<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p> One of the most distinctive linguistic characteristics of academic writing is the high frequency of nominalized structures. The present study explores how nominalization was used as an approach to making knowledge claims in applied linguistics research articles. Data comprised the introduction and method sections of 16 empirical papers featuring the IMRD (Introduction, Method, Result, Discussion) format, drawn from the most recent issues of 10 journals, with a total of 40,122 running words, from which 3,150 instances of nominalization were drawn. Analyzing these nominalized structures in the cotext of their local spans revealed 15 patterns, with the preference for some of the patterns varying across the introduction and method sections of these articles. Results showed a higher concentration of nominalization in the introductions. The study also identified the more prevalent nominal expressions in each section. The fact that each of these sections serves different purposes appears to justify the use of a contrasting range of nominal expressions. Based on the findings of this study, some pedagogical implications for academic writing and reading, ESP/EAP courses, and researchers are proposed.</p></abstract>

One of the most distinctive linguistic characteristics of academic writing is the high frequency of nominalized structures. The present study explores how nominalization was used as an approach to making knowledge claims in applied linguistics research articles. Data comprised the introduction and method sections of 16 empirical papers featuring the IMRD (Introduction, Method, Result, Discussion) format, drawn from the most recent issues of 10 journals, with a total of 40,122 running words, from which 3,150 instances of nominalization were drawn. Analyzing these nominalized structures in the cotext of their local spans revealed 15 patterns, with the preference for some of the patterns varying across the introduction and method sections of these articles. Results showed a higher concentration of nominalization in the introductions. The study also identified the more prevalent nominal expressions in each section. The fact that each of these sections serves different purposes appears to justify the use of a contrasting range of nominal expressions. Based on the findings of this study, some pedagogical implications for academic writing and reading, ESP/EAP courses, and researchers are proposed.

Exploring Nominalization in the Introduction and Method Sections of Applied Linguistics Research Articles: a Qualitative Approach

Romanian Journal of English Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

One of the most distinctive linguistic characteristics of academic writing is the high frequency of nominalized structures. The present study explores how...

Exploring Nominalization in the Introduction and Method Sections of Applied Linguistics Research Articles: a Qualitative Approach

Published Online: Nov 30, 2017

Page range: 64 - 80

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rjes-2017-0009

Keywords
Academic Writing, Introduction, Method, Nominalization, Research Articles, English for Academic Purposes

© Romanian Journal of English Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Exploring Nominalization in the Introduction and Method Sections of Applied Linguistics Research Articles: a Qualitative Approach

Published Online: Nov 30, 2017

Page range: 64 - 80

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/rjes-2017-0009

KeywordsAcademic Writing, Introduction, Method, Nominalization, Research Articles, English for Academic Purposes

© Romanian Journal of English Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.

Keywords
Academic Writing, Introduction, Method, Nominalization, Research Articles, English for Academic Purposes