应用语言学研究论文讨论部分词汇束的功能分析:跨范式研究

IF 1.5 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
K. Richter, Behruz Lotfi Gaskaree, Milad Mirzai
{"title":"应用语言学研究论文讨论部分词汇束的功能分析:跨范式研究","authors":"K. Richter, Behruz Lotfi Gaskaree, Milad Mirzai","doi":"10.22363/2687-0088-27752","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Lexical bundles, as “building blocks of discourse” (Biber Barbieri 2007: 263), vary across disciplines and genres. Mastery of lexical bundles signals professionalism and helps identify writers and speakers as members of specific discourse communities. Despite the contribution of lexical bundle research to our understanding of disciplinary variation, the constraints placed by the genre conventions of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods approaches to research writing on the use of lexical bundles remain under-researched (Le Harrington 2015). This study aims to explore the extent to which quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research articles are similar or different with respect to the frequency and functional patterns of their lexical bundles. Towards answering this question, however tentatively, the present exploratory study reports on the extent to which lexical bundles function similarly or differently in the discussion sections of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research articles in the field of applied linguistics. A corpus-based analysis of discussion sections in 150 research articles culled from ten highly rated international journals in the field of applied linguistics suggest that at the level of discussion sections, different methodological paradigms are characterized by different functional uses of lexical bundles. These lexical bundles are sufficiently formulaic that it can be argued that they constrain writers’ language preferences. These findings may be of interest to applied linguists, second language educators and advanced learners of academic English.","PeriodicalId":53426,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Linguistics","volume":"4 1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A functional analysis of lexical bundles in the discussion sections of applied linguistics research articles: A cross-paradigm study\",\"authors\":\"K. Richter, Behruz Lotfi Gaskaree, Milad Mirzai\",\"doi\":\"10.22363/2687-0088-27752\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Lexical bundles, as “building blocks of discourse” (Biber Barbieri 2007: 263), vary across disciplines and genres. Mastery of lexical bundles signals professionalism and helps identify writers and speakers as members of specific discourse communities. Despite the contribution of lexical bundle research to our understanding of disciplinary variation, the constraints placed by the genre conventions of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods approaches to research writing on the use of lexical bundles remain under-researched (Le Harrington 2015). This study aims to explore the extent to which quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research articles are similar or different with respect to the frequency and functional patterns of their lexical bundles. Towards answering this question, however tentatively, the present exploratory study reports on the extent to which lexical bundles function similarly or differently in the discussion sections of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research articles in the field of applied linguistics. A corpus-based analysis of discussion sections in 150 research articles culled from ten highly rated international journals in the field of applied linguistics suggest that at the level of discussion sections, different methodological paradigms are characterized by different functional uses of lexical bundles. These lexical bundles are sufficiently formulaic that it can be argued that they constrain writers’ language preferences. These findings may be of interest to applied linguists, second language educators and advanced learners of academic English.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53426,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Russian Journal of Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"4 1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Russian Journal of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-27752\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-27752","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

词汇束作为“话语的构建块”(Biber Barbieri 2007: 263),在不同的学科和体裁中有所不同。掌握词汇束标志着专业精神,并有助于将作者和说话者识别为特定话语群体的成员。尽管词汇束研究对我们理解学科差异做出了贡献,但对词汇束使用的研究写作的定量、定性和混合方法的类型惯例所施加的限制仍未得到充分研究(Le Harrington 2015)。本研究旨在探讨定量、定性和混合方法研究文章在词汇束的频率和功能模式方面的相似或不同程度。为了暂时回答这个问题,本探索性研究报告了词汇束在应用语言学领域的定量、定性和混合方法研究文章的讨论部分中相似或不同的程度。从应用语言学领域的10个高评价的国际期刊中挑选出150篇研究论文的讨论部分进行了基于语料库的分析,结果表明,在讨论部分的层面上,不同的方法范式以词汇束的不同功能使用为特征。这些词汇束是足够公式化的,可以认为它们限制了作家的语言偏好。这些发现可能会引起应用语言学家、第二语言教育者和高级学术英语学习者的兴趣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A functional analysis of lexical bundles in the discussion sections of applied linguistics research articles: A cross-paradigm study
Lexical bundles, as “building blocks of discourse” (Biber Barbieri 2007: 263), vary across disciplines and genres. Mastery of lexical bundles signals professionalism and helps identify writers and speakers as members of specific discourse communities. Despite the contribution of lexical bundle research to our understanding of disciplinary variation, the constraints placed by the genre conventions of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods approaches to research writing on the use of lexical bundles remain under-researched (Le Harrington 2015). This study aims to explore the extent to which quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research articles are similar or different with respect to the frequency and functional patterns of their lexical bundles. Towards answering this question, however tentatively, the present exploratory study reports on the extent to which lexical bundles function similarly or differently in the discussion sections of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research articles in the field of applied linguistics. A corpus-based analysis of discussion sections in 150 research articles culled from ten highly rated international journals in the field of applied linguistics suggest that at the level of discussion sections, different methodological paradigms are characterized by different functional uses of lexical bundles. These lexical bundles are sufficiently formulaic that it can be argued that they constrain writers’ language preferences. These findings may be of interest to applied linguists, second language educators and advanced learners of academic English.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Russian Journal of Linguistics
Russian Journal of Linguistics Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
33.30%
发文量
43
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信