Abstract

While novice writers are often expected to lucidly demonstrate the order in which different components of their reports are arranged, it is not clear as to whether such outlines are sufficiently prevalent in some social sciences. Neither are we certain about the range of structure- related language resources that can be introduced to novice writers. Based on an in-depth textual analysis and specialist informants’ inputs, this study ascertained the prevalence of structural outlines, reasons for using or avoiding them, and the linguistic resources needed to present them in high impact journals in two social science disciplines, namely ethnic studies (ES) and industrial relations (IR). It was found that the majority of the ES researchers avoid structural outlines, but most of the IR researchers incorporate them for reasons associated with the research methodologies chosen. While ES researchers prefer to use locative adverbials and different tenses, IR researchers tend to employ passive structures in structural outlines. Expert writers in both disciplines, however, rely on the use of nominalisations denoting discourse categories and personal pronouns in combination with communication, accomplishment and activity verbs. Recommendations are provided on how instructors can prepare relevant teaching materials to raise students’ consciousness of the prevalent lexico-grammatical choices needed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.