Knowledge construction of Discussion/Conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers

Sheldon, ME

Knowledge construction of Discussion/Conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers

Sheldon, ME

Permalink

Publisher:: Elsevier
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2019, 37 pp. 1 - 10 (10)
Issue Date:: 2019-01-01

Recently Added

	Filename	Size
	SHELDON.E.1-s2.0-S1475158518301759-main.pdf	955.67 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is new to OPUS and is not currently available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Sheldon, ME https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8526-2939	en_US
dc.date.accessioned	2020-06-11T06:51:19Z
dc.date.accessioned	2020-06-11T06:51:20Z
dc.date.available	2018-11-02	en_US
dc.date.available	2020-06-11T06:51:19Z
dc.date.available	2020-06-11T06:51:20Z
dc.date.issued	2019-01-01	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2019, 37 pp. 1 - 10 (10)	en_US
dc.identifier.issn	1475-1585	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141348
dc.description.abstract	The paper investigates the Discussion/Conclusion section of research articles (RA) written by English L1, English L2 and Spanish L1 writers in applied linguistics, seeking to assist scholars in Spain and Latin America to get published in reputable international English-language journals, i.e. those listed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). It draws on move analysis, contrasting texts in two languages and by three groups of writers, a first in the literature. The study will be advancing our understanding of the complexity of the RA, and the difficulties faced by scholars whose first language is not English but who are under institutional pressure to publish in English. Results showed that the macro-organization of this RA section of the two L1 groups was similar while differences were observed in the three moves/steps between these groups and the English L1 group. The latter group produced more rhetorically complex texts than the Spanish L1 group, while the English L2 group displayed hybridity in their texts as they brought to the fore the rhetorical practices of their L1 culture. The findings are expected to assist scholars to make their intellectual contributions accessible in mainstream international publications, whatever their native language.	en_US
dc.publisher	Elsevier	en_US
dc.relation.ispartof	Journal of English for Academic Purposes	en_US
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.jeap.2018.11.002	en_US
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess
dc.subject.classification	Languages & Linguistics	en_US
dc.title	Knowledge construction of Discussion/Conclusion sections of research articles written by English L1 and L2 and Castilian Spanish L1 writers	en_US
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	37	en_US
utslib.for	1303 Specialist Studies in Education	en_US
utslib.for	2004 Linguistics	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
utslib.copyright.status	recently_added	*
pubs.consider-herdc	false	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US
pubs.volume	37	en_US

Abstract:

The paper investigates the Discussion/Conclusion section of research articles (RA) written by English L1, English L2 and Spanish L1 writers in applied linguistics, seeking to assist scholars in Spain and Latin America to get published in reputable international English-language journals, i.e. those listed in the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). It draws on move analysis, contrasting texts in two languages and by three groups of writers, a first in the literature. The study will be advancing our understanding of the complexity of the RA, and the difficulties faced by scholars whose first language is not English but who are under institutional pressure to publish in English. Results showed that the macro-organization of this RA section of the two L1 groups was similar while differences were observed in the three moves/steps between these groups and the English L1 group. The latter group produced more rhetorically complex texts than the Spanish L1 group, while the English L2 group displayed hybridity in their texts as they brought to the fore the rhetorical practices of their L1 culture. The findings are expected to assist scholars to make their intellectual contributions accessible in mainstream international publications, whatever their native language.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/141348