Document Type : Research Paper
Authors
Department of English Language & Literature Faculty of Letters & Humanities Shahid Chamran University of Ahvaz, Ahvaz, Iran
Abstract
Lexical bundles are recurrent multi-word sequences that play a crucial role in academic discourse. This article presents an analysis of lexical bundles in book reviews across the disciplines of human and natural sciences. Drawing from a corpus of 737 book reviews, the study investigates the functional roles and structural patterns of these recurrent linguistic units. The research aims to bridge a gap in the literature by exploring how lexical bundles vary across disciplines. Employing a quantitative-qualitative approach, the study first quantitatively identifies the most common 4-word lexical bundles and compares their distribution between the two disciplines. The researchers then qualitatively analyzed the context in which these bundles are used, observing that they often serve to refer to or evaluate the structure, content, audience, or scope of the book under review. Findings reveal that while both human and natural sciences book reviews share some lexical bundles, they exhibit variations in their distribution, structures, and functions. Notably, natural sciences book reviews employ a greater frequency of lexical bundles signaling an evaluative context, particularly contexts related to the assessment of a book. The study also uncovers differences in the structural preferences of lexical bundles between the two disciplines. This research contributes to a deeper understanding of the genre-specific utilization of lexical bundles and underscores their role in conveying evaluative meaning in scholarly discourse. Furthermore, the study suggests avenues for further exploration, providing a foundation for future investigations into the intricate interplay between linguistic features and disciplinary preferences.
Keywords
Main Subjects
Anthony, L. (2023). AntConc (Version 4.2.0) [Computer Software]. Tokyo, Japan: Waseda University. Available from https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Biber, D. (2006). University Language: A corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Biber, D., & Barbieri, F. (2007). Lexical bundles in university spoken and written registers. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.003
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9(1), 2-20.
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at...: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics., 25, 371–405.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education.
Bondi, M. (2009). Historians at work: Reporting frameworks in English and Italian book review articles. In K. Hyland, & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings (pp. 179-196). Palgrave Macmillan.
Bychkovska, T., & Lee, J. J. (2017). At the same time: Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 university student argumentative writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 30, 38–52.
Casal, J. E., & Kessler, M. J. (2020). Form and rhetorical function of phrase-frames in promotional writing: A corpus- and genre-based analysis. System, 95. 102370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102370
Casal, J. E., & Yoon, J. (2023). Frame-based formulaic features in L2 writing pedagogy: Variants, functions, and student writer perceptions in academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 71, 102–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2023.03.004
Chen, L. (2010). An investigation of lexical bundles in ESP textbooks and electrical engineering introductory textbooks. In D. Wood (Ed.), Perspectives on formulaic language: acquisition and communication (pp. 107-125). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Chen, Y. H., & Baker, P. (2010). Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology, 14, 30–49. http://dx.doi.org/10125/44213
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm022
Conrad, S., & Biber, D. (2005). The frequency and use of lexical bundles in conversation and academic prose. Lexicographica, 20(2004), 56-71. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783484604674.56
Cortes, V. (2006). Teaching lexical bundles in the disciplines: An example from a writing intensive history class. Linguistics and Education, 17(4), 391–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2007.02.001
Durrant, P. (2015). Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation in university students’ writing: Mapping the territories. Applied Linguistics, 38(2), 165–193. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv011
Esfandiari, R., & Barbary, F. (2017). A contrastive corpus-driven study of lexical bundles between English writers and Persian writers in psychology research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 29, 21–42.
Esfandiari, R., Ahmadi, M. (2022). A corpus-based analysis of noun phrase complexity in research article part-genres in applied linguistics and clinical medicine. Language Related Research 13(3).
Gheitasi, P. (2022). Language play with formulas in an EFL classroom. Languages, 7(1), 63. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages7010063
Hunston, S. (1989). Evaluation in experimental research articles [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Birmingham.
Hyland, K. (2000). Praise and criticism: Interactions in book reviews. In K. Hyland (Ed.), Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing (pp. 41–62). Longman
Hyland, K. (2008). As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes, 27(1), 4–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001
Hyland, K., & Diani, G. (2009). Introduction: Academic evaluation and review genres. In K. Hyland, & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings (pp. 1-14). Palgrave Macmillan.
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F.K. (2017). Is academic writing becoming more informal? English for Specific Purposes, 45, 40-51.
Hyland, K., & Jiang, K. (2018). Academic lexical bundles: How are they changing? International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 23(4), 383-407.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Meta-discourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2007). Is there an “Academic vocabulary”? TESOL Quarterly, 41(2), 235–253.
Itakura, H., & Tsui, A. B. M. (2011). Evaluation in academic discourse: Managing criticism in Japanese and English book reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1366–1379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.023
Jalilifar, A. (2007). Hedging as a pragmatic strategy: Variations across disciplines and cultures. Teaching English Language, 1(1), 43-69.
Jalilifar, A., & Ghoreishi, S. M. (2018). From the perspective of: Functional analysis of lexical bundles in applied linguistics research articles. International Journal of English Studies, 18(2), 161–186. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2018/2/310351
Jalilifar, A., Ghoreishi, S. M., & Roodband, S. A. E. (2016). Developing an inventory of core lexical bundles in English research articles: A cross-disciplinary corpus-based study. Journal of World Languages, 3(3), 184-203. https://doi.org/10.1080/21698252.2017.1301279
Jalilifar, A., Niamadpour, V. (2017, January 25-27). Towards an analysis of the book review genre: An appraisal analysis [Conference presentation]. Fourth International Conference on Language, Discourse, and Pragmatics, Ahvaz, Iran. https://rb.gy/nsvn6
Jalilifar, A., Tanavar, L. (2015). In search of the generic identity of the book review: A chronological and pragmatic study. Linguistik Online 72(3).
Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y. (1998). Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities: The flow of ideas within and among disciplines. Greenwood Publishing Group.
Liu, X., & Zhu, H. (2023). Linguistic positivity in soft and hard disciplines: Temporal dynamics, disciplinary variation, and the relationship with research impact. Scientometrics, 128(5), 3107–3127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04679-5
Márquez, M. F. (2014). Lexical bundles and phrase frames in the language of hotel websites. English Text Construction, 7(1), 84–121. https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.7.1.04fus
Moreno, A.I. & Suárez, L. (2008). A study of critical attitude across English and Spanish academic book reviews. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 15-26.
Nesi, H. & Gardner, S. & Thompson, P. & Wickens, P. (2008). British academic written English corpus: Oxford Text Archive. http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12024/2539
Oakey, D. (2020). Phrases in EAP academic writing pedagogy: Illuminating Halliday’s influence on research and practice. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 44, 100829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.100829
Pan, F., Reppen, R., & Biber, D. (2016). Comparing patterns of L1 versus L2 English academic professionals: Lexical bundles in Telecommunications research journals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 60–71.
Qian, G. (2015). Books or articles: Which are more important in the scientific evaluation of different disciplines? Current Science, 109(11), 1925–1928. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24906662
Ren, J. (2021). Variability and functions of lexical bundles in research articles of applied linguistics and pharmaceutical sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 50, 100968. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100968
Römer, U. (2010). Establishing the phraseological profile of a text type: The construction of meaning in academic book reviews. English Text Construction, 3(1), 95-119.
Sanz, R., L. (2009). (Non-)critical voices in the reviewing of history discourse: A cross-cultural study of evaluation. In K. Hyland & G. Diani (Eds.), Academic evaluation: Review genres in university settings (pp. 143-160). Palgrave Macmillan.
Shin, Y. K. (2019). Do native writers always have a head start over nonnative writers? The use of lexical bundles in college students’ essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 40, 1–14.
Shirazizadeh, M., & Amirfazlian, R. (2021). Lexical bundles in theses, articles and textbooks of applied linguistics: Investigating intradisciplinary uniformity and variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 49, 100946. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100946
Sidtis, D. (2021). Foundations of familiar language: Formulaic expressions, lexical bundles, and collocations at work and play. John Wiley & Son Inc.
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Ellis, N. C. (2010). An academic Formulas list: New Methods in Phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 487–512. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp058
Siyanova-Chanturia, A., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2018). Formulaic language: Setting the scene. In A. Siyanova-Chanturia & A. Pellicer-Sánchez (Eds.), Understanding formulaic language: A second language acquisition perspective (pp. 1-15). Routledge.
Stubbs, M. (2002). Two quantitative methods of studying phraseology in English. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 7(2), 215-244.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed.). University of Michigan Press ELT.
Wang, Y. (2021). Formulaic sequences with ideational functions in L1 student and expert academic writing in English. In A. Trklja & Ł. Grabowski (Eds.), Formulaic language: Theories and methods (pp. 113–137). Language Science Press. 10.5281/zenodo.4727669
Wray, A. (2013). Formulaic language. Language Teaching, 46(3), 316-334. doi:10.1017/S0261444813000013
Wright, H. R. (2019). Lexical bundles in stand-alone literature reviews: Sections, frequencies, and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 54, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2018.09.001
Yang, W. (2016). Evaluative language and interactive discourse in journal article highlights. English for Specific Purposes, 42, 89–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.01.001
Zhang, X., & Li, W. (2021). Effects of n-grams on the rated L2 writing quality of expository essays: A conceptual replication and extension. System, 97, 102437. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102437
', './data/jtls/coversheet/cover_en.jpg'))