Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances

JALDA

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

Journal Metrics

News

Structural and Functional Differences of Lexical Bundles Between Hard Science and Soft Science Researchers: A Comparative Corpus-Driven Study

Document Type : Research Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. Candidate in ELT, Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran

2 Associate Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Maragheh Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh, Iran

3 Associate Professor of TEFL, Department of English Language and Literature, Faculty of Persian Literature and Foreign Languages, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

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 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.

Keywords

Main Subjects

Article Title [Persian]

تفاوت‌های ساختاری و عملکردی بسته‌های واژگانی بین محققان علوم سخت و علوم نرم: مطالعه پیکره محور مقایسه ای

Authors [Persian]

  • علی علیزاده 1
  • دکتر داود کوهی 2
  • دکتر یاسر حدیدی 3

1 دانشجوی دکتری آموزش زبان انگلیسی، دانشگاه آزاد مراغه، مراغه، ایران

2 دانشیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، گروه زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه آزاد واحد مراغه، مراغه، ایران

3 دانشیار آموزش زبان انگلیسی، گروه زبان و ادبیات انگلیسی، دانشکده ادبیات فارسی و زبانهای خارجی، دانشگاه تبریز، تبریز، ایران

Abstract [Persian]

بسته‌های واژگانی، ترکیب‌های تکراری واژه‌ای که کارکردهای گفتمانی ضروری را انجام می‌دهند، در قلمرو نوشتار آکادمیک برجسته شده‌اند. دیدگاه جدیدی که اهمیت عملکردی و ماهیت فرمولی آنها را به هم مرتبط می سازد، برای کشف ویژگی های پیچیده در این الگوهای زبانی تکرار شونده امیدوارکننده است. مطالعه حاضر به کمک طبقه بندی ساختاری و عملکردی معرفی شده توسط بایبر و همکاران. (1999) و هایلند (2008)، به سختی و سازگاری بسته‌های واژگانی در گفتمان مقالات تحقیقاتی در علوم سخت و نرم می‌پردازد. مجموعه، غنی از محتوای آکادمیک، در مجموع شامل 954615 کلمه است که شامل 90 مقاله تحقیقاتی در هر زیر مجموعه است. این تحقیق فراتر از طبقه‌بندی ساختاری صرف است تا تجزیه و تحلیل عملکردی را در بر بگیرد و یافته‌های روشن‌تری را آشکار کند. یافته ها نشان داد در حالی که تمایزات ساختاری بین نویسندگان در علوم سخت و نرم ناچیز به نظر می رسد، تغییرات اساسی در به کارگیری عملگرایانه بسته های واژگانی ظاهر می شود. نویسندگان در علوم نرم تمایل به عبارات اسمی ترکیب شده با تکه‌های عبارت دارند. در تضاد کامل، نویسندگان در علوم سخت عمدتاً از فعل مفعول + قطعات عبارت اضافه استفاده می کنند. علاوه بر این، واگرایی در طبقه بندی عملکردی بسته های واژگانی قابل توجه است. در حوزه علوم نرم، نویسندگان به شدت بر استفاده از سیگنال‌های کادربندی (15.6%) تأکید می‌کنند و بر اهمیت گفتمانی این عناصر تأکید می‌کنند. در مقابل، نویسندگان علوم سخت به سمت سیگنال‌های انتقال به عنوان متداول‌ترین کارکرد بسته‌های واژگانی جذب می‌شوند. این یافته‌ها کاربردهایی برای محققان دارند و اهمیت پذیرش بسته‌های واژگانی را به عنوان یک جنبه اساسی از نگارش علمی در حوزه‌های خاص آن‌ها برجسته می‌کنند.

Keywords [Persian]

  • تنوع رشته ای
  • بسته های واژگانی
  • علوم سخت
  • مقالات پژوهشی
  • علوم نرم
References
Abdollahpour, Z., & Gholami, J. (2018). Building blocks of medical abstracts: Frequency, functions and structures of lexical bundles. Asian ESP Journal, 14(1), 82-110.
Akbulut, F. D. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of lexical bundles usage in native and non-native academic writing. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(3), 1146-1166.
Allen, D. (2010). Lexical bundles in learner writing: An analysis of formulaic language in the ALESS learner corpus. Komaba Journal of English Education, 1, 105-127.
Anthony, L. (2012). AntConc (Windows, Macintosh OS X, and Linux). Recuperado de: http://www. antlab. sci. waseda. ac. jp/software/README_AntConc3, 2.
Becher, T. (1989). Disciplinary discourse. Studies in Higher Education, 12(3), 261-274.
Biber, D., & Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes (New York, N.Y.), 26(3), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003 
Biber, D., Johnsson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Pearson Education.
Byrd, P., & Coxhead, A. (2010). On the other hand: Lexical bundles in academic writing and in the teaching of EAP. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 5(5), 31-64.
Candarli, D., & Jones, S. (2019). Paradigmatic influences on lexical bundles in research articles in the discipline of education. Corpora, 14(2), 237-263.
Chen, Y., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language and Learning and Technology, 14(2), 30-49.
Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes, 23(4), 397-423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001 
Cunningham, K. J. (2017). A phraseological exploration of recent mathematics research articles through key phrase frames. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 25, 71-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2016.11.005 
De Chazal, E., Rogers, L., & McCarter, S. (2013). Oxford EAP: A course in English for academic purposes. Oxford University Press.
Durrant, P. (2017). Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation in university students’ writing: Mapping the territories. Applied Linguistics, 38(2), 165-193. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv011 
Flowerdew, J., & Forest, R. W. (2009). Schematic structure and lexicogrammatical realization in corpus- based genre analysis: The case of research in the PhD literature review. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari and S. Hunston (Eds.), Academic Writing: At the Interface of Corpus and Discourse (pp. 15-36). Continuum 
Esfandiari, R., & Barbary, F. (2023). A corpus-driven, diachronic analysis of recurrent word combinations across academic disciplines. Corpora, 18(3), 263-295.
Grabowski, Ł. (2015). Keywords and lexical bundles within English pharmaceutical discourse: A corpus-driven description. English for Specific Purposes, 38, 23–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.10.004 
Halliday, M.A.K & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social semiotic perspective. Oxford University Press.
Hyland, K. (2008a). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00178.x 
Hyland, K. (2008b). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation.  English for Specific Purposes, 27, 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001 
Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150-169. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000037 
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2018). Academic lexical bundles: How are they changing? International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(4), 383-407. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17080.hyl 
Jalali, Z. S., Moini, M. R., & Arani, M. A. (2015). Structural and functional analysis of lexical bundles in medical research articles: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Information Science and Management, 13(1), 51-69.
Lake, W. M., & Cortes, V. (2020). Lexical bundles as reflections of disciplinary norms in Spanish and English literary criticism, history, and psychology research. In U. Römer-Barron, V. Cortes and E. Friginal (Eds), Advances in Corpus-based Research on Academic Writing: Effects of Discipline, Register, and Writer Expertise (pp. 183-204). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.95.08lak 
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, 45-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.003 
Meunier, F., & Gouverneur, C. (2007). The treatment of phraseology in ELT textbooks. In E. H. Tenorio, L. Q. Rodríguez-Navarro and J. S. Rodopi, Corpora in the foreign language classroom (pp. 119-139). Brill.
Moynie, J. (2018). Lexical Bundles within English for Academic Purposes written teaching materials: A Canadian context. [Master’s thesis, Carleton University]. https://doi.org/10.22215/etd/2018-13240 
Nuttall, C. (2021). Profiling lexical frame use in NSF grant proposal abstracts. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 1(3), Article 100009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acorp.2021.100009 
Omidian, T., Shahriari, H., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.08.002 
Pan, F., Reppen, R., & Biber, D. (2016). Comparing patterns of L1 versus L2 English academic professionals: Lexical bundles in Telecommunications research journals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 60-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.11.003 
Pang, W. (2010). Lexical bundles and the construction of an academic voice: a pedagogical perspective. Asian EFL Journal, 47, 2-13.
Pérez-Llantada, C. (2014). Formulaic language in L1 and L2 expert academic writing: Shared and distinct usage. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 84-94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2014.01.002 
Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action. In N. Schmitt, Formulaic Sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 1–22). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.02sch 
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phrase-ology research.  Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp058 
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & Van Heuven, W. J. B. (2011). Seeing a phrase “time and again” matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(3), 776–784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022531 
Shin, Y. K. (2018). The Construction of English Lexical Bundles in Context by Native and Nonnative Freshman University Students. English Teaching, 73(3), 115-139. https://doi.org/10.15858/ENGTEA.73.3.201809.115 
Toulmin, S. (1972). Rationality and Scientific Discovery. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1972, 387–406. https://doi.org/10.1086/psaprocbienmeetp.1972.3698983  
Wray, A. (2006). Formulaic language. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 590–597). Elsevier.
Wright, H. R. (2019). Lexical bundles in stand-alone literature reviews: Sections, frequencies, and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 54(3), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESP.2018.09.001 
Yin, X., & Li, S. (2021). Lexical bundles as an intradisciplinary and interdisciplinary mark: A corpus-based study of research articles from business, biology, and applied linguistics. Applied Corpus Linguistics, 1(1), 100-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-27752 
Xiao, W., Li, L., & Liu, J. (2023). To move or not to move: an entropy-based approach to the informativeness of research article abstracts across disciplines. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 30(1), 1-26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2022.2037275 
Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances
Volume 12, Issue 2 - Serial Number 24
October 2024
Pages 87-114
Files
History
  • Receive Date: 11 November 2023
  • Revise Date: 01 February 2024
  • Accept Date: 27 June 2024
Share
How to cite
Statistics