Do Applied Linguists and Mechanical Engineers Report Results and Make Deductions from Their Research Differently?

Abstract

In this study, we investigated how authors in applied linguistics and
mechanical engineering report results in their papers and make deductions from their research and whether these practices are
different in the two disciplines by drawing on a corpus of thirty-six journal articles. We identified segments that perform the functions of reporting results and making deductions in the papers using Swales’s (1990, 2004) conceptual framework of rhetorical move. We then explored a range of salient linguistic features associated with the moves using the data-driven approach (Rayson, 2008). More specifically, we made keyness comparisons at the part-of-speech (POS) level to identify grammatical categories that are characteristic of the moves in each discipline. We further examined the concordance of the significant POS domains qualitatively to explore underlying meanings and functions behind the linguistic mechanism. These functional and grammatical-rhetorical analyses showed that the way that applied linguists and mechanical engineers report results and make deductions from their research follows the universal characteristics of the academic world, but at the same time, reflects the knowledge-making conventions inherent in each disciplinary community. Pedagogically, the findings can provide a useful resource for producing activities for writing instruction to raise learners' awareness of typical rhetorical norms in their field of research, and guide them in formulating structures
appropriate for communicative functions.