[Home ] [Archive]   [ فارسی ]  
:: Main :: About :: Current Issue :: Archive :: Search :: Submit :: Contact ::
:: Volume 20, Issue 2 (9-2017) ::
IJAL 2017, 20(2): 195-228 Back to browse issues page
Move Structures in “Statement-of-the-Problem” Sections of M.A. Theses: The Case of Native and Nonnative Speakers of English
Soheila Parsa , Mohammad Hassan Tahririan
Sheikhbahaee University, Isfahan
Abstract:   (718 Views)
Understanding how to structure the “Statement-of-the-Problem” (SP) section of a thesis is necessary for EFL students to develop a logical argumentation for a problem statement. This study intended to compare Move structures of SP sections of theses written by native speakers of Persian (NSPs) and English (NSEs). To this end, 100 SP sections (50 SP sections written by NSEs and 50 written by NSPs) of theses in the field of English language teaching (ELT) were selected and analyzed by the researchers based on Swales' (1990, 2004) CARS models. The analysis of the data revealed that Move structures of SP sections of the two corpora were similar. In both corpora, the three Moves of “Establishing a territory”, “Establishing a niche”, and “Presenting the present work” were considered obligatory. There were some differences in the Steps and many Move pattern variations in the two corpora. The results can broaden the understanding of the nature and function of this genre and can have important implications for EFL instructors.
Keywords: Genre analysis, Move structure, Statement-of-the-Problem sections, Cultural variations
Full-Text [PDF 798 kb]   (342 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Research | Subject: Special
Received: 2017/01/26 | Accepted: 2017/07/11 | Published: 2017/08/28
1. Ahmad, U. K. (1997). Research article introductions in Malay: Rhetoric in an emerging research community. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 273–304). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [DOI:10.1515/9783110821048.273]
2. Arvay, A., & Tanko, G. (2004). A contrastive analysis of English and Hungarian theoretical research article introductions. IRAL, 24 (1), 71-100. Bhatia, V. K. (1997). Introduction: Genre analysis and world Englishes. World Englishes, 16(3), 313–319.
3. Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 4–18. [DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002]
4. Bitchener, J., Basturkmen, H., & East, M. (2010). The focus of supervisor written feedback to thesis/dissertation students. International Journal of English Studies, 10, 79-97. [DOI:10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119201]
5. Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves in PhD thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 57-75). Harlow: Pearson.
6. Bunton, D. (2005). The structure of Ph.D. conclusion chapters. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 207-224. [DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2005.03.004]
7. Carrió-Pastor, M. (2009). Contrasting specific English corpora: Language variation. International Journal of English Studies, 14(1), 221–234.
8. Carrió-Pastor, M. (2013). A contrastive study of the variation of sentence connectors in academic English. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(3), 192–202. [DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2013.04.002]
9. Cmejrkova, S. (1996). Academic writing in Czech and English. In E. Ventola, & A. Mauranen (Eds.), Academic Writing: Intercultural and Textual Issues (pp. 137-152). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [DOI:10.1075/pbns.41.11cme]
10. Coker, W., & Coker, W. (2012). Stating the research problem: A genre-based study of English language M.Phil. theses in a Ghanaian Public University. LANGUAGE IN INDIA, 12, 509-518.
11. Connor, U. (2008). Mapping multidimensional aspects of research: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric, In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout, & W. V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric, Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [DOI:10.1075/pbns.169.19con]
12. Cooley, L., & Lewkowicz, J. (1995). The writing needs of postgraduate students at the University of Hong Kong: A project report. Hong Kong Papers in Linguistics and Language Teaching, 18, 121-123.
13. Dong, Y. R. (1998). Non-native speaker graduate students' thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes, 17, 369-390. [DOI:10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00054-9]
14. Dudley-Evans, T. (1986). Genre analysis: An investigation of the introduction and discussion sections of M.Sc. dissertations. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Talking about text (pp. 128-145). Birmingham: English Language Research, University of Birmingham.
15. Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 219-228). London: Routledge.
16. Dudley-Evans, T. (1995). Common core and specific approach to the teaching of academic writing. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic Writing in a Second Language (pp. 293-312). Norwood, N.J.: Ablex.
17. Duszak, A. (1994). Academic discourse and intellectual styles. Journal of Pragmatics, 21, 291-313. [DOI:10.1016/0378-2166(94)90003-5]
18. Duszak, A. (1997a). Cross-cultural academic communication: A Discourse-community view. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp. 11-39). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [DOI:10.1515/9783110821048.11]
19. Duszak, A. (1997b). Introduction. In A. Duszak (Ed.), Culture and styles of academic discourse (pp.1-8). New York: Mouton de Gruyter. [DOI:10.1515/9783110821048.1]
20. Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. (2008). Framework of problem-based research: A guide for novice researchers on the development of a research-worthy problem. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 11, 17-33. [DOI:10.28945/438]
21. Flowerdew, J. (2002). Academic Discourse, London: Longman.
22. Halleck, G. B., & Connor, U. M. (2006). Rhetorical moves in TESOL conference proposals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 70-86. [DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2005.08.001]
23. Halliday, M., & Hasan, R. (1990). Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social semiotic perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
24. Hewings, M. (1993). The end! How to conclude a dissertation. In G., Blue (Ed.), Language, learning and success: Studying through English. Review of English language teaching (pp. 105-112). London: Macmillan.
25. Hirano, E. (2009). Research article introductions in English for specific purposes: A comparison between Brazilian Portuguese and English. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 240–250. [DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2009.02.001]
26. Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Hyland, K. (2002). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56, 351‐358. [DOI:10.1093/elt/56.4.351]
28. Hyland, K. (2004). Graduates' gratitude: the generic structure of dissertation acknowledgements. English for Specific Purposes, 23, 303–324. [DOI:10.1016/S0889-4906(03)00051-6]
29. Ibrahim, N., &Nambiar, M.K. (2011). What is the problem with the statement of problem? the case of postgraduate international students and the introductory sections of a project paper. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1713–1717. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.356]
30. Jalilifar, A. R., Firuzmand, S., & Roshani, S. (2011). Genre analysis of problem statement sections of M.A proposals and theses in Applied Linguistics. Language, Society and Culture, 33, 85-93.
31. Jenkins, S., Jordan, M. K., & Weiland, P. O. (1993). The role of writing in graduate engineering education: A survey of faculty beliefs and practices. English for Specific Purposes, 12(1), 51-67. [DOI:10.1016/0889-4906(93)90027-L]
32. Kaplan, R. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16, 1–20. [DOI:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x]
33. Koutlaki, S. A. (2002). Offers and expressions of thanks as face enhancing acts: Ta'arof in Persian. Journal of Pragmatics, 34, 1733-1756. [DOI:10.1016/S0378-2166(01)00055-8]
34. Kwan, B.S.C. (2006). The schematic structure of literature reviews in doctoral theses of applied linguistics. English for Specific Purposes, 25, 30-55. [DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2005.06.001]
35. Mauranen, A. (2012). Exploring ELF: Academic English shaped by non-native speakers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
36. Mauranen, A. (2013a). Lingua franca discourse in academic contexts: Shaped by complexity. In John Flowerdew (Ed.), Discourse in context: Contemporary applied linguistics (pp. 225–245). London: Bloomsbury Academic.
37. Moreno, A. I. (1997). Genre constraints across languages: Causal metatext in Spanish and English RAs. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 161-179. [DOI:10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00023-3]
38. Najjar, H. Y. (1989). Scientific Arabic: The agricultural research article. (Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Michigan).
39. Paltridge, B. (2004). The exegesis as a genre: An ethnographic examination. In Ravelli, L and Ellis, A (Eds.), Analysing academic writing: Conceptualized Frameworks, (pp. 84-103). London: Continuum.
40. Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 1-17. [DOI:10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5]
41. Samraj, B. (2008). A discourse analysis of master's theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 55-67. [DOI:10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.005]
42. Samraj, B.& Monk, L. (2008). The statement of purpose in graduate program applications: Genre structure and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27, 193–211. [DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2007.07.001]
43. Sayfouri, N. (2010). SFL and ESP genre analysis of English research articles in Iranian and English-American medical journals: A contrastive study (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tehran). Retrieved from http://www.isfla.org/Systemics.
44. Shehzad, W. (2008). Move two: Establishing a niche. Ibérica, 15, 25–50.
45. Sheldon, E. (2013). The research article: A rhetorical and functional comparison of texts created by native and non-native English writers and native Spanish writers (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Technology). Retrieved from httpa.org/Systemics/Print/Theses.
46. Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
47. Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/CBO9781139524827]
48. Swales, J., & Feak, C. (1994). Academic writing for graduate students. A course for nonnative speakers of English. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
49. Taylor, G., & Tingguang, C. (1991). Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 12, 319-336. [DOI:10.1093/applin/12.3.319]
50. Thompson, P. (1999). Exploring the contexts of writing: Interviews with Ph.D. supervisors. In P. Thompson (Ed.), Issues in EAP writing research and instruction (pp. 37-54): Reading, UK: CALS.
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:


XML     Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Parsa S, Tahririan M H. Move Structures in “Statement-of-the-Problem” Sections of M.A. Theses: The Case of Native and Nonnative Speakers of English. IJAL. 2017; 20 (2) :195-228
URL: http://ijal.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2827-en.html

Volume 20, Issue 2 (9-2017) Back to browse issues page
Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.16 seconds with 32 queries by YEKTAWEB 3855