Connecting lexical bundles and moves in medical research articles’ Methods section

References

• Al-Shujairi YB, Tan H, Abdullah AN, Nimechisalem V, Imm LG. 2020. Lexical bundles in the Discussion section moves of high impact medical research articles. Pertranika Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 28(3): 2043–2061.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Appel R, Trofimovich P. 2017. Transitional probability predicts native and non-native use of formulaic sequences. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 27(1): 24–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12100
   Google Scholar
• 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. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2015.11.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qi H, Pan F. 2020. Lexical bundle variation across moves in abstracts of medical research articles. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 38(2): 109–128. doi: 10.2989/16073614.2020.1763814
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Basturkmen H. 2009. Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 8(4): 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.07.001
   Google Scholar
• Biber D, Finegan E. 2001. Intra-textual variation within medical research articles. In: Conrad S, Biber D (eds), Variation in English: Multi-dimensional studies. London: Longman. pp. 108–123.
   Google Scholar
• Biber D, Conrad S, Cortes V. 2004. If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics 25(3): 371–405. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.3.371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biber D, Johansson S, Leech G, Conrad S, Finegan E. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson.
   Google Scholar
• Chen YH, Baker P. 2010. Lexical bundles in L1 and L2 academic writing. Language Learning & Technology 14(2): 30–49.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortes V. 2004. Lexical bundles in published and student disciplinary writing: Examples from history and biology. English for Specific Purposes 23(4): 397–423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.12.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortes V. 2013. The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in researcharticle introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 12(1): 33–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.11.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cotos E, Huffman S, Link S. 2017. A move/step model for methods sections: Demonstrating Rigour and Credibility. English for Specific Purposes 46: 90–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.01.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ElMalik AT, Nesi H. 2008. Publishing research in a second language: The case of Sudanese contributors to international medical journals. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7(2): 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.007
   Google Scholar
• 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilbert GN, Mulkay M. 1984. Opening the pandora’s box: A sociological analysis of scientific discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grabowski L, Juknevičienė R. 2016. Towards a refined inventory of lexical bundles: an experiment in the Formulex Method. Kalbu Studijos/Studies About Languages 29:58–73.
   Google Scholar
• Gray B. 2015. Linguistic variation in research articles: When discipline tells only part of the story. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.71
   Google Scholar
• Hyland K. 2005. Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7(2): 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland K. 2008a. Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18(1): 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00178.x
   Google Scholar
• Hyland K. 2008b. 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
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hyland K. 2012. Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 32: 150–169. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190512000037
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le TNP, Harrington M. 2015. Phraseology used to comment on results in the Discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes 39: 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li LJ, Ge GC. 2009. Genre analysis: Structural and linguistic evolution of the English-medium medical research article (1985–2004). English for Specific Purposes 28(2): 93–104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim JMH. 2006. Methods sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. English for Specific Purposes 25(3): 282–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.07.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu XF, Deng JL. 2019. With the rapid development: A contrastive analysis of lexical bundles in dissertation abstracts by Chinese and L1 English doctoral students. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 39: 21–36. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2019.03.008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lu XF, Yoon JY, Kisselev O. 2021. Matching phrase-frames to rhetorical moves in social science research article introductions. English for Specific Purposes 61: 63–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.10.001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jalali ZS, Moini MR. 2014. Structure of lexical bundles in introduction section of medical research articles. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 98: 719–726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.473
   Google Scholar
• Mizumoto A, Hamatani S, Imao Y. 2017. Applying the bundle-move connection approach to the development of an online writing support tool for research articles. Language Learning 67(4): 885–921. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12250
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreno AI, Swales JM. 2018. Strengthening move analysis methodology towards bridging the functionform gap. English for Specific Purposes 50: 40–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.11.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nwogu KN. 1997. The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for Specific Purposes 16(2): 119–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)85388-4
   Google Scholar
• Omidian T, Shahriari H, Siyanova-Chanturia AS. 2018. A cross-disciplinary investigation of multi-word expressions in the moves of research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36(6): 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.08.002
   Google Scholar
• Ozturk I. 2007. The textual organization of research article introductions in applied linguistics: Variability within a single discipline. English for Specific Purposes 26(1): 25–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.12.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peacock M. 2002. Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System 30(4): 479–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7
   Google Scholar
• Pęzik P. 2015. Using n-gram independence to identify discourse-functional lexical units in spoken learner corpus data. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 1(2): 242–255. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.1.2.03pez
   Google Scholar
• Salager-Meyer F. 1994. Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes 13(2): 149–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2
   Google Scholar
• Salazar D. 2014. Lexical bundles in native and non-native scientific writing: Applying a corpus-based study to language teaching. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.65
   Google Scholar
• Samraj B. 2002. Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 21(1): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott M. 2004. WordSmith Tools Version 4.0. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shahriari H. 2017. Comparing lexical bundles across the introduction, method and results sections of the research article. Corpora 12(1): 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2017.0107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swales JM. 1981. Aspects of article introductions. Birmingham: The University of Aston, Language Studies Unit.
   Google Scholar
• Swales JM. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Swales JM. 2004. Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524827
   Google Scholar
• Verdaguer I, Laso NJ, Guzmán-González T, Salazar D, Comelles E, Castaño E, Hiferty J. 2013. SciE-Lex. A lexical database. In: Verdaguer I, Laso NJ, Salazar D (eds), Biomedical English: A corpus-based approach. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 21–38.
   Google Scholar
• Wood D. 2015. Fundamentals of formulaic language: An introduction. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar