Cover not available
Part of
Advances in Corpus-based Research on Academic Writing: Effects of discipline, register, and writer expertise
Edited by Ute Römer-Barron, Viviana Cortes and Eric Friginal
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 95] 2020
► pp. 137–168

Combining rhetorical move analysis with multi-dimensional analysis

Research writing across disciplines

| Iowa State University
| Iowa State University
| University of North Texas
We carry out comprehensive form–function mapping in Introduction-Methods-Results-Discussion/Conclusion – structured research articles across 30 academic disciplines by merging move analysis (revealing rhetorical structure) and multi-dimensional (MD) analysis (modeling patterns of linguistic variation). These two analytic paradigms converge to map the communicative functions of text segments with patterns of functional linguistic variation, but the juxtaposition of these two approaches requires adaptations to the traditional MD methodology. The primary purpose of this chapter is to provide a detailed account of the methodological complexities of combining MD analysis and move analysis. We briefly present the results of the MD analysis, acknowledging that further methodological adjustments may be needed to arrive at an optimal multi-dimensional description of moves.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1Move analysis
    • 1.2Investigating the linguistic characteristics of moves
    • 1.3Multi-dimensional analyses of moves
  • 2.The ISURA corpus: Design, compilation, and move annotation
    • 2.1Design and compilation
    • 2.2Development of the IMRD/C move/step framework
    • 2.3Annotating the ISURA corpus for moves and steps
  • 3.Applying MD analysis to the move-annotated ISURA corpus: Methods
    • 3.1Preparing the move-annotated ISURA corpus for analysis: Text segmentation and tagging
    • 3.2Obtaining rates of occurrence for linguistic features: Adapting to a specialized domain and short texts
    • 3.3Conducting the statistical analyses
    • 3.4Calculating dimension scores and interpreting dimensions
  • 4.Dimensions of variation across rhetorical moves
    • 4.1Dimension 1: Interpretation and expansion vs. simple reportage
    • 4.2Dimension 2: Abstraction / Overt empiricism
    • 4.3Dimension 3: Procedural narration
    • 4.4Dimension 4: Interpreting results vs. informational density
  • 5.Applying and evaluating the MD analysis of moves
    • 5.1Evaluation of the dimensions and process
    • 5.2Implications and applications
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 20 February 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.95.06gra
References (39)
References
Anthony, Laurence & Lashkia, George V. 2003. Mover: A machine learning tool to assist in the reading and writing of technical papers. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication 46: 185–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1993. Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing 8(4): 243–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006. University Language: A Corpus-Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 23]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Multi-dimensional analysis: A historical synopsis. In Multi-Dimensional Analysis: Research Methods and Current Issues, Tony Berber Sardinha & Marcia Veirano Pinto (eds), 11–26. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Connor, Ulla & Upton, Thomas A. 2007. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 28]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Finegan, Edward. 2001. Intra-textual variation within medical research articles. In Variation in English: Multi-dimensional Studies, Susan Conrad & Douglas Biber (eds), 108–137. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Gray, Bethany. 2013. Discourse Characteristics of Writing and Speaking Task Types on the TOEFL iBT Test: A Lexico-Grammatical Analysis. TOEFL iBT Research Report (TOEFL iBT-19). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.Google Scholar
. 2016. Grammatical Complexity in Academic English: Linguistic Change in Writing. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan & Finegan, Edward. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas & Jones, James. 2009. Quantitative methods in corpus linguistics. In Corpus Linguistics: An International Handbook, Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö (eds), 1286–1304. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Clark, Isobelle & Grieve, Jack. 2017. Dimensions of abusive language on Twitter. Proceedings of the First Workshop on Abusive Language Online 1: 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, Susan & Biber, Douglas. 2001. Variation in English: Multi-dimensional Studies. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Conrad, Susan. 1996. Investigating academic texts with corpus-based techniques: An example from biology. Linguistics and Education 8: 299–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortes, Viviana. 2013. The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 12: 33–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cotos, Elena, Huffman, Sarah & Link, Stephanie. 2015. Furthering and applying move/step constructs: Technology-driven marshalling of Swalesian genre theory for EAP pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 19: 52–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cotos, Elena. 2016. Computer-assisted research writing in the disciplines. In Adaptive Educational Technologies for Literacy Instruction, Scott Crossley & Danielle McNamara (eds), 225–242. New York NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. Move analysis. In Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Carol A. Chapelle (ed.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Cotos, Elena, Huffman, Sarah & Link, Stephanie. 2017. A Move/Step model for Methods sections: Demonstrating rigour and credibility. English for Specific Purposes 46: 90–106. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Csomay, Eniko. 2005. Linguistic variation within university classroom talk: A corpus-based perspective. Linguistics and Education 15: 243–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Durrant, Philip & Mathews-Aydınlı, Julie. 2011. A function-first approach to identifying formulaic language in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes 30: 58–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Egbert, Jesse & Staples, Shelley. 2019. Doing multi-dimensional analysis in SPSS, SAS, and R. In Multi-Dimensional Analysis: Research Methods and Current Issues, Tony Berber Sardinha & Marcia Veirano Pinto (eds), 125–144. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Friginal, Eric. 2008. Linguistic variation in the discourse of outsourced call centers. Discourse Studies 10(6): 715–736. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, Bethany. 2015. Linguistic Variation in Research Articles: When Discipline Tells Only Part of the Story [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 71]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Tagging and counting linguistic features for multi-dimensional analysis. In Multi-Dimensional Analysis: Research Methods and Current Issues, Tony Berber Sardinha & Marcia Veirano Pinto (eds), 43–66. London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, Budsaba. 2007. Rhetorical moves in biochemistry research articles. In Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 28], Douglas Biber, Ulla Connor & Thomas Upton (eds), 73–120. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krishnamurthy, Ramesh & Kosem, Iztok. 2007. Issues in creating a corpus for EAP pedagogy and research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(4): 356–373. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Le, Thi Ngoc Phuong & Harrington, Michael. 2015. Phraseology used to comment on results in the discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes 39: 45–61. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lin, Ling & Evans, Stephen. 2012. Structural patterns in empirical research article: A cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes 31: 150–160. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marco, Maria J. L. 2000. Collocational frameworks in medical research papers: A genre-based study. English for Specific Purposes 19: 63–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mizumoto, Atsushi, Hamatani, Sawako & Imao, Yasuhiro. 2017. Applying the bundle–move connection approach to the development of an online writing support tool for research articles. Language Learning 67(4): 885–921. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moreno, Ana I. & Swales, John M. 2018. Strengthening move analysis methodology toward bridging the function-form gap. English for Specific Purposes 50: 40–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Omidian, Taha, Shahriari, Hesamoddin & Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna. 2018. A cross-disciplinary investigation of multi-word expressions in the moves of research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36: 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parodi, Giovanni. 2010. The rhetorical organization of the textbook genre across disciplines: A ‘colony-in-loops’? Discourse Studies 12(2): 195–222. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Swales, John. 1981. Aspects of Articles Introductions [Aston ESP Reports, No. 1]. Birmingham: The University of Aston in Birmingham.Google Scholar
. 2004. Research Genres. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tabachnick, Barbara G. & Fidell, Linda S. 2007. Using Multivariate Statistics, 5th edn. Boston MA: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.Google Scholar
Tankó, Gyula. 2017. Literary research article abstracts: An analysis of rhetorical moves and their linguistic realizations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 27: 42–55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Ansarifar, Ahmad, Hesamoddin Shahriari, Shelley Staples & Mohammad Ghazanfari
2024. Linguistic variation in two written academic sub-registers. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 29 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.