Article published In:
Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada/Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Linguistic variation in two written academic sub-registers

A multi-dimensional analysis

ORCID logo | Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
ORCID logo | Centennial College
ORCID logo | University of Arizona
ORCID logo | Ferdowsi University of Mashhad
The present study aims to compare abstracts written by graduate students and internationally-published authors using Biber’s (1988) Multi-Dimensional (MD) model. To this end, two corpora of abstracts (1800 texts each) from research articles (RA) published in top international Applied Linguistics journals, and theses completed in the same field were compiled. We compared the two corpora with regard to three of Biber’s (1988) dimensions: involved versus informational production; elaborated vs. situation-dependent reference; and abstract vs. non-abstract style. Our results revealed that RA abstracts and thesis abstracts are similar when compared to non-academic registers of English, but different when compared to each other. Relative to thesis abstracts, RA abstracts are more informational but less elaborated and less impersonal. Interestingly, we found that RA/thesis abstracts differ from Biber’s (1988) academic prose register along the three dimensions. Our findings can further our understanding of the differences between RA and thesis abstracts, thus contributing to the instruction of academic writing at the graduate level.
Keywords: multi-dimensional (MD) analysis, written academic sub-registers, graduate students, internationally-published writers, RA abstract, thesis abstract
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Comparative studies of thesis and RA abstracts
    • 2.2Multi-dimensional studies in academic language
    • 2.3Research gaps and research questions
  • 3.Methodology
    • 3.1The corpora
    • 3.2The situational analysis of the corpora
    • 3.3Analytical procedure
    • 3.4Statistical analysis
  • 4.Results and discussion
    • 4.1Dimension 1: Involved versus informational production
      • 4.1.1RQ 1a: RA/thesis abstracts vs. non-academic registers with regard to dimension 1
      • 4.1.2RQ 2a: RA vs. thesis abstracts with regard to dimension1
      • 4.1.3RQ 3a: RA/thesis abstracts vs. Biber’s (1988) academic prose with regard to dimension 1
    • 4.2Dimension 3: Elaborated vs. situation-dependent reference
      • 4.2.1RQ 1b: RA/thesis abstracts vs. non-academic registers with regard to dimension 3
      • 4.2.2RQ 2b: RA vs. thesis abstracts with regard to dimension 3
      • 4.2.3RQ 3b: RA/thesis abstracts vs. Biber’s (1988) academic prose with regard to dimension 3
    • 4.3Dimension 5: Abstract vs. non-abstract style
      • 4.3.1RQ 1c: RA/thesis abstracts vs. non-academic registers with regard to dimension 5
      • 4.3.2RQ 2c: Differences between RA and thesis abstracts with regard to dimension 5
      • 4.3.3RQ 3c: RA/thesis abstracts vs. Biber’s (1988) academic prose with regard to dimension5
  • 5.Conclusion and implications
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 8 April 2024
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.22052.ans
References (64)
References
Afzaal, M., Ilyas Chishti, M., Liu, C., & Zhang, C. (2021). Metadiscourse in Chinese and American graduate dissertation introductions. Cogent Arts & Humanities, 8 (1), 1970879. DOI logo
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American psychological association. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Ansarifar, A., Shahriari, H., & Pishghadam, R. (2018). Phrasal complexity in academic writing: A comparison of abstracts written by graduate students and expert writers in applied linguistics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 31 1, 58–71. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and linguistic computing, 8(4), 243–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1995). Dimensions of register variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2003). Compressed noun-phrase structures in newspaper discourse: The competing demands of popularization vs. economy. In J. Aitchison, & D. M. Lewis (Eds.), New media language (pp. 169–181). Routledge.Google Scholar
(2014). Multi-dimensional analysis: A personal history. In T. B. Sardinha & M. V. Pinto (Eds.), Multi-dimensional analysis, 25 years on: A tribute to Douglas Biber (pp. xxvi–xxxviii). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Multi-dimensional analysis: A historical synopsis. In T. B. Sardinha & M. V. Pinto (Eds.), Multi-dimensional analysis: Research methods and current issues (pp.11–26). Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Clark, V. (2002). Historical shifts in modification patterns with complex noun phrase structures: How long can you go without a verb? In T. Fanego, M. J. López-Couso, & J. Pérez-Guerra (Eds.), English historical syntax and morphology (pp. 43–66). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). Register, genre, and style. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9 (1), 2–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1988). Adverbial stance types in English. Discourse processes, 11(1), 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Diachronic relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies (pp. 63–86). Longman.Google Scholar
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2013). Being specific about historical change: The influence of sub-register. Journal of English Linguistics, 41 (2), 104–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Poonpon, K. (2011). Should we use characteristics of conversation to measure grammatical complexity in L2 writing development? Tesol Quarterly, 45 (1), 5–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Biber, D., Gray, B., & Staples, S. (2014). Predicting patterns of grammatical complexity across language exam task types and proficiency levels. Applied Linguistics, 37 (5), 639–668. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Candarli, D. (2021). Linguistic characteristics of online academic forum posts across subregisters, L1 backgrounds, and grades. Lingua, 267 1, 103190. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cao, Y., & Xiao, R. (2013). A multi-dimensional contrastive study of English abstracts by native and non-native writers. Corpora, 8 (2), 209–234. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cheng, A. (2021). The place of language in the theoretical tenets, textbooks, and classroom practices in the ESP genre-based approach to teaching writing. English for Specific Purposes, 64 1, 26–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Routledge Academic.Google Scholar
Conrad, S. (1996a). Academic discourse in two disciplines: Professional writing and student development in Biology and History. PhD dissertation, Northern Arizona University.
(2001). Variation among disciplinary texts: A comparison of textbooks and journal articles in biology and history. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies (pp. 94–107). Longman.Google Scholar
(2014). Expanding multi-dimensional analysis with qualitative research techniques. In T. B. Sardinha & M. V. Pinto (Eds.), Multi-dimensional analysis, 25 years on: A tribute to Douglas Biber (pp. 273–297). John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2001). Multi-dimensional methodology and the dimensions of register variation in English. In S. Conrad & D. Biber (Eds.), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies (pp. 13–42). Longman.Google Scholar
Crosthwaite, P. (2016). A longitudinal multidimensional analysis of EAP writing: Determining EAP course effectiveness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 22 1, 166–178. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
El-Dakhs, D. A. S. (2018). Why are abstracts in PhD theses and research articles different? A genre-specific perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36 1, 48–60. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fauzan, U., Lubis, A. H., & Kurniawan, E. (2020). Rhetorical moves and linguistic complexity of research article abstracts in international Applied Linguistics journals. The Asian ESP Journal, 16 (5), 219–247.Google Scholar
Friginal, E., Li, M., & Weigle, S. C. (2014). Revisiting multiple profiles of learner compositions: A comparison of highly rated NS and NNS essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 23 1, 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, B. (2015). Linguistic variation in research articles. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gray, B., Cotos, E., & Smith, J. (2020). Combining rhetorical move analysis with multi-dimensional analysis: Research writing across disciplines. In U. Römer, V. Cortes, & E. Friginal (Eds.), Advances in corpus-based research on academic writing: Effects of discipline, register, and writer expertise, 137–168. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habibie, P. (2016). Writing for scholarly publication in a Canadian higher education context: A case study. In C. Badenhorst & C. Guerin (Eds.), Research literacies and writing pedagogies for masters and doctoral students (pp. 51–67). Brill. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. Longman.Google Scholar
Hartley, J., & Betts, L. (2009). Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 60 (10), 2010–2018. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harwood, N. (2005). ‘Nowhere has anyone attempted… In this article I aim to do just that’: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 37 (8), 1207–1231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hewings, M., & Hewings, A. (2002). “It is interesting to note that…”: A comparative study of anticipatory ‘it’ in student and published writing. English for Specific Purposes, 21 (4), 367–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K. (2000). Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language Awareness, 9 (4), 179–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34 (8), 1091–1112. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
(2008). Genre and academic writing in the disciplines. Language Teaching, 41(4), 543–562. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “academic vocabulary”?. TESOL quarterly, 41(2), 235–253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jalilifar, A. (2012). Academic attribution: Citation analysis in master’s theses and research articles in applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 22 (1), 23–41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 201, 114–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. E., & Nam, H. (2019). How do textual features of L2 argumentative essays differ across proficiency levels? A multidimensional cross-sectional study. Reading and Writing, 32 (9), 2251–2279. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koutsantoni, D. (2006). Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses: Advanced academic literacy and relations of power. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5 (1), 19–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kwan, B. S. C. (2010). An investigation of instruction in research publishing offered in doctoral programs: The Hong Kong case. Higher Education, 59(1), 55–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, D. Y. W., & Chen, S. X. (2009). Making a bigger deal of the smaller words. Function words and other key items in research writing by Chinese learners. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18 1, 149–165. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lei, S. A., & Chuang, N. (2009). Research collaboration and publication during graduate studies: Evaluating benefits and costs from students’ perspectives. College Student Journal, 43 (4), 1163–1168.Google Scholar
Li, Y., Ma, X., Zhao, J., & Hu, J. (2020). Graduate-level research writing instruction: Two Chinese EAP teachers’ localized ESP genre-based pedagogy. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 431, 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mizumoto, A., Hamatani, S., & Imao, Y. (2017). Applying the bundle-move connection approach to the development of an online writing support tool for research articles. Language Learning, 67(4), 885–921. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nasseri, M. (2021). Is postgraduate English academic writing more clausal or phrasal? Syntactic complexification at the crossroads of genre, proficiency, and statistical modelling, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 49 1, 100940. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nini, A. (2019). The Multi-Dimensional Analysis Tagger. In T. B. Sardinha, & M. V. Pinto (Eds.). Multi-dimensional analysis: Research methods and current issues, (pp. 67–96). Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Noguera, C. P. (2012). Writing business research article abstracts: A genre approach. Ibérica: Revista de la Asociación Europea de Lenguas para Fines Específicos (AELFE), 24 1, 211–232.Google Scholar
Pho, P. D. (2008). 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. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ren, H., & Li, Y. (2011). A comparison study on the rhetorical moves of abstracts in published research articles and master’s foreign-language theses. English Language Teaching, 4 (1), 162–166. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Samraj, B. (2013). Form and function of citations in discussion sections of master’s theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12 (4), 299–310. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sardinha, T. B., Pinto, M. V., Mayer, C., Zuppardi, M. C., & Kauffmann, C. H. (2019). Adding registers to a previous multi-dimensional analysis. In T. B. Sardinha, & M. V. Pinto (Eds.). Multi-dimensional analysis: Research methods and current issues, (pp. 165–186). Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Staples, S., & Reppen, R. (2016). Understanding first-year L2 writing: A lexico-grammatical analysis across L1s, genres, and language ratings. Journal of Second Language Writing, 32 1, 17–35. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Starfield, S., & Paltridge, B. (2019). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: Context, identity, genre. Journal of Second Language Writing, 43 1, 1–3. DOI logo
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2009). Abstracts and the writing of abstracts (Vol. 11). The University of Michigan Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Xie, S. (2020). Multidimensional analysis of Master thesis abstracts: A diachronic perspective. Scientometrics, 123 (2), 861–881.
Yoneoka, D., & Ota, E. (2017). Evaluating association between linguistic characteristics of abstracts and risk of bias: Case of Japanese randomized controlled trials. PLOS ONE, 12 (3), 1–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar