Abstract
This study investigates the types of citation transformation preferred by both English L1 (native language) writers and Turkish writers who use English as a foreign language (L2). The corpus consists of 34 theses, 17 of which are Turkish writers’ theses in English language including 10 M.A. and 7 PhD theses and 17 English L1 writers’ theses comprised of 10 M.A. and 7 PhD theses. Based on the relevant literature, a rubric was prepared by the researchers in order to analyse the theses by means of qualitative content analysis. The findings revealed that three forms of content integration consisting of direct quotation, patchwriting and critical evaluation were markedly different in English L1 and Turkish writers’ theses. Turkish L1 writers’ overuse of direct quotation and patchwriting attracted attention compared to English L1 writers.
Highlights
Using other researchers’ views, arguments and research findings in another scientific text is a prominent feature, and a necessity in scholarly writing to justify arguments and claims
Seven Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) theses conducted by NSs of English were randomly selected from a pool of theses associated with the keywords ‘English language teaching’, and ‘English language learning’, using two different databases “ProQuest Dissertation and Theses” database, and “EThOS” (Electronic Theses Online Service), the United Kingdom (UK)’s national thesis service, which has access to only PhD theses conducted in the UK
Theses produced by English Native language (L1) writers displayed a much higher percentage of critical evaluation (16.6%) and a lower percentage of direct quotation (8.7%) and patchwriting (0.3%)
Summary
Using other researchers’ views, arguments and research findings in another scientific text is a prominent feature, and a necessity in scholarly writing to justify arguments and claims. Citation hereby assists the writer to demonstrate what is different from previous arguments, and in what way the gap is to be filled emphasizing the new ideas and arguments. The formal statement of others’ views requires achieving certain conventions and norms, which can otherwise cause ethical and legal constraints and accusations such as plagiarism, patch-writing or inappropriate text. Aspects of citation practices and the skill of use of appropriate acknowledgement of others’ ideas and findings have a close relationship with academic integrity. Students’ assumptions of acknowledgement are shaped by their cultural interpretations of academic textmaking, as pointed out in East (2009). There may be a lack of congruence between students’ understanding of acknowledgement and those who are their
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
