2006
DOI: 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rhetorical strategies in engineering research articles and research theses: Advanced academic literacy and relations of power

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

2
58
0
9

Year Published

2011
2011
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 112 publications
(69 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
2
58
0
9
Order By: Relevance
“…They have to offer some background information on the topic, find the niche of the study within the research area and finally introduce the study undertaken (Hashim, 2008). These are all globally recognisable strategies that help to realise the ratification of knowledge (Koutsantoni, 2006). This globally recognised purpose of the introductory chapter operates within its own peculiar, socially constructed conventions and norms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…They have to offer some background information on the topic, find the niche of the study within the research area and finally introduce the study undertaken (Hashim, 2008). These are all globally recognisable strategies that help to realise the ratification of knowledge (Koutsantoni, 2006). This globally recognised purpose of the introductory chapter operates within its own peculiar, socially constructed conventions and norms.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Bitchener & Basturkmen, 2006, Chatterjee, 2008 has shown that the discussion section of the doctoral thesis is a challenging part-genre (Dudley Evans, 1998) to write. The doctoral thesis as a whole is a high-stakes genre, in which writers must negotiate a dual identity: simultaneously as a student presenting him/herself for examination, and as an expert demonstrating his/her credentials for membership of a disciplinary elite (Carter, 2011;Carter & Blumenstein, 2011;Koutsantoni, 2006;Paltridge & Starfield, 2007;Swales, 2004). The discussion section is arguably the part of the thesis in which these two identities come into conflict most acutely, since it is here that a writer is required to comment evaluatively on his/her own work and also set it in the context of other work in the same field, with the overall goal of showing the reader why the contribution of the doctoral research is significant.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…6 These criteria do not ensure that the language used in the articles is native indeed but following previous research (Fløttum, Dahl & Kinn 2006;Yang et al 2015), an assumption was made that even if English was not the writers' mother tongue, such cases were estimated not to be high in number to skew the corpus data (Varga 2016). Against this background, we adopt the term English writer to refer to the American, British, and Canadian scholars, affiliated to the University departments from the given countries and the term Anglo-American community to refer to the academic writing originated in them (Koutsantoni 2006;Varga 2016) …”
mentioning
confidence: 99%