Cover not available

Article published In: Languages in Contrast
Vol. 26:1 (2026) ► pp.28–54

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

A cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary study of rhetorical moves in research article abstracts

 | University of Exeter, United Kingdom
 | Iran University of Science and Technology, Iran
Published online: 26 August 2025
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.00057.abd
Abstract
Studies on cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary differences in employing rhetorical moves and stylistic features in research article abstracts (RAAs) are scant. This study explores (a) dominant rhetorical moves in international and local applied linguistics abstracts, (b) differences between Anglo-American (English) and Iranian (Persian/English) abstracts in applied linguistics, and (c) cross-disciplinary discrepancies between applied linguistics and civil engineering abstracts by Anglo-American (English) and Iranian (Persian) writers. To this end, 300 abstracts were analysed in two disciplines (applied linguistics and civil engineering) and two languages (English and Persian). The findings unfold that internationally-published article abstracts discuss research findings significantly more. English applied linguistics abstracts describe the research methodology and potential utility of the research significantly more than abstracts in Farsi. Interdisciplinary differences were found in terms of describing the methodology and discussion of the findings. Tense use varied across different moves of the abstracts giving an indication to the reader about where the writers have got to in their abstracts. A preponderance of present tense in ‘presenting the study’ move in most abstracts by civil engineers and applied linguists was found. Attended forms of demonstratives were the most used by civil engineers. Implications for English for academic writing instruction and research will be discussed.
Article outline
  • 1.Background
  • 2.Materials and method
    • 2.1Corpus selection
    • 2.2Corpus analysis procedure
  • 3.Results
    • 3.1Moves in local vs. international AL abstracts in English: L2 English vis-à-vis L1 English AL abstracts
    • 3.2Cross-linguistic analysis of moves in Persian vs. English AL journals: L1 Persian vis-à-vis L1 English AL abstracts
    • 3.3Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary analysis of moves
      • 3.3.1Cross-disciplinary differences between applied linguistics and civil engineering in English
      • 3.3.2Moves in Persian AL and CE abstracts
    • 3.4Demonstratives in abstracts across languages and disciplines
    • 3.5Tense in abstracts across languages and disciplines
  • 4.Discussion
    • 4.1Generic moves in abstract writing
    • 4.2Use of demonstratives in abstract writing
    • 4.3Tense use in abstract writing
  • 5.Conclusion
  • References
References (54)
References
Bondi, M. and Lorés Sanz, R. (eds). 2014. Abstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burrough-Boenisch, J. 2003. Examining Present Tense Conventions in Scientific Writing in the Light of Reader Reactions to Three Dutch-Authored Discussions. English for Specific Purposes 22(1): 5–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Busch-Lauer, I. 1995. Abstracts in German Medical Journals: A Linguistic Analysis. Information Processing and Management 31(5): 769–776. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, T. 2004. Textual Metadiscourse in Research Articles: A Marker of National Culture or of Academic Discipline? Journal of Pragmatics 36(10): 1807–1825. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dietrich, R., Klein, W. and Noyau, C. 1995. The Acquisition of Temporality in a Second Language. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duszak, A. 1994. Academic Discourse and Intellectual Styles. Journal of Pragmatics 21(3): 291–313. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feltrim, V. D., Aluísio, S. M. and Nunes, M. G. V. 2003. Analysis of the Rhetorical Structure of Computer Science Abstracts in Portuguese. Proceedings of Corpus Linguistics. Lancaster, United Kingdom. 212–218.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Friginal, E. and Mustafa, S. S. 2017. A Comparison of U.S.-Based and Iraqi English Research Article Abstracts Using Corpora. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 251: 45–57. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillaerts, P. and Van de Velde, F. 2010. Interactional Metadiscourse in Research Article Abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9(2): 128–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gráf, T. 2018. English-Language Abstracts Written by Czech Linguists: How Are We Doing? Linguistica Pragensia 28(1): 71–85.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, B. and Cortes, V. 2011. Perception vs. Evidence: An Analysis of This and These in Academic Prose. English for Specific Purposes 30(1): 31–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hardy, J. A. and Römer, U. 2013. Revealing Disciplinary Variation in Student Writing: A Multi-Dimensional Analysis of the Michigan Corpus of Upper-Level Student Papers (MICUSP). Corpora 8(2): 183–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hatzitheodorou, A. 2014. A Genre-Oriented Analysis of Research Article Abstracts in Law and Business Journals. In Abstracts in Academic Discourse: Variation and Change, M. Bondi and R. Lorés Sanz (eds), 175–198. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinkel, E. 2004. Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hu, G. and Cao, F. 2011. Hedging and Boosting in Abstracts of Applied Linguistics Articles: A Comparative Study of English- and Chinese-Medium Journals. Journal of Pragmatics 43(11): 2795–2809. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huckin, T. N. 2001. Abstracting from Abstracts. In Academic Writing in Context: Implications and Applications. Papers in Honour of Tony Dudley-Evans, M. Hewings (ed.), 93–103. Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. 2000. Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2004. Disciplinary Interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 Postgraduate Writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 13(2): 133–151. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2): 173–192. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2006. Disciplinary Differences: Language Variation in Academic Discourses. In Academic Discourse across Disciplines, K. Hyland and M. Bondi (eds), 17–45. Bern: Peter Lang. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2023. Academic Publishing and the Attention Economy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 641. Article 101253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. and Jiang, F. 2017. Is Academic Writing Becoming More Informal? English for Specific Purposes 451: 40–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hyland, K. and Tse, P. 2005. Hooking the Reader: A Corpus Study of Evaluative That in Abstracts. English for Specific Purposes 24(2): 123–139. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jiang, F. and Wang, F. 2018. ‘This is because …’: Authorial Practice of (Un)attending This in Academic Prose across Disciplines. Australian Journal of Linguistics 38(2): 162–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kafes, H. 2012. Cultural Traces on the Rhetorical Organization of Research Article Abstracts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications 3(3): 207–220.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kanoksilapatham, B. 2005. Rhetorical Structure of Biochemistry Research Articles. English for Specific Purposes 24(3): 269–292. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, J. J., Tytko, T. and Larkin, R. 2021. (Un)attended This/These in Undergraduate Student Writing: A Corpus Analysis of High- and Low-Rated L2 Writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 501. Article 100967. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López-Arroyo, B. and Méndez-Cendón, B. 2007. Describing Phraseological Devices in Medical Abstracts: An English/Spanish Contrastive Analysis. Meta: Journal des Traducteurs 52(3): 503–516. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorés, R. 2004. On RA Abstracts: From Rhetorical Structure to Thematic Organisation. English for Specific Purposes 23(3): 280–302. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martín-Martín, P. 2003. A Genre Analysis of English and Spanish Research Paper Abstracts in Experimental Social Sciences. English for Specific Purposes 22(1): 25–43. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Melander, B., Swales, J. M. and Frederickson, K. M. 1997. Journal Abstracts from Three Academic Fields in the United States and Sweden: National or Disciplinary Proclivities? In Culture and Styles of Academic Discourse, A. Duszak (ed.), 251–272. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Paltridge, B. 1997. Genre, Frames and Writing in Research Settings. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pérez-Llantada, C. 2015. Genres in the Forefront, Languages in the Background: The Scope of Genre Analysis in Language-Related Scenarios. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 191: 10–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Petch-Tyson, S. 2000. Demonstrative Expressions in Argumentative Discourse: A Computer Corpus-Based Comparison of Non-Native and Native English. In Corpus-Based and Computational Approaches to Discourse Anaphora, S. P. Botley and T. McEnery (eds), 43–64. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pho, P. D. 2008a. Research Article Abstracts in Applied Linguistics and Educational Technology: A Study of Linguistic Realizations of Rhetorical Structure and Authorial Stance. Discourse Studies 10(2): 231–250. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2008b. How Can Learning about the Structure of Research Articles Help International Students? Paper presented at the 19th International Conference on English for Specific Purposes (ESP), Auckland, New Zealand.
Salager-Meyer, F. 1990. Discoursal Flaws in Medical English Abstracts: A Genre Analysis per Research- and Text-Type. Text — Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 10(4): 365–384. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samraj, B. 2002a. Disciplinary Variation in Abstracts: The Case of Wildlife Behaviour and Conservation Biology. In Academic Discourse, J. Flowerdew (ed.), 40–56. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2002b. Introductions in Research Articles: Variations across Disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 21(1): 1–17. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. An Exploration of a Genre Set: Research Article Abstracts and Introductions in Two Disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 24(2): 141–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Santos, M. B. D. 1996. The Textual Organization of Research Paper Abstracts in Applied Linguistics. Text & Talk 16(4): 481–499. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. 1981. Aspects of Article Introductions. Aston ESP Research Reports No. 1. Birmingham: Language Studies Unit, University of Aston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2005. Attended and Unattended This in Academic Writing: A Long and Unfinished Story. ESP Malaysia 11(1): 1–15.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, J. M. and Feak, C. B. 2004. Academic Writing for Graduate Students. Essential Tasks and Skills (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2009. Abstracts and the Writing of Abstracts. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tankó, G. 2017. Literary Research Article Abstracts: An Analysis of Rhetorical Moves and their Linguistic Realizations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 271: 42–55. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tardy, C. M. and Swales, J. M. 2014. Genre Analysis. In Pragmatics of Discourse, K. P. Schneider and A. Barron (eds), 165–187. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tessuto, G. 2015. Generic Structure and Rhetorical Moves in English-Language Empirical Law Research Articles: Sites of Interdisciplinary and Interdiscursive Cross-Over. English for Specific Purposes 371: 13–26. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tseng, F. 2011. Analyses of Move Structure and Verb Tense of Research Article Abstracts in Applied Linguistics. International Journal of English Linguistics 1(2): 27–39. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van Bonn, S. and Swales, J. M. 2007. English and French Journal Abstracts in the Language Sciences: Three Exploratory Studies. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6(2): 93–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yakhontova, T. 2006. Cultural and Disciplinary Variation in Academic Discourse: The Issue of Influencing Factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5(2): 153–167. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yang, W. 2011. Can Genre-Based Instruction Be ‘Promising’ for Transferability? English for Specific Purposes World 33(11): 1–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhao, J. and Wu, T. 2013. A Genre Analysis of Medical Abstracts by Chinese and English Native Speakers. Journal of Medical Colleges of PLA 28(1): 60–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue