carefulexaminationshowsthatthepositionofM3varies:M3eitherfollowsM2(9out
of20cases)oristheinitialmove(8outof20cases),occursafterM4(2outof20cases),
orfollowsM1(1outof20cases).

29
Table7.TheAverageNumberofWordsandSentencesinChemistryAbstractsandin
theMethodMove
Chemistry
Average#ofwords/
characters
Average#ofsentences
Abstract Method
move
(M3)
Percentage Abstract Method
move
(M3)
Percentage
English 164.7 119 72.3% 5.9 4 67.7%
Chinese 112.7 56.7 50.3% 3.9 1.85 47.4%
RegardingtheverbvoiceandtenseinM3,inthechemistrytextsanalyzed,
passiveverbsweredominant.Amongthe10abstractsinEnglish,passiveverbswere
themajorverbsineightabstracts(Example31).Similartomyfindings,Santos(1996)
andPho(2008)foundthereweremorepassiveverbsinM3thanintheothermovesof
theabstract;however,thepredominanttenseusedintheabstractswasthepasttense
intheirstudies.
31. Arighttoleftsyntheticapproachtothisbicyclicoctapeptidewasunsuccessful
duetoaninabilitytoelaboratederivativesoftherighthandring.Inthecourseof
theseefforts,itwasdiscoveredthatthemildBraslaumodificationofthe
McFadyenStevensreactionoffersausefulmethodofreducingrecalcitrant
esterstoaldehydes.Alefttorightsyntheticstrategywasthenexamined.The
unusualLeuTrpsidechaincrosslinkpresentinthelefthandmacrocyclewas
fashionedviaathreestepsequencecomprisedofanintermolecularKnoevenagel
condensation,aradicalconjugateaddition,andaSmI2mediatednitro
reduction[EnJACS2]
Incontrasttopreviousfindingsinsimilarstudies,Ifoundthatverbsinpresent
tenseoccurinmostoftheM3sinEnglishabstracts.Presenttenseiscentralinsixoutof
tenM3sasinExample32:
32. Centraltothesyntheticapproachisapowerfulintramolecular[4+2]/[3+2]
cycloadditioncascadeofa1,3,4oxadiazoleinwhichthepentacyclicskeletonand
allthestereochemistryofthenaturalproductsareassembledinareactionthat
formsthreerings,fourCCbonds,andfivestereogeniccentersincludingthree
contiguousquaternarycenters,andintroducesthecorrectoxidationstateatC19

30
inasinglesyntheticoperation.Thefinaltetrahydrofuranbridgeissubsequently
installedinonestep,enlistinganintramolecularalcoholadditiontoaniminium
iongeneratedbynitrogenassistedopeningofthecycloadductoxidobridge,with
amodificationthatpermitsreleaseofusefulfunctionality(aketone)atthe
cleavagetermini.[EnJACS1]
Move4Product
Asanexperimentaldiscipline,thechemistryRAabstractsusuallyreport
empiricalresultstoreaders.M4wouldbeexpectedtooccurafterM3,andalsobean
obligatorymoveinbothgroupsofRAabstracts.However,asmentionedearlier,all
ChineseabstractscontainM4,andM4followsM3,butonlythreeoutoftenEnglish
abstractsincludethismove.AmongthethreeM4s,onlyoneoccursafterM3.
TheteninstancesofM4inChinesefollowM3,andbeginwithasubjectreferring
totheresultsofthestudy,whichalsosignalsthemoveasinExample33:
33. TheresultsoftheoreticalinvestigationandthermalanalysisindicatethatDNMT
presentslowerthermalstability.[ChACS4]
TwoM4saretheopeningmovesoftheabstractasinExamples34and35,which
makesmereconsidermyanalysis.ArethesereallyM4s?AretheypossiblyM2s?As
discussedinthemethodologychapter,M2usuallyanswersthequestion,Whatisthe
studyabout?Incontrast,M4answers,Whatwasdiscovered?Sincethetwoinitial
movesdescribethemainresultsoftheexperiments,theywereanalyzedasM4instead
ofM2.ThetwoforegroundedM4shaveobviousoverlapinfunctionwithM2.
34. Thefirsttotalsynthesisoftheakuammilinealkaloid(()vincorine(6)hasbeen
accomplishedinabout1%overallyieldin31steps.[EnJACS5]
35. TheN,CcouplednaphthyldihydroisoquinolinealkaloidsancistrocladiniumA(3)
andB(4),whichpossessanunprecedentediminiumarylaxisandshowhighin
vitroantileishmanialactivities,havebeensynthesizedviaashortsequenceof
eightlinearsteps,withouttheneedofprotectinggroups.[EnJACS10]
ThelowfrequencyofoccurrenceofM4andthereorderingofitinEnglishRA
abstractscouldbeduetotheoverlapbetweentheproductmove(M4)andthepurpose
move(M2).Whentheauthorsanswerthequestion,whatisthestudyabout?inM2,
theanswercanbeThestudyisaboutwhatwasdiscoveredinthestudy.Thisexplains
why,inmostofthecases,whenthereisaM2,M4isalwaysomittedinEnglish
chemistryabstracts.AsshowninTable6,thereareeightM2sinEnglishChemistry

31
abstracts,andtwoM4sarefrontedtotheinitialpositiontopromotetheirresearch.The
samethingdoesnothappentoChineseRAabstracts.Theauthorsusuallypresentthe
productmoveafterthemethodmove.Hyland(2000)discussedthephenomenonof
Englishauthorsincreasingtheuseofpromotionalelementsintheirabstractsbecause
ofthecompetitivepressurefromleadingjournalsintheinternationalacademic
community,whichmaybetakenasatentativeexplanationtothereorderingofM4in
Englishchemistryabstracts.Ibelieveifthereisnopurposemovetopromotethestudy,
theresultmovewillbeforegroundedtofulfillthisfunctionbasedontheresultofmy
study.Chineseauthorshavearelativelysmalldiscoursecommunity,sotheymayfeel
lessstress,andalsointheChineseculture,promotingisnotencouraged.MostChinese
abstractsfollowtheconventionalsequenceM3M4,andneverforegroundthecontent
oftheproductmoveinM2.
Move5Conclusion
Numerouschemistryabstractscontainthefinalconclusionmove,whichusually
discussestheresearch,interpretstheresults,andpointstotheapplicationsorwider
implicationsoftheresearch.M5isfoundinfiveofthetenEnglishabstractsasin
Example36,andeightoutoftenChineseabstractsasinExample37.
36. Therhodiumcatalyzedasymmetricreactioninvolvingaterminalacetylenewas
developedasageneralmethodfortheasymmetriccycloisomerizationof
terminalenynes.[EnJACS3]
37. Thevirtuesofthispresentprotocolarefacileavailablestartingmaterials,
convenientoperation,andeasyseparationofdesiredproducts.[ChACS8]
ThemajorityoftheM5scompriseonesinglesentence,andthefunctionofthe
moveissimilarinbothsetsoftexts.Chineseauthorsseemtohaveagreaterpropensity
togeneralizefromtheirresultsthanEnglishauthors.
SUMMARYOFTHECROSSLINGUISTICANALYSIS
ThecrosslinguisticanalysisonlinguisticsRAabstractshasshownthatallthe
abstractsfundamentallyfollowanM2M3M4M5pattern.Thepurposemove(M2)and
themethodmove(M3)areobligatoryinbothsetsoftexts.Whiletheresultmove(M4)
andthediscussionmove(M5)arefairlycommoninEnglishabstracts,thesamecannot

32
besaidforChineseabstracts.TheIntroductionmove(M1)istheleastfrequentmovein
abstractsfrombothjournals.Astrikingdifferenceintherhetoricalstructureis
identifiedintheproductmove(M4).M4isafinalmoveinChineseRAabstractsbut
neverinEnglishRAabstracts.
TherhetoricalstructureanalysisonchemistryabstractsinEnglishandChinese
hasdemonstratedthatabstractsinEnglishbasicallyfollowaM2M3pattern,butthose
inChinesehaveadifferentstructure,thatis,M3M4M5.Themethodmove(M3)isthe
onlyobligatorymoveintheChemistryabstractsinbothlanguages.Similartothe
findingsinLinguistics,theintroductionmove(M1)istheleastfrequentmove.Themost
significantdifferenceslieinthefrequencyoftheoccurrenceofthepurposemove(M2),
theproductmove(M4)andtheconclusionmove(M5).Englishabstractsaremorelikely
toincludeM2butChineseabstractscontainM4andM5moreoften.
TheanalysesrevealthatlesspromotionisusedintheChineseabstracts.This
maybeattributedtotherelativelysmalldiscoursecommunityintheChineseacademic
world.ItmayalsopointstoaculturaldistinctionbecauseintheChineseculture,
authorsarenotencouragedtopromotetheirstudies.
CROSSDISCIPLINARYANALYSISOFRAABSTRACTS
Inthissection,crossdisciplinaryanalysisisconductedinordertoidentifythe
variationsofRAabstractsintermsofrhetoricalstructureacrossdisciplines.Table8
showsthefrequencyofdifferentmovesinbothdisciplines.Theintroductionmove(M1)
istheleastfrequentmoveinbothsetsofRAabstracts,themethodmove(M3)isthe
mostfrequentlyoccurringsectioninallRAabstracts.Theconclusionmove(M5)is
foundmorefrequentlyinlinguisticsRAabstracts,thefrequencyoftheoccurrenceof
purposemove(M2),productmove(M4)showsgreatvariationsaccordingtothe
discipline.
AsshowninTable9,themostfrequentmovestructureinlinguisticsisM2M3
M4M5(85%ofthecases);however,noconventionalstructurecouldbeidentifiedin
chemistry:ChinesechemistsusuallyfollowtheM3M4M5pattern(80%ofthecases),
whereasEnglishchemistscommonlyprefertheM2M3model(80%ofthecases).This
phenomenonmaybeduetothedisciplinaryvariation.Chemistry,asanoldandmature

33
Table8.SummaryofMoveFrequency
Moves Linguistics Chemistry Average
English Chinese English Chinese Linguistics Chemistry
Introduction
Purpose
Method
Product
Conclusion
4(40%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
2(20%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
7(70%)
2(20%)
8(80%)
10
(100%)
3(30%)
5(50%)
1(10%)
1(10%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
8(80%)
3(30%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
10
(100%)
8.5(85%)
1.5(15%)
4.5(15%)
10
(100%)
6.5(65%)
6.5(65%)
discipline,hasexistedandbeenstudiedformanyyearsinChineseandAngloAmerican
academiccommunities.Therefore,chemistsinbothcountriesseemedtohave
developedtheirownuniqueacademicwritingnorms.However,linguistics,especially
appliedlinguistics,isarelativelynewdisciplineinChina,andthemajorityoftheRA
abstractsinmystudyareaboutEnglishteaching.ItwouldnotbesurprisingifChinese
linguistshavebeengreatlyinfluencedbytheEnglishauthorsinthisfield,andusually
followtherhetoricalnormsestablishedbyEnglishwriters.
InPhos(2008)study,theoccurrenceofM1islowinfrequency,whichis
consistentwiththeresultsofmystudy.Althoughtheauthorsinbothlinguisticsand
chemistryhaveastrongtendencytoomitM1intheirabstracts,thedistributionofM1s
appearstobeimbalanced:theoccurrenceofM1inlinguisticsRAabstractsistwiceas
frequentasinchemistryRAabstracts.TherelativelyhighfrequencyofM1inlinguistics
maybeexplainedbyHylands(2000)claimthatresearchinsoftdisciplinesusually

34
Table9.MoveStructureandtheConventionalStructureofAbstractsin
LinguisticsandChemistry
English Chinese English Chinese
1.M2M3M1M4
M5
2.M2M3M4M5
3.M2M3M4M5
4.M2M3M4M5
5.M2M3M4M5
6.M2M3M4M5
7.M2M3M2M4
M5
8.M1[M2/M3]M4
M5
9.M1[M2/M3]M4
M5
10.M1M2M3M4
M5
1.M2M3M4M5
2.M2M3M4M5
3.M2M3M4M5
4.[M2/M3]M4
M5
5.[M2/M3]M1
M4M5
6.M2M3M4M5
7.M1[M2/M3]
M4M5
8.M2M3M4
9.M2M3M4
10.M2M3M4
1.M2M3
2.M2M3M4
3.M1M2M3M5
4.M2M3M5
5.M4M3
6.M2M3
7.M1M2M3M5
8.M2M3
9.M2M3M5
10.M4M3M5
1.M3M4M5
2.M3M4
3.M1M3M4M5
4.M3M4
5.M3M4M5
6.M3M4M5
7.M3M4M5
8.M2M3
9.M4M5
10.M3M4M5
M2M3M4M5
(85%)
M2M3M3M4M5
(80%)(80%)
needtoprovidemorecontextduetoitsdiversityandpermeableboundaries,and
readerswouldexpectaclearintroductiontohelpthemmakeadecisiononwhether
theywilldevotetimetoreadingtheRAabstractsornot;however,itusuallydoesnot
happeninthefieldofharddisciplines,whichusuallyplacemoreemphasisonthe
methodmove.
RegardingthelowoccurrenceofM1sinbothdisciplines,thereisapossible
explanation.Althoughasadiscipline,chemistryhasalongerhistoryinbothdiscourse
communities,bothchemistryandlinguisticsarewelldevelopedscientificdisciplines,

35
andbothinvolvelargequantitiesofexperimentalstudies.Bothchemistsandlinguists
maybelievethatthereadersarefamiliarwiththefield,andhaveaccesstobackground
informationabouttheircurrentstudy.
Asstatedearlier,M3istheonlyobligatoryfunctionalmoveshowninboth
disciplines.Althoughitoccursin100%oftheRAabstracts,therearecertainaspectsof
dissimilarityinthismovebetweenthetwodisciplines.AsshowninTable2,mostofthe
M3sinlinguisticRAabstractsoccurasanindependentmove(75%ofthecases),butin
therestoftheRAabstracts(25%ofthecase),M3isembeddedwithinM2,thatistosay,
M2isthemajormoveandM3ispartofM2.
ManyauthorssuchasHyland(2000)andMartinMartin(2003)havereported
onthepackedmethodunit.Theyattributedthistospaceconstraintsinabstracts.Asan
explanationforthisphenomenon,SwalesandFeak(2009,p.14)stated,unlessthe
contributionmadebythepaperliesprincipallyinthemethodology,method
descriptionsinRAabstractsmayhavetobesqueezedtomakeroomformore
informationinothermoves.ContrarytothepackedmethodmoveinHylands(2000)
andMartinMartins(2003)studies,M3occupiesover60%ofthespaceinthe
chemistryabstracts,anddominatesthetext.Itisevidentthatchemistry,anempirical
harddiscipline,usuallyindicateshowthestudyisconductedratherthanprovides
informationinothermoves.Inotherwords,theresearchliesprincipallyinthe
methodology(SwalesandFeak,2009,p.14).Itisnotsurprisingthentofindthat
chemistryabstractsprovidemoreroomtoM3thanlinguisticsabstractsdo.
WithregardtoM4,thereisastrongexpectationthattheabstractsinchemistry
wouldcontainitasanobligatorymoveaccordingtowhatHyland(2000)proposed.He
saidthatharddisciplinestendtopromotethesignificanceoftheirresults.Inastudy
wherehecomparedthepercentageofparticularmovesofabstractsfrom1980with
thosefrom1997,Hyland(2000)claimedthatM4inRAabstractswereverycommonin
bothyears,andconcludedthatM4wasthemostfrequentmove,especiallyin
experimentalharddisciplines.Contrarytothesefindings,M4isfoundin100%ofthe
linguisticsabstracts,butonlyin65%ofthechemistryabstracts;inEnglishchemistry
abstractsonly3outof10abstractsemployM4.Asdiscussedbefore,thereis
overlappingoffunctionbetweenM2andM4inchemistryabstractswritteninEnglish.

36
Authorsseemtopresentthepurposeoftheirstudybystatingwhattheyfoundinthe
study,whichisthecontentoftheresultmoveaswell.
LINGUISTICFEATURESANALYSIS
Hyland(2003)statedthatusingselfmentionisapowerfulrhetoricalstrategyto
emphasizewriterspersonalcontributiontotheresearchandstrengthenhis/her
researchcredibilityandstandinginthediscipline.Theuseoffirstpersonpronounisa
commonwaytoshowthestanceoftheauthorintheresearch.Table10showsthe
distributionofsingular(I,me,my)andplural(we,us,our)firstpersonpronounsinthe
texts.
Table10.FirstPersonPronounsinAbstracts
FirstPerson
Pronouns
English Chinese English Chinese
Singular 1
Plural 6 1 1
Total 7 1 1
Amongthefortyabstracts,thereareatotalofninefirstpersonpronouns:eight
inlinguisticsabstractsandoneinchemistryabstracts.Theresultisconsistentwith
whatHylandandBondi(2006)foundinhisstudythatsoftdisciplinescontain75%
morestanceitemsthantheharddisciplines.Inmydataset,authorsrhetoricalvisibility
intheirabstractwritingvariesaccordingtodisciplines.Authorsinharddisciplines,
suchaschemistry,tendtohidetheirauthorstancesinthestudy.Instead,theypreferto
indicatethesubjects,procedures,materials,andinstrumentsofthestudyasthesubject
ofthesentencetostrengthentheobjectivityoftheirstudy.HylandandBondi(2006)
believedthat,thisstrategyconveysanempiricistideologythatsuggestsresearch
outcomeswouldbethesameirrespectiveoftheindividualconductingit(p.32).
Authorsinlinguisticsaremorewillingtoexposetheirpresenceinthestudy.Employing
thefirstpersonpronouninthestudywillpresenttheauthorasaninformedand

37
reliablecolleague(Hyland,2003,p.257),andgaincreditforonesindividual
perspectiveorresearchdecisions(Hyland,2003,p.257).
FouroutofninefirstpersonpronounsareinM3todemonstratehowtheauthor
conductstheexperimenttosolveaproblemorshowtheprocedureoftheexperiment.
ThreeoutofnineareinM4toreporttheproductorresultofthestudy.OneisinM2to
statethepurposeofthestudyandtheotheroneisinM5tofurtherdiscusstheresultof
thestudy.Allthefirstpersonpronounsareusedasthesubject,asinExample38.
38. Wealsoconductedinterviewsatthelastdatacollectionsession.[EnAL6]
Inadditiontotheuseofthefirstpersonpronouns,theotherinteresting
differenceisthesubjectnouns,andthetenseandvoiceofverbsinM2.Themajorityof
thesubjectsinlinguisticsareadeterminerwithaheadnoun,forexample,this/the
study,this/thepaperasinExample39.Sincemostsentencesinthismovebeginwith
suchsubjects,itisnotsurprisingthattheactivevoiceismorecommonthanpassive
voiceinM2.However,mostsubjectsinchemistryareintheformoftotalsynthesisof
asinExample39,whichsignalsthereportofanexperimentandalsotakesapresent
tensebutusespassivevoice.
39. Thispaperexaminesthebeliefsandpracticesabouttheintegrationofgrammar
andskillsteachingreportedby176Englishlanguageteachersfrom18countries.
[ChAL1]
40. AtotalsynthesisoftheAspidospermaalkaloidsacetylaspidoalbidineisdetailed,
providingaccesstobothenantiomersofthenaturalproductsandestablishing
theirabsoluteconfiguration.[EnJACS1]
SUMMARYOFTHECROSSDISCIPLINARYANALYSIS
ThecrossdisciplinaryanalysisofRAabstractsintwodisciplinesrevealsthata
conventionalrhetoricalstructureofM2M3M4M5isfoundinlinguisticsRAabstracts,
butsuchaformatwasnotidentifiedinchemistryRAabstracts.Instead,M2M3was
foundinEnglishabstracts,andM3M4M5inChineseabstracts.Asanobligatorymove
inbothdisciplines,M3hasbeenprovidedmorespaceinchemistryRAabstractsthanin
linguisticsRAabstracts.ThemoststrikingdifferenceisthatchemistryRAabstractsput
lessemphasisonM4.Onthecontrary,inchemistryRAabstracts,itisverycommonto
foregroundthecontentoftheresultinthepurposemove.

38
CHAPTER5
CONCLUSION
ThroughthecrosslinguisticandcrossdisciplinaryanalysisofRAabstracts,this
studyhasrevealedtheexistenceofvariationsintextualstructureandlinguisticfeatures
inRAabstracts.Thischapterbeginswithabriefsummaryofthemainfindingsofthe
analyses,thenIwilldiscussthepedagogicalimplicationsofthesefindings,andfinallyI
willconsiderthepossibilitiesforfutureresearchthatwouldleadtoabetter
understandingofmultilevelanalysesongenresinacademicwriting.
SUMMARYOFFINDINGS
Theresultsofthestudyindicatethatvariationinwritingcanbefoundat
differentlevelsoftextsacrossdisciplinesandlanguages.Themaindifferenceinthe
crossdisciplinarycomparisonofRAabstractslayinthetextualorganization.Basedon
Hylands(2000)framework,linguisticRAabstractsfundamentallyfollowthe
internationalconventionbasedonthenormsoftheEnglishacademicdiscourse
communityM2M3M4M5pattern.WhilechemistryRAabstractsdonothavea
conventionalstructure,internationalwritersfollowaM2M3format,andChinese
writersfollowaM3M4structure.
Themethodmoveispresentineveryabstractandthusistheonlyobligatory
moveinbothdisciplines.Thisindicatesthatdescribingthemethodologyofthestudyis
animportantpartoftheabstractsinthesetwodisciplines.However,theuseofthe
methodmoveshowssomedisciplinaryvariationsintheabstracts.Themethodmove
(M3)inchemistryabstractsoccursintheformofanindependentmove,butonequarter
oftheM3sinlinguisticabstractsareembeddedwithinthepurposemove(M2)ina
packedform,sochemistryabstractsaremorelikelytoprovidemorespacetoM3than
linguisticsabstracts.Thisshowsthattheemphasisofthechemistryabstractslies
principallyinthemethodmove.

39
ThecomparisonofthemovestepstructureofRAabstractsintwolanguages
revealsthatEnglishabstractsaremorelikelytocontainthecanonicalmoveswhile
therearemoremovedeletionsinChineseabstracts.AlthoughusuallyChineseabstracts
arelongerthanEnglishonesonaverage,Chineseauthorshaveastrongertendencyto
omitoneormoremovesinabstractwriting.Inlinguisticsabstracts,nosignificant
differenceinrhetoricalstructurewasidentified.Basically,Chineseauthorsfollowedthe
internationalschemeintermsofmoves,althoughEnglishabstractsincludethe
conclusionmove(M5)morefrequentlythanChineseabstracts.
Astrikingdifferencewasfoundinchemistryabstracts.Thepurposemove(M2)is
fairlycommoninEnglishabstracts,whilethesamecannotbesaidforChineseabstracts.
Theproductmove(M4)ismuchmorefrequentlyusedinChineseabstractsthanin
Englishabstracts.Englishauthorslikepresentingtheirresultsearlierbyincluding
resultsofthestudyinM2orpreposingM4astheinitialmove;however,Chinese
writerspreferdescribingtheresultsintheproductmoveratherthanforegroundingthe
productofthestudyinM2.M2andM4fulfillanoverlappingfunctionincertainEnglish
abstracts.InotherwordsM2isasalientmoveinEnglishRAabstracts,butnotin
ChineseRAabstracts.However,M4appearsmorefrequentlyinChineseRAabstracts
thaninEnglishRAabstracts.
ThesegenrevariationsmaybeattributedtothesizeoftheChineseacademic
discoursesocietyandcertainfeatureofChineseculture.Forhistoricalreasons,China
wasisolatedfromtheoutsideworld,especiallywesterncountries,until30yearsago,
andChinesewritersseldomparticipatedininternationalcommunication,whichmay
leadtotheirignoranceoftheinternationalnormsforacademicwriting.Theyalso
constituteasmalleracademicdiscoursecommunity.Furthermore,thebasicfunctionof
abstractsistopromotethestudytobiggerreaderships.Thetraditionalvaluesin
Chineseculture,suchasChineseauthorsusuallypreferwritinginanindirectwaytoin
adirectway,mayhinderthepromotionfunctionofabstracts.Onthecontrary,English
authorshavetofacemorechallengingcompetitioninthebiggerinternational
community,andhavetotrytostandoutintheiracademiccommunity.

40
PEDAGOGICALIMPLICATION
Theresultsofthestudyhavepedagogicalimplicationstohelpstudents,
especiallypostgraduatestudents,andnonnativewritersintheiracademicwriting.
Hyland(2002)statedthatthemasteryofgenreknowledgewouldhelpstudentsin
becomingmembersoftheirdisciplinarycommunity.Bhatia(1997)hasshownthat
genreanalysisisabletoprovideusefulinformationtonovicewritersbyexposingthem
totheconventionsofaparticulargenre,andtheywillbeabletoexploreandproduce
morecomplexgenresastheyacquiregenreknowledge.LoiandEvans(2010)claimed
thatwiththeawarenessofgenrepractices,novicewritersmaynotonlyproducemore
complexgenresbasedongenreexemplarsbutalsogainlongtermbenefitsfromthe
explicitknowledgeofgenreconventionsbecausegenreknowledgewillprovide
learnerswithathoroughandcompleteunderstandingofspecifictexts.Theyfurther
statedthatESPteachersortheuniversitywritingteachersmayselectRAsorpartsof
RAtoshowthemacrostructureofthegenreanddiscussthefunctionofeachmove
and/orconstituentstepswithstudentsparticipation.
Theresultsfromthecrossdisciplinaryanalysisinthestudycanbeaguidein
helpingstudentstorealizedisciplinaryvariationsintermsofmoves,thelinear
sequence,andthefunctionofeachmoveinabstractwriting.
Theknowledgegainedfromthecrosslinguisticanalysishasshownhowmove
stepanalysisisausefulanalyticaltoolforunderstandingculturaldifferencesinthe
rhetoricalstructureofRAabstracts.TherhetoricalstructureofEnglishacademic
writingwillbecomemorevisibletoChinesewritersbecausetheywillrealizethe
expectationsfromnativeEnglishreadersastheyacquiretheknowledgeofthedifferent
rhetoricalfeaturesinEnglishandChinese.Teachingtheprototypicalrhetorical
structureofanRAabstract(e.g.,Swales&Feak,2009)tostudents,especiallytonon
nativeauthors,wouldhelpthemrecognizethesespecificfeaturesofeachmoveand
howmovesareusedinwriting.ESPwritinginstructorsshouldbeawarethatthe
preferredrhetoricalstrategiesinbothlanguagesaredifferent,andguidenonnative
authorswritingtoproduceacademicdiscoursefollowingthenormsoftheinternational
academiccommunity.

41
ThefindingsofthisstudymayhelpChineseauthorsbetterunderstandthe
changesordevelopmentofRAabstractsinlinguisticsandchemistryfields,both
structurallyandlinguistically.Hopefully,bybeingawareofthelinguisticand
disciplinaryvariationintermsofrhetoricalstructure,studentsandnonnativewriters
willincreasetheirchancesforpublicationandeffectivelyparticipateinthe
internationalacademicdiscoursecommunities.
FUTURESTUDY
ThecurrentstudyisadualcontrastivestudyofRAabstracts,includingthe
contrastiveanalysisintwolanguages,EnglishandChinese,andthecomparative
analysisintwodisciplines,linguisticsandchemistry.TherhetoricalstructureoftheRA
abstractsandlinguisticfeaturesofthemovesintheabstractswereanalyzed.As
discussedintheintroductionchapter,themajorityofcontrastivestudieshavefocused
onthecomparisonofRAabstractswritteninEnglishandEuropeanlanguageabstracts
andsoftdisciplines,likelinguistics,whichhaveattractedtheattentionofnumerous
analysts.Chineseasthemostwidelyusedlanguageandchemistryasoneofthehard
disciplineshaveseldombeeninvolvedinsuchkindsofstudies.
Sinceonly40abstractswereanalyzedinthepresentstudy,futureresearch
shouldbeconductedonabiggercorpus.Thenumberofabstractsineachsetofdatacan
beincreased.Thenumberofdisciplines,especiallyharddisciplines,canalsobe
increasedinacrosslinguisticanalysisofChineseandEnglish.
Thecurrentstudyonlyincludeswrittendiscourseanalysis.Inordertoexplore
moresocioculturalfactorsandreadersexpectationsonwritingacademicabstracts,it
wouldbehelpfultocarryoutinterviewsorconductsurveyswithdisciplinary
informantsandauthorsinfuturestudies.

42
REFERENCES
Ackland,G.M.(2009).AdiscourseanalysisofEnglishandFrenchresearcharticle
abstractsinlinguisticsandeconomics.SanDiego,CA:MontezumaPublishing.
Askehave,I.,&Swales,J.M.(2001).Genreidentificationandcommunicativepurpose:A
problemandapossiblesolution.AppliedLinguistics,22(2),195212.
Bhatia,V.K.(1997).Introduction:GenreanalysisandworldEnglishes.WorldEnglishes,
16(3),313319.
Brett,P.(1994).Agenreanalysisoftheresultssectionofsociologyarticles.Englishfor
SpecificPurposes,13(1),4759.
Connor,U.,Nagelhout,E.,&Rozycki,W.V.(2008).Contrastiverhetoric:Reachingto
interculturalrhetoric.Philadelphia,PA:JohnBenjaminsPublishers.
Ge,D.M.,&Yang,R.Y.(2005).Agenreanalysisofresearcharticleabstracts.Modern
ForeignLanguages,28(2),3846.
Holmes,R.(2001).Variationandtextstructure:Thediscussionsectionineconomics
researcharticles.ITLReviewofAppliedLinguistics,131132,107135.
Hyland,K.(1996).TalkingtotheAcademy:Formsofhedginginscienceresearch
articles.WrittenCommunication,13(2),251281.
Hyland,K.(2000).Disciplinarydiscourses:Socialinteractionsinacademicwriting.
London,UK:Longman.
Hyland,K.(2002).Optionsofidentityinacademicwriting.ELTJournal,56(4),351358.
Hyland,K.(2003).Selfcitationandselfreference:Credibilityandpromotionin
academicpublication.JournaloftheAmericanSocietyforInformationScienceand
Technology,54(3),251259.
Hyland,K.,&Bondi,M.(Eds.).(2006).Academicdiscourseacrossdisciplines.NewYork,
NY:PeterLangAG.
Jiang,Y.Y.(2010).GenreanalysisonEnglishandChineseresearcharticleabstractsin
appliedlinguistics.JournalofHefeiUniversityofTechnology,24(2),141144.
Ju,Y.M.(2004).GenreanalysisonresearcharticleabstractsinEnglishandChinese.
ForeignLanguageEducation,25(2),3235.
Li,C.N.,&Thompson,S.A.(1976).Subjectandtopic:Anewtypologyoflanguage.InC.
N.Li(Ed.),Subjectandtopic(pp.457489).NewYork,NY:AcademicPress.
Lim,J.M.H.(2006).Methodsectionsofmanagementresearcharticles:Apedagogically
motivatedqualitativestudy.EnglishforSpecificPurposes,25(3),282309.

43
Loi,C.K.,&Evans,M.S.(2010).Culturaldifferencesintheorganizationofresearch
articleintroductionsfromthefieldofeducationalpsychology:Englishand
Chinese.JournalofPragmatics,42(10),28142825.
Lors,R.(2004).OnRAabstracts:Fromrhetoricalstructuretothematicorganization.
EnglishforSpecificPurposes,23(3),280302.
MartinMartin,P.(2003).AgenreanalysisofEnglishandSpanishresearchpaper
abstractsinexperimentalsocialsciences.EnglishforSpecificPurpose,22(1),25
43.
Melander,B.,Swales,J.M.,&Fredrickson,K.M.(1997).Journalabstractsfromthree
academicfieldsintheUnitedStatesandSweden:Nationalordisciplinary
proclivities?InA.Duszak(Ed.),Cultureandstyleofacademicdiscourse(pp.251
272).NewYork,NY:MoutondeGruyter.
Ozturk,I.(2007).Thetextualorganisationofresearcharticleintroductioninapplied
linguistics:Variabilitywithinasinglediscipline.EnglishforSpecificPurposes,
26(1),2538.
Pho,P.D.(2008).Researcharticleabstractsinappliedlinguisticsandeducational
technology:Astudyoflinguisticrealizationsofrhetoricalstructureandauthorial
stance.DiscourseStudies,10(2),231250.
Pho,P.D.(2009).Anevaluationofthreedifferentapproachestotheanalysisofresearch
articleabstracts.MonashUniversityLinguisticsPapers,6(2),1116.
SalagerMeyer,F.(1992)Atexttypeandmoveanalysisstudyofverbtenseand
modalitydistributioninmedicalEnglishabstracts.EnglishforSpecificPurposes,
11(2),93113.
Samraj,B.(2000).Discursivepracticesingraduatelevelcontentcourses:Thecaseof
environmentalscience.Text,20(3),347371.
Samraj,B.(2002).Disciplinaryvariationinabstracts:Thecaseofwildlifebehaviorand
conservationbiology.InJ.Flowerdew(Ed.),Academicdiscourse(pp.105120).
NewYork,NY:Longman.
Samraj,B.(2005).Anexplorationofagenreset:Researcharticleabstractsand
introductionintwodisciplines.EnglishforSpecificPurposes,24(2),141156.
Samraj,B.(2009).Movestructure.Manuscriptsubmittedforpublication.
Santos,M.B.D.(1996).Thetextualorganizationofresearchpaperabstractsinapplied
linguistics.Text,16(4),481499.
Swales,J.M.(1981).Aspectsofarticleintroductions.Birmingham,England:Language
StudiesUnit,UniversityofAston.
Swales,J.M.(1990).Genreanalysis:Englishinacademicandresearchsettings.
Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Swales,J.M.(2004).Researchgenres:Explorationsandapplications.Cambridge,UK:
CambridgeUniversityPress.

44
Swales,J.M.,&Feak,C.B.(2009).Abstractsandthewritingofabstracts.AnnArbor,MI:
UniversityofMichiganPress.
Taylor,G.,&Chen,T.(1991).Linguistic,cultural,andsubculturalissuesincontrastive
discourseanalysis:AngloAmericanandChinesescientifictexts.Applied
Linguistics,12(3),319336.
VanBonn,S.,&Swales,J.M.(2007).EnglishandFrenchjournalabstractsinthe
languagesciences:Threeexploratorystudies.JournalofEnglishforAcademic
Purpose,6(2),93108.
Yang,R.Y,&Allison,D.(2003).Researcharticlesinappliedlinguistics:Movingfrom
resultstoconclusions.EnglishforSpecificPurposes,22(4),365385.

45
APPENDIX
SOURCESOFDATA:ABSTRACTSBYLANGUAGEBY
DISCIPLINES
46

EnglishLinguisticsAbstractsReferences
Borg,S.(2009).Englishlanguageteachersconceptionofresearch.AppliedLinguistics,
30,358389.
Tomiyama,M.(2009).AgeandproficiencyinL2Attrition:Datafromtwosiblings.
AppliedLinguistics,30,253276.
Csizer,K.&Kormos,J.(2009).Modelingtheroleofinterculturalcontactinthe
motivationoflearningEnglishasaforeignlanguage.AppliedLinguistics,30,166
186.
Laufer,B.&Girsai,N.(2008).Formfocusedinstructioninsecondlanguagevocabulary
learning:Acaseforcontrastiveanalysisandtranslation.AppliedLinguistics,29,
694717.
BJorkwillen,R.(2008).Routinetrouble:Howpreschoolchildrenparticipatein
multilingualinstruction.AppliedLinguistics,29,555578.
Derwing,T.M.,Munro,M.J&Thomson,R.I.(2008).AlongitudinalstudyofESL
learnersfluencyandcomprehensibilitydevelopment.AppliedLinguistics,29,
359381.
Borg,S.&Burns,A.(2008).IntegratinggrammarinadultTESOLclassrooms.Applied
Linguistics,29,456483.
Farrell,T.S.C.&Kun.S.T.K.(2008).Languagepolicy,languageteachersbeliefs,and
classroompractices.AppliedLinguistics,29,381404.
Cheng,A.(2008).Analyzinggenreexemplarsinpreparationforwriting:Thecaseofan
L2graduatestudentintheESPgenrebasedinstructionalframeworkof
academicliteracy.AppliedLinguistics,29,5072.
Kim,Y.&McDonough,K.(2008).Learnersproductionofpassivesdringsyntactic
primingactivities.AppliedLinguistics,29,149155.
ChineseLinguisticsAbstractsReferences
Gao,Y.S.(2009).AcquisitionofEnglishnullobjectconstructionbyChineselearnersof
English:Aninterfaceperspectiveofdiscourse,semanticsandsyntax.Foreign
LanguageTeachingandResearch,41(6),438446.
Chen,X.X.&LiH.N.(2009).Theeffectsofteacherswrittencorrectivefeedbackon
Englishwriting.ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,41(5),351358.
Peng,X.W.&Zhang,Sh.(2009).Tropeabilitydevelopment:anempiricalstudyofpre
schoolchildren.ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,41(5),359364.
Wang,L.F.&Ma,H.J.(2009).AcorpusstudyofEnglishspeechproducedbyChinese
collegestudents:Theinstanceofthespeaker.ForeignLanguageTeachingand
Research,41(5),365370.
47

Bao,G.(2009).SyntacticcomplexityinEFLlearnersessays:Amultidimentional
perspective.ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,41(4),291297.
Zhang,X.&Qi,L.(2009).Incidentalvocabularyacquisitioninnaturalreading.Foreign
LanguageTeachingandResearch,41(4),303308.
Zhao,F.L.(2009).Predictabilityofgrammaticalknowledgeonpragmaticknowledge.
ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,41(4),284290.
Peng,P.&Tao,Sh(2009).NativeChinesespeakingchildrenlearningtoreadEnglish:
Theroleofdecoding,Englishlanguagecomprehensionandgeneralcognitive
ability.ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,41(1),3037.
Wang,J.J.&Zhu,Y.Y.(2008).Teacherlearninginthecontextofteacherstudent
relationship:AnarrativeinquiryofanEFLteacher.ForeignLanguageTeaching
andResearch,40(4),270278.
Gu,S.S.&Wang,T.Sh.(2008).Theimpactofnegativefeedback,noticingandmodified
outputonEFLquestiondevelopment.ForeignLanguageTeachingandResearch,
40(4),270278.
EnglishChemistryAbstractsReferences
B.1.TheJournalofAmericanChemistrySociety
Campbell,E.L.,Zuhl,A.M.,Liu,Ch.M.&Boger,D.L.(2010).TotalSynthesisof(+)
Fendleridine(Aspidoalbidine)and(+)1Acetylaspidoalbidine.Journalof
AmericanChemistrySociety,132(9),30093012.
Ma,B.,Banerjee,B.,Litvinov,D.N.,He,L.W.&Castle,S.L.(2010).TotalSynthesisofthe
AntimitoticBicyclicPeptideCelogentinC.JournalofAmericanChemistry
Society,132(9),11591171.
Nicolaou,K.C.,DavidJ.A.L.,Tria,E.G.S.&Ellery,S.P.(2009).TotalSynthesisof
PlatensimycinandRelatedNaturalProducts.JournalofAmericanChemistry
Society,131(9),1690516918.
Trost,B.M.,OBoyle,B.M.&Hund,D.(2009).TotalSynthesisandStereochemical
Assignmentof()UshikulideA.JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131(9),
1506115074.
Zhang,M.,Huang,X.P.,Shen,L.Q.,&Qin,Y.(2009).TotalSynthesisoftheAkuammiline
Alkaloid(()Vincorine.JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131(9),6013
6020.
Williams,D.R.,Walsh,M.J.,&Miller,N.A.(2009).StudiesfortheSynthesisofXenicane
Diterpenes.AStereocontrolledTotalSynthesisof4Hydroxydictyolactone.
JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131(9),90389045.
Nicolaou,K.C.,Becker,J.,Lim,Y.H.,Lemire,A.,Neubauer,T.&Montero.A.(2009).Total
SynthesisandBiologicalEvaluationof(+)and()BisanthraquinoneAntibiotic
48

BE43472BandRelatedCompounds.JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131
(9),1481214826.
Custar,D.W.,Zabawa,T.P.,Hines,J.,Crews,C.M.,&Scheidt,K.A.(2009).TotalSynthesis
andStructureActivityInvestigationoftheMarineNaturalProductNeopeltolide.
JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131(9),1240612414.
Ishikawa,H.,Colby,D.A.,Seto,S.,Va,P.,Tam,A.,Kakei,H.,Rayl,T.J.,Hwang,I.&Boger,D.L.
(2009).TotalSynthesisofVinblastine,Vincristine,RelatedNaturalProducts,and
KeyStructuralAnalogues.JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,131(9),4904
4916.
Bringmann,G.,Gulder,T.,Hertlein,B.,Hemberger,Y.&Meyer,F.(2010).TotalSynthesis
oftheN,CCoupledNaphthylisoquinolineAlkaloidsAncistrocladiniumAandB
andRelatedAnalogues.JournalofAmericanChemistrySociety,132(9),1151
1158.
ChineseChemistryAbstractsReferences
Yi,P.G.,Wang,T.,Zhou,J.M.,Peng,H.L.,Li,X.F.,Yu,X.Y.,&Wang,C.X.(2009).Synthesis,
CrystalStructure,andSpectroscopicStudieson2(3hydroxy2pyridyl)
benzimidazole.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(24),28032808.
Qin,J.K.,Han,L.Y.,Lan,W.L.,Tang,H.,Su,G.F.,Dai,Z.K.,&Xu,Q.(2009).Synthesisand
BioactivityofFuroxanthoneDerivatives.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(22),2597
2606.
Hu,G.Q.,Zhang,Z.Q.,Wang,H.Y.,Wu,X.K.,Wang,X.,Du,G.J.,Xie,S.Q.,Huang,W.L.,&
Zhang,H.B.(2009).SynthesisandAntitumorActivityofFluoroquinolon3yl
FusedHeterocyclicSystems(III):Striazolothiadiazinone,DerivativesDerived
Enrofloxacin.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(22),25922596.
She,J.N.,Xu,K.Z.,Zhang,H.,Huang,J.,Zhao,F.Q.,&Song,J.R.(2009).PreparationCrystal
StructureandThermalBehaviorof1,4dihydro5h(dinitromethylidene)
tetrazole(DNMT).ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(23),26452649.
Yang,X.D.,Tun,Y.X.,Han,J.Y.,Yuan,H.,&Du,C.B.(2009)OneStepSynthesisof
DiphenylCarbonateoverPalladium/MetaldopedManganeseOxideOctahedral
MolecularSieveCatalysts.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(24),28092814.
Xu,B.,Li,Q.,Fan,Z.J.,Bao,L.L.,&Zhao,K.Q.(2009).CrystalStructureandTheoretical
CalculationofNphenylN(1,3thiazol2yl)1,2,3benzothiadiazole7
carboxamidinewithBioactivity.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(24),27732778.
Zhao,L.Y.,Ma,H.R.,Sun,Z.G.,&Guan,J.G.(2010).SynthesisandPropertiesofNonionic
ActiveEmulsifiersandTheirBasedWaterborneEpoxyResins.ACTACHIMICA
SINICA,68(02),174180.
Zhang,Z.Y.,Chen,Q.,&An,D.L.(2009).ConvenientSynthesisof(1propynyl)Arenes
ThroughaOnepotDoubleEliminationReaction.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(20),
23492354.
49

Ren,X.J.,Han,M.Y.,Li,Y.,&Xie,Z.X.(2009).Synthesisof3hydroxy24norchol5en
23oicAcid.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(14),17001704.
Wu,X.D.,Liu,D.Z.,Zhou,X.Q.,Yang,X.W.,&Zhu,K.M.(2009).Synthesisand5
reductaseInhibitionActivityEvaluationof3keto4aza5androstene17
oximidoDerivatives.ACTACHIMICASINICA,67(13),14871491.

Li Yungenre Analisys

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Li Yungenre Analisys

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

AGENREANALYSISOFENGLISHANDCHINESERESEARCHARTICLE

Você também pode gostar