Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes
Vol. 1:2 (2020) ► pp.92–119
Full length Papers

Discipline and methodological paradigm

A case study of EAL scholars’ perceptions of research writing in political science

| National Research University Higher School of Economics | University of Helsinki

In contemporary academia, multilingual scholars using English as an additional language (EAL) are actively engaged in knowledge construction producing more research texts in English than native speakers (Hyland, 2016). Having a more general purpose to gain insights into the factors that influence multilingual scholars’ research writing practices in English, this case study seeks to explore how EAL users perceive disciplinary norms of epistemic stance expression in political science. It is based on interviews with 5 Russian political scientists and on the analysis of their research texts. The findings suggest that the participants do not seem to have a shared understanding of disciplinary norms regarding epistemic stance expression; however, their narratives highlight the importance of the methodological paradigm the texts belong to for their writing practices. The study is a contribution to the discussion of the role of the discipline in EAL scholars’ research writing practices and linguistic and rhetorical variability of research texts within one discipline. The results of this study have pedagogical implications for ERPP course designers and practitioners.

Keywords: research writing, multilingual scholars, EAL, disciplinary norms, methodological paradigm, epistemic stance
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Participants and settings
  • 3.Data and methods
    • 3.1Text analysis
    • 3.2Interviews
    • 3.3Analysis of the interviews
  • 4.Results
    • 4.1Participants’ perceptions of disciplinary norms of epistemic stance expression
    • 4.2Epistemic stance expression in interviewees’ texts
    • 4.3Factors other than discipline influencing writers’ epistemic stance expression
      • 4.3.1Methodological paradigm
      • 4.3.2The influence of writers’ educational, teaching, and research experience
      • 4.3.3L1 influence
  • 5.Discussion and conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 30 November 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jerpp.20004.shc
References
Becher, T.
(1989) Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Open University Press/SRHE.Google Scholar
Becher, T., & Trowler, P.
(2001) Academic tribes and territories. Open University Press/SRHE.Google Scholar
Belcher, D., & Hirvela, A.
(2005) Writing the qualitative dissertation: what motivates and sustains commitment to a fuzzy genre? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4 1, 187–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, B.
(1999) Vertical and horizontal discourse: An essay. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20 (2), 157–173. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E.
(1999) The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman.Google Scholar
Blakeslee, A., & Fleischer, C.
(2019) Becoming a writing researcher. (2nd ed.). Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bondi, M., & Lorés-Sanz, R.
(Eds.) (2014) Abstracts in academic discourse. Variation and change. Peter Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brinkman, S.
(2013) Qualitative interviewing. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cao, F., & Hu, G.
(2014) Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66 1, 15–31. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coates, J.
(1987) Epistemic modality and spoken discourse. Transactions of the Philological Society, 85 (1), 110–131. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Connor, U.
(2011) Intercultural rhetoric in the writing classroom. University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W.
(2012) Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (4th ed.). Pearson.Google Scholar
Curry, M. J., Lillis, T.
(2019) Unpacking the lore on multilingual scholars publishing in English: A discussion paper. Publications, 7 (2), 27. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fløttum, K.
(2012) Variation of stance and voice across cultures. In K. Hyland et al. (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres (pp. 218–231). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fløttum, K., Dahl, T., & Kinn, T.
(2006) Academic voices. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Flowerdew, J., & Costley, T.
(Eds.) (2017) Discipline-specific writing: Theory into practice. Routledge.Google Scholar
Garton, S., & Copland, F.
(2010) ‘I like this interview; I get cakes and cats!’: The effect of prior relationships on interview talk. Qualitative Research, 10 (5), 533–551. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Giddens, A.
(1984) The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Polity.Google Scholar
Gnutzmann, C., & Rabe, F.
(2014) “Theoretical subtleties” or “text modules”? German researchers’ language demands and attitudes across disciplinary cultures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 13 1, 31–40. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habibie, P., & Hyland, K.
(Eds.) (2019) Novice writers and scholarly publication: Authors, mentors, gatekeepers. Palgrave Macmillam. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harwood, N.
(2009) An interview-based study of the functions of citations in academic writing across two disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 41 (3), 497–518. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harwood, N., & Petrić, B.
(2012) Performance in the citing behavior of two student writers. Written Communication, 29 (1), 55–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hu, G., & Cao, F.
(2011) Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistic articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43 1, 2795–2809. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015) Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39 1, 12–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K.
(1998) Hedging in scientific research articles. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000) Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Longman.Google Scholar
(2005) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7 (2), 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2016) Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic injustice. Journal of Second Language Writing, 31 1, 58–69. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F.
(2016) Change of attitude? A diachronic study of stance. Written Communication, 33 (3), 251–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hynninen, N., & Kuteeva, M.
(2017) “Good” and “acceptable” English in L2 research writing: Ideals and realities in history and computer science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30 1, 53–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jenkins, J., & Mauranen, A.
(Eds.) (2019) Linguistic diversity. Insider accounts of the use of English and other languages in universities within Asia, Australasia, and Europe. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kaplan, R.
(1966) Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16 1, 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kaufhold, K., & McGrath, L.
(2019) Revisiting the role of ‘discipline’ in writing for publication in two social sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 40 1, 115–128. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S.
(2009) InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). Sage.Google Scholar
Lakić, I., Vuković, M., & Živković, B.
(2015) Academic discourse across cultures. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Lancaster, Z.
(2016) Using corpus results to guide the discourse-based interview: A study of one student’s awareness of stance in academic writing in philosophy. Journal of Writing Research, 8 (1), 119–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lave, J., & Wenger, E.
(1991) Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le, T. N. P., & Harrington, M.
(2015) Phraseology used to comment on results in the Discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39 1, 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lorés-Sanz, R.
(2016) ELF in the making? simplification and hybridity in abstract writing. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca 5 (1), 53–81. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J.
(1977) Semantics. Vol. 2 1. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
MacDonald, S.
(1994) Professional academic writing in the humanities and social sciences. Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Manathunga, C., & Brew, A.
(2014) Beyond tribes and territories: New metaphors for new times. In P. Trowler, S. Murray, & V. Bamber (Eds.), Tribes and territories in the 21st-century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education (pp. 44–56). Routledge.Google Scholar
Martín-Martín, P.
(2008) The mitigation of scientific claims in research papers: A comparative study. International Journal of English Studies, 8 (2), 133–152.Google Scholar
Mur-Dueñas, P., & Ŝinkūi̇enė, J.
(Eds.) (2018) Intercultural perspectives on research writing. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Odell, L., Goswami, D., & Herrington, A.
(1983) The discourse-based interview: A procedure for exploring the tacit knowledge of writers in nonacademic settings. In P. Mosenthal, L. Tamor, & S. A. Walmsley (Eds.), Research on writing (pp. 221–236). Longman.Google Scholar
Olinger, A. R.
(2014) On the instability of disciplinary style: Common and conflicting metaphors and practices in text, talk, and gesture. Research in the teaching of English, 48 (4), 453–478.Google Scholar
Palmer, F. R.
(1986) Mood and modality. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Petrić, B., & Harwood, N.
(2013) Task requirements, task representation, and self-reported citation functions: An exploratory study of a successful L2 student’s writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12 1, 110–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shchemeleva, I.
(2019) “It seems plausible to maintain that…”: Clusters of epistemic stance expressions in written academic ELF texts. ESP Today, 7 (1), 24–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Silver, M.
(2012) Voice and stance across disciplines in academic discourse. In K. Hyland, & C. S. Guinda (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres (pp. 202–217). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tribble, C.
(2017) ELFA vs. Genre: A new paradigm war in EAP writing instruction? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 25 1, 30–44. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trowler, P.
(2014a) Depicting and researching disciplines: Strong and moderate essentialist approaches. Studies in Higher Education, 39 1, 1720–1731. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014b) Disciplines and interdisciplinarity: Conceptual groundwork. In P. Trowler, M. Saunders, & V. Bamber (Eds.), Tribes and territories in the 21st century: Rethinking the significance of disciplines in higher education (pp. 5–29). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tusting, K., McCulloch, S., Bhatt, I., Hamilton, M., & Barton, D.
(2019) Academic writing: The dynamics of knowledge creation. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vassileva, I.
(2001) Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20 (1), 83–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vold, E. T.
(2006b) Epistemic modality markers in research articles: A cross-linguistic and crossdisciplinary study. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 16 (1), 61–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wang, J., & Jiang, F.
(2018) Epistemic stance and authorial presence in scientific research writing: Hedges, boosters and self-mentions across disciplines and writer groups. In P. Mur-Dueñas, & J. Ŝinkūi̇enė (Eds.), Intercultural perspectives on research writing (pp. 195–216). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wilder, L.
(2012) Rhetorical strategies and genre conventions in literary studies: Teaching and writing in the disciplines. Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Wu, X., Mauranen, A., & Lei, L.
(2020) Syntactic complexity in English as a lingua franca academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 43 1, 1–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Shchemeleva, Irina
2021. “There’s No Discrimination, These Are Just the Rules of the Game”: Russian Scholars’ Perception of the Research Writing and Publication Process in English. Publications 9:1 ► pp. 8 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 september 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.