the discussion section of research articles in applied linguistics

373 Pages·2015·2.34 MB·English

THE DISCUSSION SECTION OF RESEARCH ARTICLES IN
APPLIED LINGUISTICS: GENERIC STRUCTURE AND
STANCE FEATURES

LEILA DOBAKHTI

THESIS SUBMITTED IN FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

FACULTY OF LANGUAGES AND LINGUISTICS
UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA
KUALA LUMPUR

October 2011
UNIVERSITY OF MALAYA
ORIGINAL LITERARY WORK DECLARATION

Name of Candidate: Leila Dobakhti (I.C/Passport No.: K8152770)
Registration/Matric No.: THA080037
Name of Degree: The Doctor of Philosophy
Title of Project Paper/Research Report/Dissertation/Thesis (“this work”):
The Discussion Section of Research Articles in Applied Linguistics: Generic Structure and
Stance Features

Field of Study: Genre Analysis
I do solemnly and sincerely declare that:
(1) I am the sole author/writer of this Work;
(2) This Work is original;
(3) Any use of any work in which copyright exists was done by way of fair dealing and for
permitted purposes and any excerpt or extract from, or reference to or reproduction of any
copyright work has been disclosed expressly and sufficiently and the title of the Work and
its authorship have been acknowledged in this Work;
(4) I do not have any actual knowledge nor do I ought reasonably to know that the making of
this work constitutes an infringement of any copyright work;
(5) I hereby assign all and every rights in the copyright to this Work to the University of
Malaya (“UM”), who henceforth shall be owner of the copyright in this Work and that
any reproduction or use in any form or by any means whatsoever is prohibited without the
written consent of UM having been first had and obtained;
(6) I am fully aware that if in the course of making this Work I have infringed any copyright
whether intentionally or otherwise, I may be subject to legal action or any other action as
may be determined by UM.

Candidate’s Signature Date: 10 October 2011

Subscribed and solemnly declared before,

Witness’s Signature Date: 10 October 2011

Name: Dr. Norizah Hassan

Designation: Supervisor

ii
ABSTRACT

This thesis is a mixed-method genre-based study which analyzes the Discussion section
of qualitative and quantitative research articles in the field of Applied Linguistics. It is
particularly focused on examining the generic structures and stance features of these
two sets of articles. The study consists of two main parts. In the first part, 15 qualitative
and 15 quantitative RAs’ Discussion sections were analyzed employing Swales’ (1990,
2004) move structure model. In the second part of the study, Hyland’s (1999, 2005,
2008) taxonomy of stance features – hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self
mention – was used to investigate stance features. This part of the study was conducted
in two sections. In the first part, using WordPilot 2002, these four stance features were
investigated in two specialized sub-corpora of 100 qualitative and 100 quantitative
research articles’ Discussion sections. The corpus analysis gave insightful information
about the overall frequency as well as forms of stance features in the qualitative and
quantitative sub-corpora. In the second part, in order to identify in which parts of the
Discussion section each of these stance features were clustered in, these features were
investigated in various moves of the Discussion sections of 10 qualitative and 10
quantitative research articles. Identifying the main moves in which each of these stance
features occurred more frequently, helped to justify and account for the differences
identified in the frequency of these features in 200 research articles. It also helped to
identify the main function of these features based on the communicative purpose of the
moves that the stance features appeared more frequently in. After the text analyses were
completed, interviews were carried out with four specialist informants to supplement
them. The aim of conducting these interviews was to obtain the insiders’ views on the
conventions of the field and to verify the findings. Overall, the analysis revealed
similarities as well as interesting differences between these two sets of articles in terms
of generic structure and stance features. The differences and similarities can be
attributed to the disciplinary conventions, different methodologies, and in the case of
stance features to generic structure of these two sets of articles.

iii
ABSTRAK

Tesis in adalah kajian berasakan genre menggunakan kaedah campuran yang
menganalisis seksyen “Discussion” yang terdapat dalam artikel ilmiah kualitatif dan
kuantitatif dalam bidang Linguistik Terapan. Tesis ini bertumpu kepada menilai struktur
generik dan ciri-ciri “stance” yang terdapat pada kedua-dua set artikel ini. Kajian ini
mengandungi dua bahagian utama. Dalam bahagian pertama, 15 artikel ilmiah kualitatif
dan 15 artikel ilmiah kuantitatif dianalisis menggunakan model struktur move Swales
(1990, 2004). Dalam bahagian kedua kajian ini, taksonomi ciri-ciri “stance” Hyland
(1999, 2005, 2008) – “hedges, boosters, attitude markers” dan “self mention” –
digunakan untuk mengkaji ciri-ciri “stance” dalam seksyen “Discussion” artikel ilmiah
kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Bahagian kedua ini dilaksanakan dalam dua seksyen. Dalam
seksyen pertama, dengan menggunakan WordPilot 2002, keempat-empat ciri “stance”
dikaji dalam dua sub-korpora khusus daripada 100 artikel ilmiah kualitatif dan 100
artikel ilmiah kuantitatif. Analisis korpora memberi maklumat bermakna tentang
kekerapan keseluruhan dan juga bentuk untuk ciri-ciri “stance” di dalam sub-korpora
kualitatif dan kuantitatif. Dalam seksyen kedua, bagi mengenal pasti bahagian mana
ciri-ciri “stance” ini dikelompokkan dalam seksyen “Discussion”, ciri-ciri “stance” ini
telah dikaji dalam pelbagai “moves” dalam seksyen “Discussion” daripada 10 artikel
ilmiah kualitatif dan 10 artikel ilmiah kuantitatif. Setelah mengenal pasti “moves”
utama di mana setiap ciri “stance” berlaku dengan lebih kerap, dapatan ini membantu
mengesahkan dan menjelaskan perbezaan yang dikenal pasti dari segi kekerapan ciri-
ciri ini di dalam 200 artikel ilmiah. Ia juga membantu untuk mengenal pasti fungsi
utama ciri-ciri ini berdasarkan tujuan komunikasi “moves” di mana ciri-ciri “stance”
muncul dengan lebih kerap. Setelah analisis teks dilakukan, temu bual telah dijalankan
bersama empat pakar informan bagi menyokong dapatan. Tujuan melakukan temu bual
ini adalah untuk mendapatkan pandangan pakar tentang konvensyen dalam bidang ini
dan juga mengesahkan dapatan. Secara keseluruhan, analisis menunjukkan terdapat
persamaan dan perbezaan, termasuk juga perbezaan yang menarik tentang kedua-dua set
artikel ini dari segi struktur generik dan ciri-ciri “stance”. Perbezaan dan persamaan ini
boleh dikaitkan kepada konvensyen disiplin dan kaedah penyelidikan yang berbeza,
dan dalam kes “stance” perbezaan dan persamaan ini boleh dikaitkan kepada struktur
generic kedua-dua set artikel ini.

iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All praise and thanks to Allah S.W.T who has helped and guided me throughout my
entire life. Thank you my majestic Allah for giving me the strength to accomplish this
research.
I wish to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Dr. Norizah Hassan, my supervisor, who
supported me from the first stage of my thesis in every possible aspect. Without her
intellectual and emotional support, advice, assistance and continuous guidance, I could
not have finished this research on time. All your kindness and help will not be forgotten
indeed.
I am deeply and forever indebted to my parents, Aidin and Akram, for all their
sacrifices, moral support and endless love. They suffered patiently during all these years
that I was doing my studies away from home. Mom, Dad thank you so very much.
I take this opportunity to convey my love and gratitude to my beloved husband, Dr.
Mohammad Zohrabi, who in the first place encouraged me to pursue my Ph.D. Your
love, patience, understanding, continuous support and encouragement in various forms
inspired me as I faced all the obstacles in the completion of this thesis.
I would like to thank my specialist informants who gave their time generously and
answered my questions patiently.
I would also like to thank my friends both those back home and those here for all their
love and support. They proved to me that “friends are the most important ingredients in
the recipe of life”.

Leila Dobakhti
University of Malaya
October 2011

v
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION ii
ABSTRACT iii
ABSTRAK iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS v
LIST OF FIGURES xiii
LIST OF TABLES xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS xvi
LIST OF APPENDICES xvii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Introduction to the Study 1
1.2 Rationale of Studying Qualitative and Quantitative Research Articles 4
1.3 Purpose of the Study 6
1.4 Objectives of the Study 7
1.5 Research Questions 8
1.6 Organization of the Study 8
1.7 Summary of the Chapter 9
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
2.1 Introduction 10
2.2 The New Rhetoric Approach to Genre 11
2.3 Systemic Functional Linguistics Approach to Genre 15
2.3.1 The Context of Situation 16
2.3.2 The Context of Culture 18
2.3.3 Distinguishing the Generic Identity 19
2.4 English for Specific Purposes Approaches to Genre 22
2.4.1 The Concept of Genre 23
2.4.1.1 Swales’ Definition of Genre 23
2.4.1.2 Bhatia’s Definition of Genre 26
2.4.2 Discourse Community 30
2.4.3 Language Learning Task 32
2.5 A Comparison of the Three Approach to Genre 33
vi
2.6 Swales’ Model of Genre Analysis 40
2.7 Studies on Discussion Section of Research Articles 41
2.8 Relationship between Genres 52
2.8.1 Genre Sets 52
2.8.2 Genre Systems 53
2.8.3 Genre Chains 55
2.8.4 Genre Network 55
2.8.5 Genre Colonies 55
2.9 Genre Analysis and Contrastive Rhetoric 57
2.10 Genre Analysis and Corpus Linguistics 60
2.11 The Concept of Stance 65
2.11.1 Hedges 69
2.11.2 Boosters 77
2.11.3 Attitude Markers 81
2.11.4 Self-mention 83
2.12 Summary of the Chapter 89
CHAPTER 3: DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction 90
3.2 Research Design 90
3.3 The Corpus of the Study 91
3.3.1 The Procedure of Selecting the Journals 91
3.3.2 The Procedure of Selecting the Articles 94
3.3.2.1 Identifying Quantitative and Qualitative RAs 94
3.3.2.2 Selecting the Articles for Analyzing Generic Structure 96
3.3.2.3 Selecting the Articles for Investigating Stance Features 97
3.4 Pilot Study 99
3.5 Data Analysis 99
3.5.1 Identifying the Generic Structure 99
3.5.1.1 Definitions of a Move and a Step 100
3.5.1.2 The Procedure of Analysis 100
3.5.1.3 The Identification of Moves and Steps 101
3.5.1.4 The Labeling of Moves, Steps and Sub-steps 102
3.5.1.5 The Validation of the Data Analysis Findings 103
3.5.2 Investigating Stance Features 104
vii
3.6 Interviews 107
3.7 Summary of the Chapter 108
CHAPTER 4: THE GENERIC STRUCTURE OF DISCUSSION SECTION OF
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH ARTICLES
4.1 Introduction 109
4.2 The Generic Structure of Discussion Section of Qualitative 109
Research Articles
4.2.1 Move 1: Providing Background Information 113
4.2.2 Move 2: Stating Findings 114
4.2.3 Move 3: Providing Evidence for Findings 115
4.2.4 Move 4: Commenting on Findings 116
4.2.4.1 Step1: Explaining 117
4.2.4.2 Step2: Interpreting 118
4.2.4.3 Step3: Evaluating 119
4.2.5 Move 5: Supporting the Comments on Findings 121
4.2.5.1 Step1: Referring to Data 121
4.2.5.2 Step2: Referring to Literature 122
4.2.6 Move 6: Comparing Findings with Literature 123
4.2.6.1 Step1: Indicating Consistency of Findings with 124
Literature
4.2.6.2 Step2: Indicating Inconsistency of Findings with 125
Literature
4.2.7 Move 7: Making Recommendations 126
4.2.7.1 Step1: Making Suggestions for Practice 126
4.2.7.2 Step2: Recommending Further Research 128
4.2.8 Move 8: Making Deductions 129
4.2.9 Move 9: Supporting Deductions/Suggestions 131
4.2.9.1 Step1: Referring to Data 131
4.2.9.2 Step2: Referring to Literature 132
4.2.10 Move 10: Evaluating the Study 133
4.2.10.1 Step1: Stating Significance of the Study 133
4.2.10.2 Step2: Stating Limitations of the Study 134
4. 2.11 Move 11: Summarizing the Study 135
4.3 Occurrences of the Moves and Steps in Discussion Section of 135
Qualitative Research Articles
viii
4.3.1 Frequency of Appearance of the Moves and Steps in the 136
Sub-Corpus
4.3.2 Overall Frequency of the Moves and Steps in the Whole 139
Sub-corpus
4.3.3 Cycle of Moves 141
4.4. Summary of the Chapter 143
CHAPTER 5: THE GENERIC STRUCTURE OF DISCUSSION SECTION OF
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH ARTICLES
5.1 Introduction 145
5.2 The Generic Structure of Discussion Section of Quantitative 145
Research Articles
5.2.1 Move 1: Providing Background Information 146
5.2.2 Move 2: Stating Findings 147
5.2.2.1 Step1: Reporting Findings 147
5.2.2.2 Step2: Summarizing Findings 148
5.2.3 Move 3: Commenting on Findings 148
5.2.3.1 Step1: Explaining 149
5.2.3.2 Step2: Interpreting 150
5.2.3.3 Step3: Evaluating 151
5.2.4 Move 4: Comparing Findings with Literature 152
5.2.4.1 Step 1: Indicating Consistency of Findings with 153
Literature
5.2.4.2 Step2: Indicating Inconsistency of Findings with 154
Literature
5.2.5 Move 5: Explaining Inconsistency of Findings with Literature 155
5.2.6 Move6: Making Deductions 156
5.2.7 Move7: Supporting Deductions 157
5.2.7.1 Referring to Findings 157
5.2.7.2 Referring to Methodology 157
5.2.7.3 Referring to Literature 158
5.2.8 Move8: Evaluating the Study 159
5.2.8.1 Stating Significance of the Study 159
5.2.8.2 Stating Limitations of the Study 159
5.2.9 Move 9: Making Recommendations 160
5.2.9.1 Step1: Making Suggestions for Practice 161
5.2.9.2 Step2: Recommending Further Research 161
ix
5.2.10 Move 10: Summarizing the Study 162
5.3 Occurrences of the Moves and Steps in Discussion Section of the 163
Quantitative Research Articles
5.3.1 Frequency of Appearance of the Moves and Steps in the 163
Sub-Corpus
5.3.2 Overall Frequency of the Moves and Steps in the Whole 166
Sub-Corpus
5.3.3 Cycle of the Moves 169
5.4. Summary of the Chapter 171
CHAPTER 6: A COMPARISON OF THE GENERIC STRUCTURES OF
DISCUSSION SECTION OF QUALITATIVE AND
QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH ARTICLES
6.1 Introduction 173
6.2 Moves That Appeared in Both Sub-Corpora 173
6.2.1 Providing Background Information 174
6.2.2 Stating Findings 177
6.2.3 Commenting on Findings 178
6.2.4 Comparing Findings with Literature 186
6.2.5 Making Deductions 189
6.2.6 Supporting Deductions/Suggestion 190
6.2.7 Evaluating the Study 191
6.2.8 Making Recommendations 194
6.2.9 Summarizing the Study 198
6.3 Moves That Appeared Only in the Qualitative Sub-Corpus 198
6.3.1 Providing Evidence for Findings 198
6.3.2 Supporting the Comments on Findings 200
6.4 Moves That Appeared Only in the Quantitative Sub-Corpus 201
6.5 Steps Used Only in the Qualitative Sub-Corpus 205
6.6 Step Used Only in the Quantitative Sub-Corpus 208
6.7 Overview of the Findings 209
6.8 Summary of the Chapter 215
CHAPTER 7: STANCE FEATURES IN DISCUSSION SECTION OF
QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH
ARTICLES
7.1 Introduction 217
x