This paper critically examines genre-based studies in English for Academic Purpose (EAP) within the context of disciplinary changes. While genre-based investigations in various disciplines provide valuable insights into RA writing, they may inadvertently perpetuate essentialist views on research writing. The study highlights the need to bridge the gap between genre-based RA investigations and the evolving demands of interdisciplinary research. By reviewing the relevance and effectiveness of previous studies, the paper identifies trends, gaps, and challenges, offering recommendations to align genre-based research with the dynamic landscape of academic disciplines. The discussion also delves into the transformative nature of disciplines, challenging traditional boundaries and impacting research writing practices. Finally, the paper suggests a future path for genre-based investigations, emphasizing a shift from circumscribed move-step analyses to a more comprehensive understanding of student’s real needs in research writing practices across disciplines.
References
[1]
Ash’ari, N., Barabadi, E., & Shirvan, M. E. (2023). The Rhetorical Organization of Discussions Sections of Qualitative Research Articles in Applied Linguistics and the Use of Meta-Discourse Markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, Article 101310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101310
[2]
Barry, A., & Born, G. (Eds.) (2013). Interdisciplinarity: Reconfigurations of the Social and Natural Sciences. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203584279
[3]
Basturkmen, H. (2012). A Genre-Based Investigation of the Discussion Sections of Research Articles in Dentistry and Disciplinary Variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004
[4]
Bazerman, C. (2011). Standpoints: The Disciplined Interdisciplinarity of Writing Studies. Research in the Teaching of English, 46, 8-21.
[5]
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.28
[6]
Cheng, F. W. (2021). Crafting Theoretical Value in Management Research Article Discussion Sections. Ibérica, No. 41, 61-82. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.41.61
[7]
Craig, R. T. (2012). Communication as a Field and Discipline. In The International Encyclopedia of Communication. John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781405186407.wbiecc074
[8]
Hyland, K. (1999). Academic Attribution: Citation and the Construction of Disciplinary Knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 20, 341-367. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/20.3.341
[9]
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies, 7, 173-192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
[10]
Joseph, R., & Lim, J. M. H. (2019). Directions for the Future: A Genre-Based Investigation into Recommendations for Further Research and Practical Applications in Forestry. ESP Today, 7, 124-147. https://doi.org/10.18485/esptoday.2019.7.2.1
[11]
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2015). Distinguishing Textual Features Characterizing Structural Variation in Research Articles across Three Engineering Sub-Discipline Corpora. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 74-86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.06.008
Kaufhold, K., & McGrath, L. (2019). Revisiting the Role of ‘Discipline’ in Writing for Publication in Two Social Sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 40, 115-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.06.006
[14]
Land, R. (2012). Crossing Tribal Boundaries: Interdisciplinarity as a Threshold Concept. In P. Trowler, M. Saunders, & V. Bamber (Eds.), Tribes and Territiories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education (pp. 175-185). Routledge.
[15]
Lillis, T., & Tuck, J. (2016). Academic Literacies: A Critical Lens on Writing and Reading in the Academy. In K. Hyland, & P. Shaw (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of English for Academic Purposes (pp. 30-43). Routledge.
[16]
Lim, J. M. H. (2011). ‘Paving the Way for Research Findings’: Writers’ Rhetorical Choices in Education and Applied Linguistics. Discourse Studies, 13, 725-749. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445611421364
[17]
Liu, Y., & Buckingham, L. (2018). The Schematic Structure of Discussion Sections in Applied Linguistics and the Distribution of Metadiscourse Markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.04.002
[18]
Loi, C. K., Evans, M. S., Lim, J. M. H., & Akkakoson, S. (2016). A Comparison between Malay and English Research Article Discussions: A Move Analysis. SAGE Open, 6. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244016652925
[19]
Lu, X., Yoon, J., Kisselev, O., Casal, J. E., Liu, Y., Deng, J., & Nie, R. (2021). Rhetorical and Phraseological Features of Research Article Introductions: Variation among Five Social Science Disciplines. System, 100, Article 102543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102543
[20]
Moreno, A. I., & Swales, J. M. (2018). Strengthening Move Analysis Methodology. Towards Bridging the Function-Form Gap. English for Specific Purposes, 50, 40-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.006
[21]
Nwogu, K. (1991). Structure of Science Popularization: A Genre-Analysis Approach to the Schema of Popularized Medical Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 10, 111-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(91)90004-G
[22]
Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative Moves in the Discussion Section of Research Articles. System, 30, 479-497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7
[23]
Rubio, M. M. D. S. (2011). A Pragmatic Approach to the Macro-Structure and Metadiscoursal Features of Research Article Introductions in the Field of Agricultural Sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 30, 258-271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.002
[24]
Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
[25]
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research Genres: Exploration and Applications. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
[26]
Swales, J. M. (2019). The Futures of EAP Genre Studies: A Personal Viewpoint. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 75-82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.01.003
[27]
Tessuto, G. (2015). Generic Structure and Rhetorical Moves in English-Language Empirical Law Research Articles: Sites of Interdisciplinary and Interdiscursive Cross-Over. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 13-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2014.06.002
[28]
Trowler, P., Saunders, M., & Bamber, V. (Eds.) (2012). Tribes and Territories in the 21st Century: Rethinking the Significance of Disciplines in Higher Education. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203136935
[29]
Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research Articles in Applied Linguistics: Moving from Results to Conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00026-1
[30]
Ye, Y. (2019). Macrostructures and Rhetorical Moves in Energy Engineering Research Articles Written by Chinese Expert Writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 48-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.01.007
