簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表
研究生： 張懷恩
Chang, Huai-En
論文名稱： 以語料庫探究跨領域學術寫作緒論之詞組框架
A Cross-disciplinary Corpus Study on Phrase Frames in Research Article Introduction
指導教授： 陳浩然
Chen, Hao-Jan
口試委員： 王宏均 賴淑麗
口試日期： 2021/07/12
學位類別： 碩士
Master
系所名稱： 英語學系
Department of English
論文出版年： 2021
畢業學年度： 109
語文別： 英文
論文頁數： 191
中文關鍵詞： 詞組框架 、文部分析 、跨領域變化 、語料庫語言學 、學術寫作
英文關鍵詞： phrase frames (p-frames), moves and steps analysis, interdisciplinary variations, corpus linguistics, academic writing
DOI URL： http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202100709
論文種類： 學術論文
相關次數： 點閱：121  下載：8 
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報

    • 許多先前研究曾探討詞組框架(phrase frames)於學術寫作上的議題(Ang & Tan, 2019; Grey & Biber, 2013; Lu et al, 2021)。另一方面，先前的研究亦闡明詞組框架與Swale (1981)所提出的文部(move analysis)之間關聯的重要性。許多研究該領域的學者將研究重心置於使用小型語料庫的研究來探討詞組框架於文部緒論上的運用，然而，使用較大型的語料庫來檢視詞組框架於學術英文寫作上的研究卻很有限。此外。也鮮少有研究深入探究詞組框架於跨領域學科間的差異性。
    基於以上所提及之研究缺口及利基，本研究提出四個相關的研究問題:
    1) 在社會學與生物生命科學領域，哪些是最常用的五字詞與六字詞之詞組框架?
    2) 就詞組框架的使用層面而言，是否有跨領域之差異?
    3) 大型語料庫是否能產出如同小語料庫相似的詞組框架變異詞?
    4) 生物與生命科學學門的詞組框架如何串聯文部?
    此研究基於Swale (1981)的文部類別以及Lu等學者(2021)所分類的學術寫作緒論之詞組框架分類作為研究架構。透過使用語料庫工具AntCorGen擷取文本內容，將社會學與生物生命科學領域之語料庫從原先Lu研究的600筆語料擴大為6000筆文本，而KfNgram工具則使用來產出兩個學科領域的相關詞組框架。另外使用線上工具Venny產生統計對比數據以比較兩學科領域之間的差異。最後得以收集詞組框架之變化詞作為對應其詞組框架。
    研究結果顯示在此兩學科領域最常用的詞組框架之五字詞與六字詞及其變化詞。此研究有許多發現，第一，隨著詞組框架長度的增加，詞組框架數量減少。第二，就詞組框架的使用而言，跨領域之間有其相似性與差異處。例如，有些特定詞組框架於兩個學科領域皆有發現，而有些詞組框架則較具有領域特殊性(discipline-specific)。針對第三個研究問題，此研究亦發現，隨著語料庫的擴大，能產出類似及較多的詞組框架變化詞，亦稱為片語實現詞(phraseological realizations)，而能提供詞彙的可供性(affordance)及豐富性(abundance)以利於學術寫作之使用，最後，透過KfNgram蒐集到之語料，串連及彙整出生物生命科學領域之詞組框架。
    本研究基於研究發現之結果，希望能提供對於學術寫作格式化當中的詞組框架之運用盡棉薄之力，此外，本研究建議，不論是此領域之研究者與教育人士、學術論文作者及教材研發者能將此研究之格式化詞組框架與寫作緒論之文部關係引入相關課程，以期待能增進學術寫作之新手與學生的表達能力。

    A number of previous studies have delved into the issue of connecting phrase-frames, one type of formulaic expressions, in academic writing (Ang & Tan, 2019; Grey & Biber, 2013; Lu et al, 2021). On the other hand, previous studies have also shed light on the important relationship between p-frame structures and Swale’s (1981) moves and steps model. While many scholars have focused their attention on the research of phrase frames in a small corpus and the connection of phrase frames with moves and steps in academic writing introduction, there is little research of adopting a large corpus to examine the phrase-frame structures in academic writing. Furthermore, little do previous studies explore the interdisciplinary variations in terms of the phrase frames in introduction.
    Based on the research niche, four research questions were proposed in the current study: 1) What are the most-frequently used 5-word and 6-word phrase frames in social science and biology life science? 2) Are there any cross-disciplinary variations in terms of the use of phrase frames? 3) To what extent can the larger corpus generate similar p-frame realizations as the smaller corpus? 4) How can p-frame variants in biology life science be connected to moves and steps?
    The study was based on Swale’s (1981) framework of moves and steps model and Lu et al’s (2021) classification of phrase frames in research paper introduction. The corpus size in both the social science and biology life science was expanded, with 6000 texts (published research articles) being retrieved from AntCorGen. Another tool KfNgram was also used to generate phrase frames in introduction from the two disciplines. An online tool called Venny was also adopted to yield statistic figures to compare the variations between the two disciplines. Finally, phrase-frames tokens were also collected and matched to the phrase-frame structures.

    The results demonstrated the frequently-used phrase frame patterns and variants in the two disciplines. There were several important findings in the current study. With the increase of word length, the number of phrase frames would decrease. Second, there are similarities and differences in interdisciplinary variations. For example, some phrase frames are commonly shared across disciplines, while there are still discipline-specific p-frames in certain fields. Last, with the expansion of the corpus size, more phrase frames would be generated, which provides lexical affordance and abundance to facilitate academic writing. It is hoped that the present study could make contributions to the research on formulaic expressions in academic writing. Additionally, the results and findings in the present study could offer pedagogical implications for researchers, instructors, academic writers and teaching material developers.

    中文摘要 i ABSTRACT iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT v TABLE OF CONTENTS vi LIST OF TABLES ix LIST OF FIGURE x CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background and Motivation 1 1.2 Statement of the Problems and Research Niche 5 1.3 Research Questions 6 1.4 Significance of the Study 7 1.5 Definitions of Key Terms 9 1.5.1 Formulaic Expressions 9 1.5.2 Phrase frames 10 1.5.3 Genre 11 1.5.4 Swales' CARS Model 11 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 12 2.1 General Review on Phrase Frames and Moves and Steps 12 2.1.1 From Formulaic Language to Phrase Frames 12 2.1.2 Reviews of Multiple Definitions of Phrase Frames 14 2.1.3 Rhetorical Moves and Steps 16 2.2 Previous Studies on Move Analysis and P-frame Patterns 17 2.2.1 Studies of Rhetorical Moves and Steps 17 2.2.2 Rhetorical Moves and Steps in Academic Writing Research 22 2.2.3 Literature Reviews of Previous Studies on P-frame Structures 26 2.3 Related Literatures on P-frame Studies and Statements of Research Niche 34 CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 37 3.1 Research Design 37 3.1.1 The Approach and Rationale for the Current Study 38 3.1.2 The Corpora for the Current Study 39 3.2 Tool and Instrument 41 3.2.1 AntCorGen 42 3.2.2 kfNgram 43 3.2.3 Venny 2.1.0 45 3.3 Data Analysis Procedure 48 3.3.1 Selecting the Corpora 48 3.3.2 Identifying the P-frames 50 3.3.3 Matching P-frames in Biology Life Science to Rhetorical Moves and Steps 53 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 55 4.1 Most-frequently Used P-frame List in the Two Disciplines 55 4.1.1 Five-word P-frame Patterns 58 4.1.2 Six-word P-frame Patterns 71 4.2 Cross-disciplinary Variations in the Two Disciplines 78 4.2.1 The Shared P-frame Patterns in Social Science and Biology Life Science 80 4.2.1.1 The Shared 5-word P-frames Across the Two Disciplines 81 4.2.1.2 The Shared 6-word P-frames Across the Two Disciplines 84 4.2.2 The P-frame Pattern Exemplifications of the Both Disciplines 88 4.2.3 Discussion of Major Findings for Research Question 1 and 2 92 4.3 Similarities and Differences Between the Present Study and Lu et al's (2021) 93 4.4 Connecting P-frame Patterns to Moves and Steps in Writing Introduction 97 4.5 Discussion of the Major Findings for Research Question 3 and 4 98 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION 101 5.1 Summary and Concluding Remarks 101 5.2 Pedagogical Implications 103 5.3 Limitations of the Current Research and Suggestions for Future Studies 105 References 108 Appendix 1 The Classification of P-frame Structures among Lu's Research, the Social Studies and the Biology Life Science in the Current Study 117 Appendix 2 Five-word p-frames and phraseological Realizations of Both Disciplines 176

    Allan, R. (2016). Lexical bundles in graded readers: To what extent does language restriction affect lexical patterning? System, 59, 61-72.
    Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: the evidence of recurrent word-combinations. In: Cowie, A. P. (ed.) Phraseology, Theory, Analysis, and Applications. pp. 101-124.
    Amnuai, W., & Wannaruk, A. (2013). An analysis of moves in introductions in international and Thai journal research articles. PASAA, 45, 61-90.
    Ang, L. H., & Tan, K. H. (2019). From lexical bundles to lexical frames: Uncovering the extent of phraseological variation in academic writing. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 25(2). Computer Science.
    Ari, O. (2006). Review of three software programs designed to identify lexical bundles. Language Learning & Technology, 10 (1), 30-37.
    Bestgen, Yves (2018). Evaluating the frequency threshold for selecting lexical bundles by means of an extension of the Fisher's exact test. Corpora, 13(2), 2018,205-228.
    Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. London: Longman.
    Bratt Paulston, C. (1990). Educational language policies in Utopia. In B. Harley, P. Allen, J. Cummins, & M. Swain (Eds.), The development of second language proficiency (pp. 187-197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the result section of sociology articles: A corpus study. English for Specific Purposes, 13 (1), 47-59.
    Chang, Y.J, and Huang H.T. Exploring TED talks as a pedagogical resource for oral presentations: A corpus-based move analysis. English Teaching & Learning, vol. 39, pp. 29-62. Education Source, doi: 10.6330/ETL.2015.39.4.02.
    Chang C-F and Kuo C-H. (2011). A corpus-based approach to online materials development for writing research papers. English for Specific Purposes. 30 (3). 222-234.
    Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2004). Introduction. In U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus linguistics (pp. 1-8). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Banjamins.
    Connor, U., & Upton, T. A., & Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Introduction to move analysis. In D. Biber, U. Connor, & T. A. Upton (eds). Discourse on the move (pp.23-41). Amsterdam / Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    Cortes, V. (2004). Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes. 23, 397-423.
    Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33-43.
    Cunningham, K.J. (2017): A phraseological exploration of recent mathematics research articles through key phrase frames. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 25, 71–83
    Dudley-Evans A (2000). Genre analysis: A key to a theory of ESP. Available at: www.uv.aelfe/webRAs/RA_2_Dudley.pdf.
    Durrant, Philip & Mathews-Aydinli, Julie. 2011. A function-first approach to identifying formulaic language in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes 30. pp. 58-72.
    Eeg-Olofsson, M. & Altenberg, B. (1994). “Discontinuous recurrent word combinations in the London-Lund Corpus”. In U. Fries, G. Tottie & P. Schneider (Eds.) Creating and Using English Language Corpora: Papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora. Amsterdam: Rodopi, 63-77.
    Ellis, N. C. (2012). Formulaic language and second language acquisition: Zipf and the phrasal teddy bear. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32, 17-44.
    Fletcher, W. H. (2002-2007). kfNgram. Annapolis, MD: USNA.
    Flowerdew, J. (1999a). Writing for scholarly publication in English: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8, 243-264.
    Flowerdew J, Wan A (2010). The linguistic and the contextual in applied genre analysis: the case of the company audit report. English for Specific Purposes 29 (2): 78-93.
    Flowerdew, J. (2005). An integration of corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP / ESP: Countering criticisms against corpus-based methodologies. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 321-332.
    Flowerdew, J., & Costley, T. (2016). Discipline-specific writing. London: Routledge.
    Forsyth, Richard and Łukasz Grabowski (2015). Is there a formula for formulaic language? Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 54 (1), 511-549.
    Grabowski, L. (2015). Phrase frames in English pharmaceutical discourse: A corpus-driven study of intradisciplinary register variation. Research in Language, 13 (3), 266-291.
    Graddol, D. (2006). English next: Why global English may mean the end of English as a Foreign Language. The British Council.
    Granger, S., Bestgen, Y. (2014). The use of collocations by intermediate vs. advanced nonnative writers: a bigram-based study. Int. Rev. Appl. Linguist. Lang. Teach. 52 (3), pp.229-252.
    Gray, B., Biber, D. (2013). Lexical frames in academic prose and conversation. International Journal of Corpus Linguist 18(1), p.109-139.
    Hsu, Y.& Kuo, CH. (2008).Writing RA introduction: Difficulties and strategies. Retrieved September 13, 2012, from http://tesol.nctu.edu.tw/FCKupload/File/students_paper/Writing%20RA%20Introduction%20Difficulties%20and%20Strategies_%E5%BE%90%E6%98%B1%E6%84%B7.pdf
    Hyland, K. (2006). English for academic purposes: An advanced resource book. London & New York: Routledge.
    Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen. Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes 27 (1), pp.4-21.
    Jalilifar, A. (2010). Research article introductions: Sub-disciplinary variations in Applied Linguistics. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 2(2), 29-55.
    Joseph, R., Lim, J. M. H. & Nor, N. A. M. (2014). Communicative moves in Forestry Research introductions: Implications for the design of learning materials. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 134, 53-69.
    Jungwan Yoon & J. Elliott Casal (2020). P-frames and rhetorical moves in applied linguistics conference abstracts. Advances in Corpus-based Research on Academic Writing. (pp.282-305)
    Kachru, B. (1992). Teaching World Englishes. In B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue (pp. 355-366). Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.
    Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific
    Purposes, 24(3), 269-292. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
    Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific
    Purposes, 24(3), 269-292. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
    Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 269-292. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
    Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Writing research articles in English: Microbiology. Journal of the Falculty of Arts, Silpakorn University, 29, 174-208.
    Kjellmer, G. (1991). A mint of phrases. In: Aijmer, K., Altenberg, B. (Eds.) English Corpus Linguistics. pp-111-127.
    Le, Thi Ngoc Phuong& Harrington, Michael. (2015). Phraseology used to comment on results in the discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes 39: 45-61.
    Lu, X., Yoon, Jungwan & Kisselev, Olesya. (2018). A phrase-frame list for social science research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36: 76-85.
    Lu, X., Yoon, J., & Kisselev, O. (2021). Matching phrase-frames to rhetorical moves in social science research article introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 61, 63-83.
    Maswana, S., Kanamaru, T., & Tajino, A. (2015). Move analysis of research articles across five engineering fields: What they share and what they do not. Ampersand, 2, 1-11.
    Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 26(1), 25-38.
    O’keeffe, A., & Walsh, S. (2012). Applying corpus linguistics and conversation analysis in the investigation of small group teaching in higher education. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8(1), 159-181.
    Omidian, Taha, Shahriari, Hesamoddin & Siyanova-Chanturia, Anna. 2018 A cross-disciplinary investigation of multi-word expressions in the moves of research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36: 1-14.
    Park, S. (2004). Rhetorical strategies in English research article introductions written by NS and NNS. Studies in Modern Grammar, 38.
    Patrick Pantel, Deepak Ravichandran, and Eduard Hovy. (2004). Towards terascale knowledge acquisition. In 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: COLING-2004, pages 771-777. Geneva.
    Pawley, A., & Syder, F.H. (1983). Two puzzles for linguistic theory: Nativelike selection and nativelike fluency. In J. C. Richards & R.W. Schmidt (Eds.) Language and communication, (p191-p226.) New York: Longman.
    Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30(4), 479-497.
    Peacock, M. (2011). The structure of the methods section in research articles across eight disciplines. The Asian ESP Journal, 7(2), 97-123.
    Pho, P. D. (2008). How can learning about the structure of research articles help international students? In T. McGrath (Ed.), 19th ISANA International Education Association Conference Proceedings (pp. 1 - 11). ISANA International Education Association .
    Posteguillo, S. (1999). The schematic structure of computer science research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 18 (2), 139-160.
    Rayson, P.E. (2015). Computational tools and methods for corpus compilation and analysis. In: Biber., Reppen, R. (eds.) Combridge Handbook of English Corpus Linguistics. CUP, Cambridge.
    Reppen, R. (2009). Exploring L1 and L2 Writing Development through Collocation: A Corpus-based Look. In A. Barfield & H. Gyllstad (Eds), Researching collocations in another language (pp. 49-59). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    Romer, U. (2009). The inseparability of lexis and grammar: Corpus linguistic perspectives. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 7, 140-162.
    Renouf, A., & Sinclair, J. (1991). Collocational frameworks in English. English Corpus linguistics, 128-143.
    Scott, M. (1996). Wordsmith Tools 4., Oxford. Oxford University Press
    Seyyed, E. G., & Elyas, B. (2019). Key phrase frames in the discussion section of research articles of higher education. Lingua: International review of general linguistics, 236.
    Shaw,P. (1991). Science research students’ composing processes. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 189-206.
    Shigeaki Amano and Tadahisa Kondo. (1999). Lexical Properties of Japanese. Sanseido.
    Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Sinclair, J. (2004). Trust the Text: Language, Corpus and Discourse. London: Routledge.
    Stoller FL & Robinson MS. (2013). Chemistry journal articles: An interdisciplinary approach to move analysis with pedagogical aims. English for Specific Purposes. 32(1) pp. 45-57.
    Stubbs, M., & Barth, I. (2003). Using recurrent phrases as text-type discriminators: A quantitative method and some findings. Functions of Language, 10 (1), 61-104.
    Swales, J. M. (1981) Aspects of article introduction. Birmingham, UK: The University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.
    Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. New York: Cambridge University Press.
    Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Tardy, C. M. (2011). Genre analysis. In K. Hyland & B. Paltridge (Eds.), The Continuum companion to discourse analysis (pp. 54-68). London, UK: Continuum.
    Taylor, G., & Chen, T. (1991). Linguistic, cultural, and subcultural issues in contrastive discourse analysis: Anglo-American and Chinese scientific texts. Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 319-336.
    Vincent, B. (2013). Investigating academic phraseology through combinations of very frequent words: A methodological exploration. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12 (1), 44-56.
    Wang, C.W. (2019). A Corpus-Based Study on Connecting Lexical Bundles and Moves in Cross-Discipline Research Article Introduction. (Unpublished master thesis). National Taiwan Normal University.
    William, I. A. (1999). Results sections of medical research articles: Analysis of rhetorical categories for pedagogical purposes. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 347-366.
    Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365-385.

    下載圖示
    QR CODE