1. Ammon, U. (2001). Editor’s preface. In U. Ammon (Ed.), The dominance of English as a language of science (pp. v-x). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
2. Aktas, R. N., & Cortes, V. (2008). Shell nouns as cohesive devices in published and ESL student writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 3-14.
3. Avison, D. A. (1997). The Search for the ‘Discipline’ of Information Systems. In G. McKenzie, J. Powell & R. Usher (Eds.), Understanding Social Research: Perspectives on Methodology and Practice (pp 83-95). London: Palmer Press.
4. Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. London: Longman.
5. Bhatia, V. K. (2004). Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. London: Continuum.
6. Biglan, A. (1973). The Characteristics of Subject Matters in Different Academic Areas. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 195-203.
7. Brandt, D. (1986). Text and context: How writers come to mean. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional approaches to writing, research perspectives (pp. 93-107). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
8. Burgess, S. (2002). Packed houses and intimate gatherings: Audience and rhetorical structure. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 196-215). London: Longman/Pearson Education.
9. Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). Critical academic writing and multilingual students. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
10. Cargill, M., & O’Connor, P. (2009). Writing scientific research articles. West Sussex: Wiley- Blackwell.
11. Connor, U. (1984). A study of cohesion and coherence in English as a second language student’s writing. Papers in Linguistics, 17, 301-316.
12. Curry, M. J., & Lillis, Th. (2010). Academic research networks: Accessing resources for English-medium publishing. English for Specific Purposes,29, 281-295.
13. Duszak, A. (1997). Culture and styles of academic discourse. Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
14. Eggins, S. (2004). An Introduction to Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.
15. Eiler, M. (1986). Thematic distribution as a heuristic for written discourse function. In B. Couture (Ed.), Functional Approaches to Writing, Research Perspectives (pp. 49-68). Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex.
16. Ferenz, O. (2005). EFL writers’ social networks: Impact on advanced academic literacy development. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 339-351.
17. Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 121-150.
18. Francis, G. (1989). Thematic Selection and Distribution in Written Discourse. Word, 40(1-2), 201-222.
19. Fries, P. H. (1994). On Theme, Rheme and Discourse Goals. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in Written Text Analysis (pp. 229-249).London and New York: Routledge.
20. Fries, P. H. (1995). A personal view of theme. InM. Ghadessy (Ed.), Thematic development in English texts (pp. 1-19). London: Pinter.
21. Fries, P. H., & Francis, G. (1992). Exploring Theme: Problems for Research. Occasional Papers in Systemic Linguistics, 6, 45-59.
22. Geisler, C. (1994). Academic literacy and the nature of expertise: Reading, writing and knowing in academic philosophy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Gonzalez, W. J. (2013). From the sciences that Philosophy has “neglected” to the new challenges. In H. Andersen, D. Dieks, W. J. Gonzalez, T. Uebel, & G. Wheeler (Eds.), New challenges to philosophy of science (pp. 1-7). Dordrecht: Springer.
24. Greaves, S. (2008). Strategic Security as a New Academic Discipline. Journal of Strategic security, 1(1), 7-19.
25. Halliday, M. A. K. (1985/1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
26. Halliday, M. A. K. (1993). On the language of physical science. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (Eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power (pp. 54-68). London: The Falmer Press.
27. Halliday, M. A. K., &Matthiessen, Ch. M. I. M. (2004). AnIntroduction to Functional Grammar. London: Hodder Arnold.
28. Hawes, Th., & Thomas, S. (1997). Problems of thematisation in student writing.RELC Journal, 28(2), 35-55.
29. Hawes, T. (2015). Thematic progression in the writing of students and professionals. Ampersand, 2, 93-100.
30. Hinkel, E. (2001). Matters of cohesion in L2 academic texts. Applied Language Learning, 12, 111 132.
31. Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for specific purposes, 20(3), 207-226.
32. Khany, R., &MansooriNejad, A. (2010). The interaction between rhetorical structure and thematisation in academic research articles. IJAL, 13(1), 47-72.
33. Lachowicz, D. (1981). On the use of the passive voice for objectivity, author responsibility and hedging in EST. Science of Science, 2(6), 105-115.
34. Lei, L. (2012). Linking adverbials in academic writing on applied linguistics by Chinese doctoral students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 267-275.
35. Lillis, Th., & Curry, M. J. (2006). Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, 23(1), 3-35.
36. Lovejoy, K. B. (1991). Cohesion and information strategies in academic writing: Analysis of passages in three disciplines. Linguistics and Education, 3, 315-43.
37. Martinez, I. A. (2003). Aspects of theme in the method and discussion sections of biology journal articles in English. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 103-123.
38. McCabe, A. (1999). Theme and Thematic Patterns in Spanish and English History Text (PhD Dissertation). Aston: Aston University.
39. Mellos, V. D. (2011). Coherence in English as a second language undergraduate writing: a theme-rheme analysis (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). San Diego State University.
40. Nesi, H., &Basturkmen, H. (2006). Lexical bundles and discourse signaling in academic lectures. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 11, 147-168.
41. North, S. (2005). Disciplinary Variation in the Use of Theme in Undergraduate Essays. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 431-452.
42. Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions, English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-138.
43. Peters, S. (2011). Asserting or deflecting expertise? Exploring the rhetorical practices of master’s theses in the philosophy of education. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 176-185.
44. Plum, G. (1988). Textual and contextual conditioning in spoken English: a genre-based approach (Unpublished PhD Dissertation). Department of Linguistics, University of Sydney.
45. Polo, F. J., & Varela, M. C. (2009). English for research purposes at the University of Santiago de Compostela: A survey. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8, 152-164.
46. Strohmayer, U. (2014). Historical Geographical Traditions. In J. Morrissey, D. Nally, U. Strohmayer, &Y. Whelan (Eds.), Key Concepts in Historical Geography (pp. 269-279). London: Sage.
47. Tardy, Ch. M. (2005). “It’s like a story”: Rhetorical knowledge development in advanced academic literacy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 325-338.
48. Thompson, G. (2004). IntroducingFunctional Grammar. London: Arnold.
49. Thornbury, S. (1999). How to Teach Grammar. Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
50. Trench, B., & Bucchi, M. (2010). Science communication, an emerging discipline. JCom, 9(3).
51. Uzuner, S. (2008). Multilingual scholars’ participation in core/global academic communities: A literature review. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(4), 250-263.
52. VandeKopple, W. J. (1991). Themes, thematic progressions, and some implications for understanding discourse. Written Communication, 8(3), 311-347.
53. Webster, G. D. (2012). Quantitative Trends in establishing a psychology of science: A review of the metasciences. In G. J. Feist& M. E. Gorman, (Eds.), Handbook of the psychology of science (pp. 487-506). Springer.
54. Whittaker, R. (1995). Theme, processes and the realization of meanings in academic articles. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Thematic development in English texts (pp. 105-128). London: Pinter.