Cover not available
Article published In:
Register Studies
Vol. 1:1 (2019) ► pp.168–198

Register in English for Academic Purposes and English for Specific Purposes

| Portland State University
Susan Conrad, Professor of Applied Linguistics at Portland State University (USA), contributes this article on the applications of register research to English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and English for Specific Purposes (ESP). Her research focuses on topics including academic register variation, discipline-specific language, student and workplace writing, and grammar and writing pedagogy. Since the 1990s, her work has advocated for and exemplified the ways in which register-based descriptions can facilitate language teaching, including building awareness of register variation in learners and novice writers themselves. This focus is illustrated in her book Real Grammar: A Corpus-Based Approach to English (Conrad & Biber 2009, Pearson Longman), which takes many of the major register-based patterns of variation in English grammar (described in the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English, Biber et al. 1999) and translates them into practical grammar lessons for language learners, making explicit how grammar use is mediated by register. Her applied focus is also evident in her work as Principal Investigator for the Civil Engineering Writing Project <http://​www​.cewriting​.org/>. The project, funded by the National Science Foundation, addresses the writing needs of Civil Engineering students through corpus-based register comparisons (of university student writing, practitioner workplace writing, and published academic writing), applying the results to the development and evaluation of pedagogical materials that improve students’ preparation for writing in the workplace.
Keywords: language teaching and learning, disciplinary variation, workplace and professional communication, engineering writing, genre
Article outline
  • 1.How is register conceptualized in the field of EAP/ESP?
  • 2.How does register relate to the research goals within EAP/ESP?
  • 3.What are the major methodological approaches that are used to analyze or account for register in EAP/ESP?
  • 4.What does a typical register study look like in EAP/ESP?
    • 4.1Methodology
    • 4.2Findings
  • 5.What are the most promising areas of future register research in EAP/ESP?
  • Acknowledgements
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 26 April 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.18008.con
References (105)
References
Atkinson, D. (1992). The evolution of medical research writing from 1735 to 1985: The case of the Edinburgh Medical Journal . Applied Linguistics, 13(4), 337–374. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1996). The philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675–1975: A sociohistorical discourse analysis. Language in Society, 25(3), 333–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baffy, M. (2017). Shifting frames to construct a Legal English class. English for Academic Purposes, 251, 58–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Banks, D. (2008). The development of scientific writing: Linguistic features and historical context. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Banset, E., & Parsons, G. (1989). Communications failure in Hyatt Regency disaster. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering, 115(3), 273–288. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barber, C. (1962). Some measurable characteristics of modern scientific prose. In F. Behre (Ed.), Contributions to English syntax and philology (pp. 21–43). Gothenborg: Almquist & Wiksell.Google Scholar
Beer, D., & McMurrey, D. (2014). A guide to writing as an engineer, 4th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Bhatia, V. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Bhatia, V., & Bremner, S. (2012). English for business communication. Language Teaching, 45(4), 410–445. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (1986). Spoken and written textual dimensions in English: Resolving the contradictory findings. Language 62(2), 384–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Register as a predictor of linguistic variation. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8(1), 9–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press). Register, genre, style, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistic, 25(3), 371–405. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Egbert, J. (2016). Register variation on the searchable web. Journal of English Linguistics, 44(2), 95–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies (pp. 66–83). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 5–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). The Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Cao, Y., & Xiao, R. (2013). A multi-dimensional contrastive study of English abstracts by native and non-native writers. Corpora, 8(2), 209–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charles, M. (2006). Phraseological patterns in reporting clauses used in citation: A corpus-based study of theses in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 25(3), 310–331. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Charles, M., & Pecorari, D. (2016). Introducing English for academic purposes. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Chen, S., Boyajian, D., & Inyang, H. (2011). SLSE damage detection technique for foundation strengthening using plates. Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 29(3), 237–248. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14(2), 30–49.Google Scholar
Cheng, W., Greaves, C., & Warren, M. (2008). A corpus-driven study of discourse intonation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S. (2015). Register variation. In D. Biber & R. Reppen (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of English corpus linguistics (pp. 309–329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). A comparison of practitioner and student writing in civil engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 106(2), 191–217. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). The use of passives and impersonal style in civil engineering writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(1), 38–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2001). Multi-dimensional methodology and the dimensions of register variation in English. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies (pp. 13–42). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Conrad, S. & Biber, D. (2009). Real grammar: A corpus-based approach to English. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Conrad, S., Kitch, W., Pfeiffer, T., Smith, T., & Tocco, J. (2015). Students writing for professional practice: A model for collaboration among faculty, practitioners and writing specialists. Proceedings of the 2015 American Society for Engineering Education Conference, Seattle, Washington. <[URL]> DOI logo
Conrad, S., Lamb, K., & Pfeiffer, T. (2018). Where grammar, content, and professional practice meet: The case of the passive voice. Proceedings of the 2018 American Society for Engineering Education Conference and Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT. <[URL]> DOI logo
Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397–423. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Couture, B. (1992). Categorizing professional discourse: Engineering, administrative, and technical/professional writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 6(1), 5–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Csomay, E., & Prades, A. (2018). Academic vocabulary in ESL student papers: A corpus-based study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 331, 100–118. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ding, D. (2002). The passive voice and social values in science. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 32(2), 137–154.Google Scholar
Dreyfus, S., Humphrey, S., Mahboob, A., & Martin, J. (2016). Genre pedagogy in higher education. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Egbert, J. (2014). Student perceptions of stylistic variation in introductory university textbooks. Linguistics and Education, 251, 64–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
English for Specific Purposes: An international research journal. (2018). <[URL]>
Ferguson, C. (1983). Sports announcer talk: Syntactic aspects of register variation. Language in Society, 12(2), 153–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fouché, I., van Dyk, T., & Butler, G. (2017). An “enlightening course that empowers first years”?: A holistic assessment of the impact of a first-year academic literacy course. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 271, 14–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friginal, E., Li, M., & Weigle, S. (2014). Revisiting multiple profiles of learner compositions: A comparison of highly rated NS and NNS essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 231, 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friginal, E., & Mustafa, S. (2017). A comparison of U.S.-based and Iraqi English research article abstracts using corpora. English for Academic Purpose, 251, 45–57. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2014). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35(3), 305–327. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardner, S. (2012). Genres and registers of student report writing: An SFL perspective on texts and practices. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(1), 52–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gollin-Kies, S., Hall, D., & Moore, S. (2015). Language for specific purposes. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gries, S. (2008). Dispersions and adjusted frequencies in corpora. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 403–437. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gwiasda, K. (1984). Of classrooms and contexts: Teaching engineers to write wrong. IEEE Transactions on Education, E-27, 148–150. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. (1993). Some grammatical problems in scientific English. In M. Halliday & J. Martin (Eds.), Writing science (pp. 69–85). London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Handford, M. (2010). The language of business meetings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hardy, J., & Römer, U. (2013). Revealing disciplinary variation in student writing: A multi-dimensional analysis of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora, 8(2), 183–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirvela, A. (2013). ESP and reading. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 76–94). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hunston, S. (2013). Systemic functional linguistics, corpus linguistics, and the ideology of science. Text & Talk, 331, 617–640. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 71, 173–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
John, P., Brooks, B., & Schriever, U. (2017). Profiling maritime communication by non-native speakers: A quantitative comparison between the baseline and standard marine communication phraseology. English for Specific Purposes, 471, 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move (pp. 73–103). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knuttson, O., Blåsjö, M., Hållsten, S., Karlström, P. (2012). Identifying different registers of digital literacy in virtual learning environments. The Internet and Higher Education, 15(4), 237–246. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koester, A. (2006). Investigating workplace discourse. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, D. (2001). Genres, registers, text types, domains, and styles: Clarifying the concepts and navigating a path through the BNC jungle. Language Learning & Technology, 5(3), 37–72.Google Scholar
Lee, J., & Casal, J. (2014). Metadiscourse in results and discussion chapters: A cross-linguistic analysis of English and Spanish thesis writers in engineering. System, 461, 39–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lessard-Clouston, M. (2010). Theology lectures as lexical environments: A case study of technical vocabulary use. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 308–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lillis, T., & Curry, M. (2006). Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars. Written Communication, 23(1), 3–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matthiessen, C. (2019). Register in systemic functional linguistics. Register Studies, 1(1), 10–14 (this issue). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mauranen, A. (2011). English as a lingua franca of the academic world. In D. Belcher, A. Johns, & B. Paltridge (Eds.), New directions in English for specific purposes research (pp. 143–173). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
McGrath, L. (2016). Self-mentions in anthropology and history research articles: Variation between and within disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 211, 86–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70(2), 151–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, D., & Biber, D. (2015). Evaluating reliability in quantitative vocabulary studies: The influence of corpus design and composition. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(1), 30–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mudraya, O. (2006). Engineering English: A lexical frequency instructional model. English for Specific Purposes, 25(2), 235–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myers, G. (2010). The discourse of blogs and wikis. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Nature (2017, March). Fake news: Science journalism can be evidence-based and compelling but still get it wrong [Editorial]. Nature, 5431 (7644) 1501.Google Scholar
Nelson, M. (2006). Semantic associations in Business English: A corpus-based analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 25(2), 217–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nesi, H., & Gardner, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Northcott, J. (2013). Legal English. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 214–226). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (Eds.) (2013). The handbook of English for Specific Purposes. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Parfitt, M. & Parfitt, E. (2007). Failures education: The key to better engineering design. Structure Magazine, January 2007, 10–12.Google Scholar
Parkinson, J. (2013). English for science and technology. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 155–173). Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Parkinson, J., & Musgrave, J. (2014). Development of noun phrase complexity in the writing of English for Academic Purposes students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 141, 48–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pessoa, S., Miller, R., & Kaufer, D. (2014). Students’ challenges and development in the transition to academic writing at an English-medium university in Qatar. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 52(2), 127–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reave, L. (2004). Technical communication instruction in engineering schools. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 18(4), 452–490. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Research Centre for Professional Communication in English (2017). Mission. <[URL]>
Römer, U., & O’Donnell, M. (2011). From student hard drive to web corpus (part 1): The design, compilation and genre classification of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora, 6(2), 159–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sageev, P., & Romanowski, C. (2001). A message from recent engineering graduates in the workplace: Results of a survey on technical communication skills. Journal of Engineering Education, 90(4), 685–693. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sales, H. (2006). Professional communication practices in engineering. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spector, T. (1994). Writing a scientific manuscript: Highlights for success. Journal of Chemical Education, 71(1), 47–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Staples, S. (2016). Identifying linguistic features of medical interactions: A register analysis. In L. Pickering, E. Friginal & S. Staples (Eds.), Talking at work: Corpus-based explorations of workplace discourse (pp. 179–208). London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tardy, C. (2011). ESP and multi-method approaches to genre analysis. In D. Belcher, A. Johns & B. Paltridge (Eds.), New directions in English for specific purposes research (pp. 143–173). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, S., Tucker, R., & Kelly, W. (1998). Critical communication variables. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 124(1), 58–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P., Hunston, S., Murakami, A., & Vajn, D. (2017). Multi-dimensional analysis, text constellations, and interdisciplinary discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(2), 153–186. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walsh, S., Morton, T., & O’Keeffe, A. (2011). Analysing university spoken interaction: A CL/CA approach. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 16(3), 325–345. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Widdowson, H. (1998). Communication and community: The pragmatics of ESP. English for Specific Purposes, 17(1), 3–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wingate, U. (2015). Academic literacy and student diversity: The case for inclusive practice. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, J. (2009). How technical communication textbooks fail engineering students. Technical Communication Quarterly, 18(4), 351–375. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woodrow, L. (2017). Introducing course design in English for specific purposes. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Marko, Karoline, Margit Reitbauer & Georg Pickl
2022. Same person, different platform. Register Studies 4:2 ► pp. 202 ff. DOI logo
Meyer, David & Verena Pietzner
2022. Reading textual and non-textual explanations in chemistry texts and textbooks – a review. Chemistry Education Research and Practice 23:4 ► pp. 768 ff. DOI logo
Jeaco, Stephen
2021. Exploring register withThe Prime Machine. Register Studies 3:2 ► pp. 279 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 july 2024. 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.