Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Selling Their Research: The Linguistic Realization of Rhetoric Moves in English Thesis Abstracts Written by Hungarian Undergraduates Cover

Selling Their Research: The Linguistic Realization of Rhetoric Moves in English Thesis Abstracts Written by Hungarian Undergraduates

Romanian Journal of English Studies
Volume 10 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)
By: Katalin Doró  
Open Access
|Feb 2013

References

  1. Anderson, Kenneth and Maclean, Joan. 1997. “A genre analysis study of 80 medical abstracts.” Edinburgh WorkingPapers in Applied Linguistics 8:1-23.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. Bayley, Liz and Eldredge, Jonathan, D. 2003. “The structured abstract: an essential tool for researchers.” Hypothesis 17(1):11-13.
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. Biber, Douglas and Barbieri, Federica. 2007. “Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers.” Englishfor Specific Purposes 26(3):263-286.10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Chen, Ya-Hua and Baker, Paul. 2010. “Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing.” Language Learning & Technology 14(2):30-49.
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. Coxhead, Averil. 2000. “A new academic word list.” TESOL Quarterly 34 (2):213-238.10.2307/3587951
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Coxhead, Averil and Byrd, Pat. 2007. “Preparing writing teachers to teach the vocabulary and grammar of academic prose.” Journal of Second Language Writing 16(3):129-147.10.1016/j.jslw.2007.07.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Doró, Katalin. 2007. “The use of high- and low-frequency verbs in English native and non-native student writing” in Second language lexical processes: Applied linguistic and psycholinguistic perspectives. Zs. Lengyel and J. Navracsics (Eds.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 117-129.
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. Doró, Katalin. 2008. The written assessment of the vocabulary knowledge and use of English majors in Hungary. University of Szeged. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. Harwood, Nigel. 2005. “‘Nowhere has anyone attempted ... In this article I aim to do just that’: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines.” Journal of Pragmatics 37(8): 1207-1231.10.1016/j.pragma.2005.01.012
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. Hirano, Eliana. 2009. “Research article introduction in English for specific purposes: A comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English.” English for Specific Purposes 28(4):204-250.10.1016/j.esp.2009.02.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. Horváth, József. 2001. Advanced writing in English as a foreign language: A corpus-based study of processes andproducts. Pécs: Lingua Franca.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. Hyland, Ken. 1996. “Talking to the academy: forms of hedging in science research articles.” Written Communication 13(2):251-281.10.1177/0741088396013002004
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. Hyland, Ken. 2001. “Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles.” English for SpecificPurposes 20(3):207-226.10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00012-0
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. Lehmann, Magdolna. 2003. “The lexis of writing and vocabulary size: The relationship between receptive knowledge and productive use.” Studies in English theoretical and applied linguistics. József Andor, József Horváth and Marianne Nikolov (Eds.). Pécs: Lingua Franca, pp. 172-181.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. Li, Jie and Schmitt, Norbert. 2009. “The acquisition of lexical phrases in academic writing: A longitudinal case study.” Journal of Second Language Writing 18(2):85-102.10.1016/j.jslw.2009.02.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Li, Yongyan and Casanave, Christine Pearson. 2012. “Two first-year students’ strategies for writing from sources: Patchwriting or plagiarism?” Journal of Second Language Writing 21(2):165-180.10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Lorés, Rosa. 2004. “On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organization.” English for SpecificPurposes 23(3):280-302.10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. Malcolm, Lois. 1987. “What rules govern tense usage in scientific articles?” English for Specific Purposes 6(1):31-43.10.1016/0889-4906(87)90073-1
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. Martínez, Iliana A. 2001. “Impersonality in the research article as revealed by analysis of the transitivity structure.” English for Specific Purposes 20(3):227-247.10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00013-2
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. Martínez, Iliana A. 2005. “Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English.” Journal of Second Language Writing 14:174-190.10.1016/j.jslw.2005.06.001
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. Pecorari, Diane. 2003. “Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic second-language writing.” Journal of Second Language Writing 12(4):317-345.10.1016/j.jslw.2003.08.004
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. Petrić, Bojana. 2012. “Legitimate textual borrowing: Direct quotation in L2 student writing.” Journal of SecondLanguage Writing 21(2):102-117.Pho, Phuong Dzung. 2008. “Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: a study of linguistic realizations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance.” Discourse Studies 13(4):234-250.
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. Pho, Phuong Dzung. 2009. “Linguistic realization of rhetoric structure: a corpus-based study of research-article abstracts and introductions in applied linguistics and education technology” in Corpus-linguisticapplications: current studies, new directions. Stefan Thomas Gries, Stefanie Wulff and Mark Davies (Eds.). Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 135-152.
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. Sheldon, Elena. 2011. “Rhetorical differences in RA introductions written by English L1 and L2 Castilian Spanish L1 writers.” Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10(4):238-351.10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.004
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. Stotesbury, Hilkka. 2003. “Evaluation in research article abstracts in the narrative and hard sciences.” Journal ofEnglish for Academic Purposes 2(4):327-341.10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00049-3
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. Strunkytė, Gintarė and Jurkūnaitė, Eglė. 2008. Written Academic Discourse: Lexical Bundles in Humanities andNatural Sciences. Vilnius University. Unpublished BA thesis.
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. Wallwork, Adrian. 2011. English for writing research papers. New York: Sprinkler.10.1007/978-1-4419-7922-3
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Weigle, Sara Cushing and Parker, Keisha. 2012. “Source text borrowing in an integrated reading/writing assessment.” Journal of Second Language Writing 21(2):118-133.10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.004
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. Wette, Rosemary. 2010. “Evaluating student learning in a university-level EAP unit on writing using sources.” Journal of Second Language Writing 19(3):158-177.10.1016/j.jslw.2010.06.002
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. Zergollern-Miletić, Lovorka and Horváth, József. 2009. “Coherence and originality in university students’ writing: The Zagreb-Pécs project” in Réka Lugossy, József Horváth and Marianne Nikolov (Eds.). UPRT 2008:Empirical studies in English applied linguistics. Pécs: Lingua Franca Csoport, pp. 135-151.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rjes-2013-0016 | Journal eISSN: 2286-0428 | Journal ISSN: 1584-3734
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 181 - 191
Published on: Feb 22, 2013
Published by: West University of Timisoara
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year
Keywords:
abstract,
academic phrases,
academic writing,
rhetoric moves,
undergraduates
Related subjects:
Linguistics and semiotics,
Theoretical frameworks and disciplines,
Linguistics, other,
Germanic languages,
English

© 2013 Katalin Doró, published by West University of Timisoara
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons License.

Previous articleVolume 10 (2013): Issue 1 (March 2013)Next article