2. Applied Linguistics (Inspirations from neighbor disciplines)
Elham Farahani; Hooshang Yazdani
Abstract
Idioms are typically considered as elements of informal, vivid, and entertaining language, and are generally thought to be unsuitable for formal contexts. However, recent studies show that idioms are increasingly used in formal communication and academic writing. In this context, this corpus-based study ...
Read More
Idioms are typically considered as elements of informal, vivid, and entertaining language, and are generally thought to be unsuitable for formal contexts. However, recent studies show that idioms are increasingly used in formal communication and academic writing. In this context, this corpus-based study aims to offer new insights into English idioms by examining them within a corpus consisting of 5,675,554 tokens from 640 randomly selected applied linguistics research articles (RAs). To achieve this, the researchers developed a working definition and framework for identifying academic idioms within written genres like RAs. Using this framework, they compiled a list of the most common academic idioms found in the genre. Additionally, the study explored whether the frequency of these idioms changed over the period from 1980 to 2020. The findings revealed that idioms are indeed present in applied linguistics RAs and merit appropriate attention. No significant correlation was found between time and idiom usage frequency, while the writing style of authors appeared to significantly influence how often idioms are used. By identifying and analyzing the most frequent academic idioms in applied linguistics RAs, this study’s results may be valuable for EFL writing instructors, graduate and postgraduate students in applied linguistics, and developers of teaching materials.
2. Applied Linguistics (Inspirations from neighbor disciplines)
Ali Alizadeh; Davud Kuhi; Yaser Hadidi
Abstract
Lexical bundles, recurrent word combinations serving essential discourse functions, have gained prominence in the realm of academic writing. A novel perspective that bridges their functional significance and formulaic nature is promising for uncovering intricate features within these recurring language ...
Read More
Lexical bundles, recurrent word combinations serving essential discourse functions, have gained prominence in the realm of academic writing. A novel perspective that bridges their functional significance and formulaic nature is promising for uncovering intricate features within these recurring language patterns. Drawing from the structural and functional taxonomy introduced by Biber et al. (1999) and Hyland (2008), this comprehensive study aims to find the existence of any significant difference in the frequency and use of lexical bundles from both structural and functional perspectives between research articles authored by individuals in soft and hard science disciplines. The corpus, rich in academic content, encompasses a total of 954,615 words, featuring 90 research articles in each sub-corpus. The investigation extends beyond mere structural classification to encompass functional analysis, unveiling insightful findings. The findings indicate while structural distinctions between authors in hard and soft sciences appear negligible, substantial variations emerge in the pragmatic deployment of lexical bundles. Authors in soft sciences exhibit a predilection for noun phrases combined with of-phrase fragments. In stark contrast, authors in hard sciences predominantly employ passive verb + prepositional phrase fragments. Additionally, the divergence in the functional classification of lexical bundles is noteworthy. In the realm of soft sciences, authors heavily emphasize the use of framing signals, underscoring the discursive significance of these elements. In contrast, hard science authors gravitate towards transition signals as the most frequently employed function of lexical bundles. These findings carry substantial implications for researchers, highlighting the importance of embracing lexical bundles as a fundamental aspect of scholarly writing within their specific domains.
2. Applied Linguistics (Inspirations from neighbor disciplines)
Farnaz Sahebkheir; Marjan Vosoughie
Abstract
In this article, researchers set out to discover the metadiscourse markers in research articles written by both native and non-native English speakers. To this end, a total number of twenty research articles published by Iranian and native English speakers in highly reputed journals on Arts and Humanities ...
Read More
In this article, researchers set out to discover the metadiscourse markers in research articles written by both native and non-native English speakers. To this end, a total number of twenty research articles published by Iranian and native English speakers in highly reputed journals on Arts and Humanities domains were randomly selected from major databases including Science Direct, Noormagz, and Magiran. Through Hylands’ Metadiscoursal model (2005), appraisals were accomplished on two main metadiscoursal aspects including interactive vs. interactional resources. The results revealed that interactive resources had the highest proportion in comparison with interactional resources with transitions being in the top list in both native and non-native articles considering different parts of the articles from abstract up to the conclusion part. From among interactional resources, in articles written by native English speakers, attitude markers and for the non-native ones, engagement markers had the least rates. In addition, Iranian scholars had used some markers e.g. ‘attitude markers’, and ‘hedges’ more than native English speakers. It can be included that students should be informed about a balanced use of the frequency and the percentage of different metadiscourse markers in English as a part of teaching writing or grammar in their research writing modules.
