Rhetorical Organization of Applied Linguistics Abstracts: Does Scopus Journal Quartile Matter?

Eri Kurniawan, Arif Husein Lubis, Didi Suherdi, Ari Arifin Danuwijaya


This study investigates whether Scopus journal quartile affects the rhetorical organization and linguistic realizations of applied linguistics research article (hereafter RA) abstracts from Scopus-indexed journals. Embracing the corpus-based approach, this study analyzed 28 abstracts from four AL journals (seven abstracts each) with different quartile. Hyland’s (2000) model was adopted as the analysis guideline. The phrase was the unit of analysis to obtain fine-grained results of the moves occurrences. The analysis revealed that most of the articles from Q2-Q4 journals applied the informative typology, while those from Q1 journal applied the indicative-informative one. Journal quartile does not necessarily affect the manifestation of all moves and steps. The number of occurrences of Step 1-describing participants and Step 3-describing procedure in the Method move was similar in all journals. Moreover, the Purpose and Findings moves were obligatory in all journals.  Journal quartile played an influential role in employing the verb tense of Introduction, Purpose, and Conclusion moves and the sentence voice of Method and Conclusion moves. The findings reach a conclusion that journal quartile does not necessarily affect the domination of the standard rules of the RA abstracts’ rhetorical organization and linguistic realizations in AL journals. This study provides insight into the realm of English academic writing about the current trends of move analysis from the journal quartile lens. Further comparative research on the rhetorical features between the accepted and rejected RA abstracts and materials development for the pedagogy of English for research publication purposes are recommended.


Rhetorical organization; linguistic realizations; applied linguistics abstract; Scopus journal quartile; move analysis

Full Text:



Abdolmalaki, S. G., Tan, H., Abdullah, A. N. B., Sharmini, S., & Imm, L. G. (2019). Introduction chapter of traditional and article-based theses: A comparison of rhetorical structures and linguistic realisations. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. 19(1), 116-35.

Amnuai, W. (2019). Analyses of rhetorical moves and linguistic realizations in accounting research article abstracts published in international and Thai-based journals. Sage Open. 9(1), 1-9.

Baker, P. (2010). Corpus method in linguistics. In L. Litosseliti (Ed.), Research method linguistic (pp. 93-116). London: Continuum.

Biber, D., Connor, U. & Upton, T. A. (Eds.). (2007). Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. Studies In Corpus Linguistics (pp. 1-19). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Bornmann, L. & Marx, W. (2014). How to evaluate individual researchers working in the natural and life sciences meaningfully? A proposal of methods based on percentiles of citations. Scientometrics. 98(1), 487-509.

Can, S., Karabacak, E. & Qin, J. (2016). Structure of moves in research article abstracts in applied linguistics. MDPI. 4(23), 1-16.

Chalak, A. & Norouzi, Z. (2013). Rhetorical moves and verb tense in abstracts: A comparative analysis of American and Iranian academic writing. International Journal of Language Studies. 7(4), 101-10.

Cotos, E., Link, S. & Huffman, S. (2017). Effects of DDL technology on genre learning. Language Learning & Technology. 21(3), 104-30.

Crookes, G. (1986). Towards a validated analysis of scientific text structure. Applied Linguistics. 7(1), 57–70.

Cross, C. & Oppenheim, C. (2006). A genre analysis of scientific abstracts. Journal of Documentation. 62(4), 428-46.

Darabad, A. M. (2016). Move analysis of research article abstracts: A cross-disciplinary study. International Journal of Linguistics. 8(2), 125-40.

Doró, K. (2013). The rhetoric structure of research article abstracts in English studies journals. Versita Prague Journal of English Studies. 2(1), 119-39.

Elsevier, B. V. (2017). Scopus Content Coverage Guide. Netherland: Author.

Fazilatfar, A. M. & Naseri, Z. S. (2014). Rhetorical moves in applied linguistics articles and their corresponding Iranian writer identity. Procedia. 98, 489-98.

Flowerdew, J. (2001). Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly. 35(1), 121-50.

Flowerdew, J. (2013). English for research publication purposes. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for Specific Purposes (pp. 301-321). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Hardjanto, T. D. (2017). Common discourse patterns of cross-disciplinary research article abstracts in English. Humaniora. 29(1), 72-84.

Hartley, J. & Benjamin, M. (1998). An evaluation of structured abstracts in journals. British

Journal of Educational Psychology. 68, 443-56.

Heng, C. S. & Ebrahimi, S. F. (2012). Marked themes as context frames in research article abstracts. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. 12(4), 1147-64.

Huckin, T. (2001). Abstracting from abstracts. In M. Hewings (Ed.), Academic Writing in Context (pp. 93-103). Birmingham: University of Birmingham Press.

Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London, UK: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2009). Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London: Continuum.

ISO 214. (1976). International Organization for Standardization. Documentation – Abstracts for Publications and Documentation. Geneva: Author.

Jalilifar, A. & Vahid Dastjerdi, H. (2010). A contrastive generic analysis of thesis and dissertation abstracts: Variation across disciplines and cultures. Journal of the Faculty of Letters &

Humanities. 26, 17-50.

Joseph, R., & Lim, J. M-H. (2018). Background information in the discussion sections of forestry journals: A case study. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies. 18(1), 198-216.

Kafes, H. (2012). Cultural traces on the rhetorical organization of research article abstracts. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications. 3(3), 207-20.

Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes. 24(3), 269–292. doi: 10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003

Kanoksilapatham, B. (2013). Generic characterisation of civil engineering research article abstracts. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 19(3), 1-10.

Kurniawan, E., Dallyono, R. & Cahyowati, A. (2019). Exploring logical connectors in journals with different indexing levels: A comparison between international and national indexed journals. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics. 9(1), 76-84. doi: 10.17509/ijal.v9i1.16088

Liu, W. & Gu, M. (2016). The probability of publishing in first-quartile journals. Scientometrics. 106(3), 1273-76.

Lorés, R. (2004). On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organization. English for Specific Purposes. 23, 280-302.

Lubis, A. H. (2019). The argumentation structure of research article ‘findings and discussion’ sections written by non-native English speaker novice writers: a case of Indonesian undergraduate students. Asian Englishes, 1-20. doi: 10.1080/13488678.2019.1669300

Martín-Martín, P. (2002). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in Experimental Social Sciences. English for Specific Purposes. 22(1), 25-43.

Martín-Martín, P. (2005). Rhetoric of abstracts in English and Spanish scientific discourse: A cross-cultural genre-analytic approach. Bern: Peter Lang.

Pho, P. D. (2008). Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: A study of linguistic realizations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance. Discourse Studies. 10(2), 231-50.

Saboori, F. & Hashemi, M. R. (2013). A cross-disciplinary move analysis of research article abstracts. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World. 4(4), 483-496.

Saeeaw, S. & Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2014). Rhetorical variation across research article abstracts in environmental science and applied linguistics. English Language Teaching. 7(8), 81-93.

Safnil, A. (2013). A genre-based analysis on the introductions of research articles written by Indonesian academics. TEFLIN Journal. 24(2), 180-200.

Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introduction in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes. 24, 141-56.

Santos, M. B. D. (1996). The textual organization of research paper abstracts in applied linguistics. Text. 16(4), 481–99.

Sidek, H. M., Saad, N. S. M., Baharun, H. & Idris, M. M. (2016). An analysis of rhetorical moves in abstracts for conference proceedings. International E-Journal of Advances in Social Sciences. 2(4), 24-31.

Suntara, W. & Usaha, S. (2013). Research article abstracts in two related disciplines: Rhetorical variation between linguistics and applied linguistics. English Language Teaching. 6(2), 84-99.

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research setting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. M. & Feak, C. B. (2009). Abstracts and the writing of abstracts. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

Tankó, G. (2017). Literary research article abstracts: An analysis of rhetorical moves and their linguistic realizations. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 27, 42-55.

Vathanalaoha, K. & Tangkiengsirisin, S. (2018). Genre analysis of experiment-based dental research article abstracts: Thai and international journals. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. 24(3), 1-14.

Wahyu, L. C. (2016). The rhetorical moves and verb tense in research article abstracts. Jurnal Pendidikan Humaniora. 4(4), 187-92.

Wang, S-P. & Tu, P-N. (2014). Tense use and move analysis in journal article abstracts. Taiwan Journal of TESOL. 11(1), 3-29.

Weissberg, R. & Buker, S. (1990). Writing Up Research: Experimental Research Report Writing for Students Of English. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17576/gema-2019-1904-10


  • There are currently no refbacks.




eISSN : 2550-2131

ISSN : 1675-8021