SavedAdd your journal

Journals / IOJET / 2019 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4

A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTATIVE STRUCTURES IN ESP WRITING

Loredana BERCUCİ
Mădălina CHİTEZ
Journal
IOJET
Pages
733–747
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We arguethat translations of Romanian structures feature prominently when descriptive moves(description, definition, enumeration) are employed.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:One of the challenges in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) classrooms is teaching writinggenres, especially to students who come from fields that are taught in L1.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This is presumably“not only because different languages seem to have different ways of organizing ideas andstructuring arguments but because students’ prior writing experiences in the home, school orelsewhere do not prepare them for the literacy expectations of their university or professionalworkplace” (Hyland, 2013, p. 95).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We arguethat translations of Romanian structures feature prominently when descriptive moves(description, definition, enumeration) are employed.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

One of the challenges in English for Specific Purposes (ESP) classrooms is teaching writinggenres, especially to students who come from fields that are taught in L1. This is presumably“not only because different languages seem to have different ways of organizing ideas andstructuring arguments but because students’ prior writing experiences in the home, school orelsewhere do not prepare them for the literacy expectations of their university or professionalworkplace” (Hyland, 2013, p. 95). In our study, we analyze 36 argumentative essays writtenby students of Political Science and International Relations in an English for Social Sciences(ESP-adapted) course taught at the West University of Timisoara in Romania. The essays arewritten in English and the students’ L1 is Romanian. The aim of the study is to find out to whatextent argumentative structures in English are influenced by Romanian academic writing genrenorms. For our analysis, we use corpus linguistics methods, looking at frequencies andphraseology patterns as well as prominent rhetoric features related to argumentation. We arguethat translations of Romanian structures feature prominently when descriptive moves(description, definition, enumeration) are employed.

🔖

Cite This Article

BERCUCİ, L., CHİTEZ, M. (2022). A CORPUS ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENTATIVE STRUCTURES IN ESP WRITING. IOJET, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 4, 733–747. https://ajindex.com/articles/542308

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (6)

  1. Băniceru, C., Borchin, M., Doroholschi, C.I., Tucan, D. (2012). Academic writing in Romania: a contrastive analysis of BA thesis introductions in Romanian and English. Quaestiones Romanicae, 1, 331-345. [online] Available at: https://ciccre.uvt.ro/pt-pt/qvaestionesromanicae/quaestiones-romanicae-i (31.03.2019) Băniceru, C., Tucan, D. (2018). Perceptions about “Good Writing” and “Writing Competences” in Romanian academic writing practices: A questionnaire study. In Chitez, M., Doroholschi C.I., Kruse, O., Salski, L., Tucan, D. (Eds.), University Writing in Central and Eastern Europe: Tradition, Transition, and Innovation (p. 103-112). New York: Springer International Publishing. Bercuci, L., Chitez, M. (2019). The influence of the Romanian academic style on student writing in English. [forthcoming] Borchin, M., Doroholschi, C.I. (2016).
  2. Romania. In Kruse, O. et all (Eds.), Exploring European writing cultures: Country reports on genres, writing practices and languages used in European higher education (p. 179-201). Winterthur: ZHAW Zürcher Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften (Working Papers in Applied Linguistics 10). Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Wattam, S. (2015).
  3. LancsBox. Charle, C. (2004).
  4. Patterns. In Rüegg, W. (Eds.), A history of the university in Europe, Vol. III: Universities in the Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries (p. 35-80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Chitez, M. (2018). Corpus linguistics meets academic writing: Examples of applications in the Romanian EFL context.” In Chitez, M., Doroholschi C.I., Kruse, O., Salski, L., Tucan, D. (Eds.), University Writing in Central and Eastern Europe: Tradition, Transition, and Innovation (p. 133-149). New York: Springer International Publishing. Chitez, M., Doroholschi C.I., Kruse, O., Salski, L., Tucan, D. (2018). University writing in Central and Eastern Europe: Tradition, Transition, and Innovation. New York: Springer International Publishing. Harbord, J. (2018). A European model for writing support. In Chitez, M., Doroholschi C.I., Kruse, O., Salski, L., Tucan, D. (Eds.), University Writing in Central and Eastern Europe: Tradition, Transition, and Innovation (p. 15-29). New York: Springer International Publishing. Hyland, K. (2013).
  6. ESP and writing. In Paltridge, B. and Starfield, S. (Eds.), The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (p. 95-113). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Neave, G. (2011). Patterns. In W. Rüegg (Eds.), A history of the University in Europe, Vol. IV: Universities s