Rhetorical relations in English and Spanish research articles
An analysis of introductions and conclusions from the perspective of two functional theories
Keywords:rhetorical relations, research articles, Rhetorical Structure Theory, Systemic Functional Linguistics, register
Research articles have been the object of study of many scholars within the ESP tradition, most notably, since Swales' (1990) studies on academic language. Such studies have focused mainly on ‘moves' and ‘steps', i.e. on the part-whole relations that comprise each of the sections in a research article. However, little is known about the iterative connectivity of sentences and paragraphs that make up the discourse organization of research articles sections. This study uses Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann and Thompson, 1987) for the analysis of discourse relations in introductions and conclusions of research articles from applied linguistics journals in two languages, English and Spanish. It also uses Systemic Functional Linguistics (Halliday, 1985) in order to locate introductions and conclusions within a general theory of register. The results showed significant trends across registers and languages that can inform the teaching of writing within the context of academic expository texts.
Bazerman, C. (1988) Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Berkenkotter, C. and Huckin, T. N. (1995) Genre Knowledge in Disciplinary Communication: Cognition/Culture/Power. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Boccia, C. (2010) La sección Introduction: una macro-propuesta. In V. M. Castel (Ed.) El Artículo Científico en Inglés: Aspectos Teórico-Descriptivos, Pedagógicos y Computacionales de una Modelización Sistémico Funcional 79–128. Mendoza: Editorial de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras de la Universidad Nacional de Cuyo.
Cloran, C., Stuart-Smith, V. and Young, L. (2007) Models of discourse. In R. Hasan, C. M. I. M. Matthiessen and J. J. Webster (Eds) Continuing Discourse on Language, vol 2., 647–670. London: Equinox.
da Cunha, I. and Iruskieta, M. (2010) Comparing rhetorical structures in different languages: The influence of translation strategies. Discourse Studies 12: 563–598. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445610371054
Dudley-Evans, T. (1994) Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis 219–228. London: Routledge.
Flowerdew, J. (1999) Problems in writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing 8: 243–264. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80116-7
Fox, B. (1987) Discourse Structure and Anaphora: Written and Conversational English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511627767
Fryer, D. L. (2012) Analysis of the generic discourse features of the English-language medical research paper: A systemic functional approach. Functions of Language 19: 5–37. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.19.1.01fry
Ghadessy, M. (Ed.) (1999) Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.169
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978) Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1990) The construction of knowledge and value in the grammar of scientific discourse: With reference to Charles Darwin’s The Origin of Species. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) Linguistic Studies of Text and Discourse, vol. 2 in the Collected Works of M. A. K .Halliday, 168–194. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994a) An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994b) So you say ‘pass’…thank you three muchly. In A. D. Grimshaw (Ed.) What’s Going on Here? Complementary Studies of Professional Talk, vol. 2, 175–229. Norwood: Ablex.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2001) On the grammatical foundations of discourse. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) Studies in Chinese Language, vol. 8 in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday, 346–364. London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. (2005) Computational and Quantitative Studies, vol. 6 in the Collected Works of M. A. K. Halliday (edited by J. J. Webster). London: Continuum.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2004) An Introduction to Functional Grammar, 3rd ed. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2014) Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar, 4th ed. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A. and Strevens P. D. (1964) The Linguistic Sciences and Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Halliday, M. A. K. and Webster, J. J. (2014). Text Linguistics: The How and Why of Meaning. London: Equinox.
Holmes, R. (1997) Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 16: 321–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00038-5
Hood, S. (2004) Managing attitude in undergraduate academic writing: A focus on the introductions to research reports. In L. Ravelli and R. Ellis (Eds) Analysing Academic Writing: Contextualized Frameworks 24–44. London: Continuum.
Hood, S. (2010) Appraising Research: Evaluation in Academic Writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662
Hood, S. (2012) Voice and stance as appraisal: Persuading and positioning in research writing across intellectual fields. In K. Hyland and C. Sancho Guinda (Eds) Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres 51–68. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825_4
Hovy, E. H. and Maier, E. (1995) Parsimonious or profligate: How many and which discourse structure relations? Unpublished manuscript.
Hyland, K. (1998) Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54
Hyland, K. (2011) Academic discourse. In K. Hyland and B. Paltridge (Eds) Continuum Companion to Discourse Analysis 171–184. London: Continuum.
Iruskieta, M. and da Cunha, I. (2010) El potencial de las relaciones retóricas para la discriminación de textos especializados de diferentes dominios en euskera-español. Calidoscópio 8: 2177–6202. https://doi.org/10.4013/cld.2010.83.03
Lavid, J. (1997) Textual relations in discourse: Towards a specification of multiple links between text segments. BELLS (Barcelona English Language and Literature Studies) 8: 233–245.
Lewin, B. A., Fine, J. and Young, L. (2001) Expository Discourse: A Genre-Based Approach to Social Research Text. London: Continuum.
Maier, E. (1996) Textual relations as part of multiple links between text segments. In G. Adorni and M. Zock (Eds) Trends in Natural Language Generation: An Artificial Intelligence Perspective 68–87. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-60800-1_24
Mann, W. C. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1991) Functions of language in two frameworks. Word 42: 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1991.11435839
Mann, W. C., Matthiessen, C. M. I. M and Thompson, S. A. (1992) Rhetorical structure theory and text analysis. In W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson (Eds) Diverse Linguistic Analyses of a Fund-Raising Text 39–78. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Mann, W. C. and Taboada, M. (2005) RST website (http://www.sfu.ca/rst).
Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A. (1983) Relational propositions in discourse (Tech. Rep. ISI/RR-83-115). Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Institute.
Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A. (1987) Rhetorical structure theory: A theory of text organization (Tech. Rep. ISI/RS-87-190). Los Angeles: University of Southern California, Information Sciences Institute.
Mann, W. C. and Thompson, S. A. (1988) Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text 8: 243–281.
Martin, J. R. (1983) conjunction: The logic of English text. In J. S. Petöfi and E. Sözer (Eds) Micro and Macro Connexity of Texts 1–72. Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.19126.96.36.199
Martin, J. R. (1994) Macro-genres: The ecology of the page. Network 21: 29–52.
Martin, J. R. and Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (1991) Systemic typology and topology. In F. Christie (Ed.) Literacy in Social Processes: Papers from the Inaugural Australian Systemic Functional Linguistics Conference 345–384. Darwin: Centre for Studies of Language in Education.
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. (2002) Combining clauses into clause complexes: A multi-faceted view. In J. Bybee and M. Noonan (Eds) Complex Sentences in Grammar and Discourse: Essays in Honor of Sandra A. Thompson 237–322. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.110.13mat
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. and Teruya, K. (2015) Grammatical realizations of rhetorical relations in different registers. WORD 61: 232–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2015.1071963
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K. and Lam, M. (2010) Key Terms in Systemic Functional Linguistics. London: Continuum.
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M., Teruya, K. and Wu, C. (2008) Multilingual studies as a multi-dimensional space of interconnected language studies. In J. J. Webster (Ed.) Meaning in Context: Implementing Intelligent Applications of Language Studies 146–220. London: Continuum.
Matthiessen, C. M. I. M. and Thompson, S. A. (1988) The structure of discourse and ‘subordination’. In J. Haiman and S. A. Thompson (Eds) Clause Combining in Grammar and Discourse 275–329. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.18.12mat
Mauranen, A. (1993) Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes 12: 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(93)90024-I
Moreno A. I. (1997) Genre constraints across languages: Causal metatext in Spanish and English RAs. English for Specific Purposes 16: 161–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00023-3
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2007) ‘I/we focus on. . .’: A cross-cultural analysis of self-mentions in business management research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6: 143–162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.002
O’Donnell, M. (2004) RSTTool, Version 3.45 (Software). Available at http://www.wagsoft.com/RSTTool/.
Peacock, M. (2002) Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System 30: 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7
Ruiying, Y. and Allison, D. (2003) Research articles in applied linguistics: moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes 22: 365–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1
Sanders, T. and Spooren, W. (1999). Communicative intentions and coherence relations. In W. Bublitz, U. Lenk and E. Ventola (Eds) Coherence in Spoken and Written Discourse: How to Create it and How to Describe it 235–250. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.63.18san
Sheldon, E. (2011) Rhetorical differences in RA introductions written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10: 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.004
Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M., Taverniers, M. and Ravelli, L. (Eds) (2003) Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.236
Sriniwass, S. (2008) Tactic augmentation and circumstantial augmentation in the creation of field meanings. In Jones, C. and E. Ventola (Eds) From Language to Multimodality: New Developments in the Study of Ideational Meaning 131–152. London: Equinox.
Swales, J. M. (1990) Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004) Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
Taboada, M. and Gómez-González, M. A. (2012) Discourse markers and coherence relations: Comparison across markers, languages and modalities. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 6: 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v6i1-3.17
Taboada, M. and Mann, W. C. (2006) Rhetorical structure theory: looking back and moving ahead. Discourse Studies 8: 423–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445606061881
Taylor, G. and Tinguan, C. (1991). Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics 12: 319–336. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/12.3.319
Thompson, G. and Hunston, S. (2006) Introduction: system and corpus: Two traditions with a common ground. In G. Thompson and S. Hunston (Eds) System and Corpus: Exploring Connections 1–14. London: Equinox.
Thompson, S. A. and Mann, W. C. (1987) Antithesis: A study in clause combining and discourse structure. In R. Steele and T. Threadgold (Eds) Language Topics: Essays in Honour of Michael Halliday, vol. 2, 359–381. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Ure, J. (1971) Lexical density and register differentiation. In G. E. Perren and J. L. M. Trim (Eds) Applications of Linguistics: Selected Papers of the Second International Congress of Applied Linguistics 443–452. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Weissberg, R. and Buker, S. (1990) Writing up Research: Experimental Research Report Writing for Students of English. New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.
Wood, A. (2001) International scientific English: The language of research scientist around the world. In J. Flowerdew and M. Peacock (Eds) Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes, 71–83. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524766.008
How to Cite
© Equinox Publishing Ltd.
For information regarding our Open Access policy, click here.