Beyond words in evaluation: Formulaic language in critical reviews of research articles across disciplines

封面

如何引用文章

全文:

详细

Formulaic language, characterized by phraseological patterns such as lexical bundles, has been observed to significantly influence the discourse of speakers and writers. These patterns tend to differ across genres and disciplines. However, the examination of formulaic language in evaluative genres, particularly across different disciplines, has been relatively limited. This study aims to explore the use of formulaic language in review feedback on manuscripts submitted by Iranian junior researchers to international journals across three disciplines. Using a discourse analytical approach, the study analyzes the frequency, structure, and function of the most prevalent four-word lexical bundles in 120 authentic peer reviews (recommending either major or minor revisions) in applied linguistics (AL), engineering, and business (40 from each discipline). The study explores how reviewers employ formulas to convey their comments to writers. The results reveal disciplinary differences in the usage, structure, and function of lexical bundles among reviewers. However, commonalities exist due to the inherent conventions of the evaluative genre. These disciplinary tendencies are also reflected in the organization of reviewers' reports and their commenting styles. The study contributes to enhancing the understanding of evaluative practices within specific disciplines by offering valuable insights into the phraseological patterns used in peer reviews and highlighting the discipline-specific formulaic expressions employed by reviewers to provide constructive feedback to authors.

作者简介

Hadi Kashiha

Sohar University

编辑信件的主要联系方式.
Email: hkashiha@su.edu.om
ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8907-4804

Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics at Sohar University in Oman and a former postdoctoral researcher at Alzahra University in Iran. His research interests focus on Corpus and Applied Linguistics, with particular emphasis on Discourse Analysis, Genre studies, English for Academic Purposes, and Pragmatics. He has authored several research articles published in prestigious journals, including Journal of Pragmatics, Australian Journal of Linguistics, European Journal of Applied Linguistics, Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, and a few other international journals.

Oman

参考

  1. Adel, Annelie & Britt Erman. 2012. Recurrent word combinations in academic writing by native and non-native speakers of English: A lexical bundles approach. English for Specific Purposes 31 (2). 81-92.
  2. Altenberg, Bengt. 1993. Recurrent word combinations in spoken English. In Juian Meldon D’Arcy (ed.), Proceedings of the fifth Nordic association for English studies Conference, 17-27. University of Iceland.
  3. Becher, Tony. 1994. The significance of disciplinary differences. Studies in Higher Education 19 (2). 151-161.
  4. Belcher, Diane D. 2007. Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing 16 (1). 1-22.
  5. Biber, Douglas & Federica Barbieri. 2007. Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes 26 (3). 263-286.
  6. Biber, Douglas & Susan Conrad. 1999. Lexical bundles in conversation and academic prose. Language and Computers 26. 181-190.
  7. Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad & Viviana Cortes. 2004. If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics 25 (3). 371-405.
  8. Biber, Douglas, Susan Conrad & Randi Reppen. 1998. Corpus Linguistics: Investigating Language Structure and Use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  9. Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad, Edward Finegan & Randolph Quirk. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Longman.
  10. Breeze, Ruth. 2013. Lexical bundles across four legal genres. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 18 (2). 229-253. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.18.2.03bre
  11. Chan, Swee Heng, Hadi Kashiha & Helen Tan. 2014. Lexical bundles: Facilitating University “Talk” in group discussions. English Language Teaching 7 (4). 1-10. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n4p1
  12. Chen, Yu-Hua & Paul Baker. 2010. Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning and Technology 14 (2). 30-49.
  13. Cortes, Viviana. 2004. Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes 23 (4). 397-423.
  14. Cortes, Viviana. 2006. Teaching lexical bundles in the disciplines: An example from a writing intensive history class. Linguistics and Education 17 (4). 391-406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2007.02.001
  15. Grabowski, Łukasz. 2015. Keywords and lexical bundles within English pharmaceutical discourse: A corpus-driven description. English for Specific Purposes 38. 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.10.004
  16. Curzon, M. E. J. & R. E. Cleaton-Jones. 2011. Reviewing scientific manuscripts. European Archives of Paediatric Dentistry 12 (4). 184-187.
  17. Herbel-Eisenmann, Beth, David Wagner & Viviana Cortes. 2010. Lexical bundle analysis in mathematics classroom discourse: The significance of stance. Educational Studies in Mathematics 75 (1) 23-42. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-010-9253-6
  18. Howarth, Peter. 1998. Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistics 19 (1). 24-44. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.1.24
  19. Hyland, Ken. 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes 27 (1). 4-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06. 001.
  20. Jeong, Hyojin & Nan Jiang. 2019. Representation and processing of lexical bundles: Evidence from word monitoring. System 80. 188-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system. 2018.11.009
  21. Karabacak, Erkan & Jingjing Qin. 2013. Comparison of lexical bundles used by Turkish, Chinese, and American university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences 70. 622-628.
  22. Kashiha, Hadi. 2015. Recurrent formulas and moves in writing research article conclusions among native and nonnative writers. The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 21 (1). 47-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/3L-2015-2101-05
  23. Kashiha, Hadi & Chan Swee Heng. 2013. An exploration of lexical bundles in academic lectures: Examples from hard and soft sciences. The Journal of Asia TEFL 10 (4). 133-161.
  24. Kashiha, Hadi & Chan Swee Heng. 2014a. Discourse functions of formulaic sequences in academic speech across two disciplines. GEMA Online™ Journal of Language Studies 14 (2). 15-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/GEMA-2014-1402-02
  25. Kashiha, Hadi & Chan Swee Heng. 2014b. Structural analysis of lexical bundles in university lectures of politics and chemistry. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 3 (1). 224-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.3n.1p.224
  26. Kashiha, Hadi & Chan Swee Heng. 2014c. Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary investigation of lexical bundles in academic writing. Pertanika: Journal of Social Science and Humanities 22 (4). 937-951.
  27. Kashiha, Hadi & Chan Swee Heng. 2015. A little bit about: Differences in native and non-native speakers’ use of formulaic language. Australian Journal of Linguistics 35 (4). 297-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2015.1067132
  28. Larina, Tatiana & Douglas Mark Ponton. 2020. Tact or frankness in English and Russian blind peer reviews. Intercultural Pragmatics 17 (4). 471-496. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2020-4004
  29. Larina, Tatiana & Douglas Mark Ponton. 2022. I wanted to honour your journal, and you spat in my face: Emotive (im)politeness and face in the English and Russian blind peer review. Journal of Politeness Research 18 (1). 201-226. https://doi.org/10.1515/pr-2019-0035
  30. Loonen, Martijn PJ, J. Joris Hage & Moshe Kon. 2005. Who benefits from peer review? An analysis of the outcome of 100 requests for review by Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 116 (5). 1461-1472.
  31. Meunier, Fanny & Sylviane Granger. 2008. Phraseology in Foreign Language Learning and Teaching. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/z.138
  32. Mungra, Philippa & Pauline Webber. 2010. Peer review process in medical research publications: Language and content comments. English for Specific Purposes 29 (1). 43-53.
  33. Nekrasova, Tatiana M. 2009. English L1 and L2 speakers’ knowledge of lexical bundles. Language Learning 59 (3). 647-686. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00520.x
  34. Paltridge, Brian. 2017. The Discourse of Peer Review: Reviewing Submissions to Academic Journals. London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48736-0
  35. Paltridge, Brian. 2019. Looking inside the world of peer review: Implications for graduate student writers. Language Teaching 52 (3). 331-342. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444818000150
  36. Paltridge, Brian. 2020. Engagement and reviewers’ reports on submissions to academic journals. Journal of English for Research Publication Purposes 1 (1). 4-27.
  37. Pan, Fan & Chen Liu. 2019. Comparing L1-L2 differences in lexical bundles in student and expert writing. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 37 (2). 142-157. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2019.1625276
  38. Pawley, Andrew & Frances Hodgetts Syder. 1983. Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In Jack C. Richards & Richard W. Schmidt (eds.), Language and communication, 191-225. Longman.
  39. Reppen, Randi & Shannon B. Olson. 2020. Lexical bundles across disciplines: A look at consistency and variability. In Ute Romer, Viviana Cortes & Eric Friginal (eds.), Advances in corpus-based research on academic writing: Effects of discipline, register, and writer expertise, 170-182. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.95.07rep
  40. Salazar, Danica. 2014. Lexical Bundles in Native and Non-native Scientific Writing: Applying a Corpus-based Study to Language Teaching. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.65
  41. Samraj, Betty. 2016. Discourse structure and variation in manuscript reviews: Implications for genre categorization. English for Specific Purposes 42. 76-88
  42. Schmitt, Norbert, Sarah Grandage & Svenja Adolphs. 2004. Are corpus-derived recurrent clusters psycholinguistically valid? In Norbert Schmitt (ed.), Formulaic sequences. Acquisition, processing and use, 127-152. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.9.08sch
  43. Scott, Mike. 2008. Wordsmith Tools 4. Oxford University Press
  44. Shin, Yu Kyoung. 2019. Do native writers always have a head start over nonnative writers? The use of lexical bundles in college students’ essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 40. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.04.004
  45. Shirazizadeh, Mohsen & Rojan Amirfazlian. 2021. Lexical bundles in theses, articles and textbooks of applied linguistics: Investigating intradisciplinary uniformity and variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 49. 100946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100946
  46. Sinclair, John. 1991. Corpus, Concordance, Collocation. Oxford University Press.
  47. Swales, John M. 1990. Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  48. Swales, John M. 1996. Occluded genres in the academy. In Eija Ventola & Anna Mauranen (eds.), Academic writing, 45-58. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  49. Tremblay, Antoine, Bruce Derwing, Gary Libben & Chris Westbury. 2011. Processing advantages of lexical bundles: Evidence from self-paced reading and sentence recall tasks. Language Learning 61 (2). 569-613.
  50. Wei, Yaoyu & Lei Lei. 2011. Lexical bundles in the academic writing of advanced Chinese EFL learners. RELC Journal 42 (2). 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688211407295
  51. Wray, Alison. 2013. Formulaic language. Language Teaching 46 (3). 316-334. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444813000013

版权所有 © Kashiha H., 2023

Creative Commons License
此作品已接受知识共享署名-非商业性使用 4.0国际许可协议的许可。

##common.cookie##