Sutong Gao, Issra Pramoolsook

DOI Number
First page
Last page


This study explored the move-step structure of the Results and Discussion (R&D) section of electronic engineering research articles (EERAs) written by Chinese and Thai researchers. Two corpora, with each containing 12 R&D sections, were compiled for analysis with reference to the three frameworks of Kanoksilapatham (2005, 2015) and Maswana et al. (2015). In addition, variations in terms of move-step structure between the two corpora were examined. Findings firstly demonstrated a newly proposed framework of 3 moves and 12 steps. What’s more, all of the three moves were found obligatory, and the variations between the two corpora mainly existed in the steps under each move category. Findings of the present study could provide insights into EERA construction for novice writers. Moreover, generic variations that are acceptable within the discipline might expand RA genre knowledge for both EE researchers and genre practitioners.


move-step structure, electronic engineering research article, results and discussion section, contrastive analysis

Full Text:



Basturkmen, Helen. 2012. A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11: 134-144.

Biber, Douglas, Ulla Connor, and Thomas Upton. 2007. Discourse on the Move: Using Corpus Analysis to Describe Discourse Structure. John Benjamins Publishing.

Brett, Paul. 1994. A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes 13 (1): 47-59.

Dujsik, Darunee. 2013. A genre analysis of research article discussions in applied linguistics. Language Research 49 (2):453-477.

Graves, Heather, Shahin Moghaddasi, and Azirah Hashim. 2014 “Let G ¼ (V, E) be a graph”: Turning the abstract into the tangible in introductions in mathematics RAs. English for Specific Purposes 36: 1-11.

Holmes, Richard. 1997. Genre analysis, and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 16 (4): 321-337.

Hyland, Ken. 1998. Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Kanoksilapatham, Budsaba. 2005. Rhetorical structure of biochemistry RAs. English for Specific Purposes 24: 269-292.

Kanoksilapatham, Budsaba. 2015. Distinguishing textual features characterizing structural variation in RAs across three engineering sub-discipline corpora. English for Specific Purposes 37: 74-86.

Kwan, Becky S.C. 2017. A cross-paradigm macro-structure analysis of research articles in Information Systems. English for Specific Purposes 45: 14-30.

Le, Thi Ngoc Phuong, and Michael Harrington. 2015. Phraseology used to comment on results in the discussion section of applied linguistics quantitative research articles. English for Specific Purposes 39: 45-61.

Li, Qian, and Issra Pramoolsook. 2015. Research article abstracts in two subdisciplines of Business--move structure and hedging between Management and Marketing. English Language Teaching 8 (1): 52-62.

Lim, Jason Miin Hwa. 2006. Method sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. English for Specific Purposes 25: 282-309.

Lim, Jason Miin Hwa. 2010. Commenting on research results in applied linguistics and education: A comparative genre-based investigation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (4): 280-294.

Lin, Ling, and Stephen Evans. 2012. Structural patterns in empirical research articles: A cross-disciplinary study. English for Specific Purposes 31: 150-160.

Lu, Xiaofei, and Jinlei Deng. 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.

Maswana, Sayako, Toshiyuki Kanamaru, and Akira Tajino. 2015. Move analysis of research articles across five engineering fields: What they share and what they do not. Ampersand 2: 1-11.

Moghaddasi, Shahin, and Heather A.B. Graves. 2017. “Since Hadwiger’s conjection… is still open”: Establishing a niche for research in discrete mathematics research article introductions. English for Specific Purposes 45: 69-85.

Peacock, Matthew. 2002. Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System 30 (4): 479-497.

Salager-Meyer, Françoise. 1994. Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes 13 (2): 149-170.

Stoller, Fredricka L., and Marin S. Robinson. 2013. Chemistry journal articles: An interdisciplinary approach to move analysis with pedagogical aims. English for Specific Purposes 32: 45-57.

Tessuto, Girolamo. 2015. Generic structure and rhetorical moves in English-language empirical law research articles: Sites of interdisciplinary and interdiscursive cross-over. English for Specific Purposes 37: 13-26.

Vodovozov, Valery. 2010. Introduction to Electronic Engineering. (accessed February 26, 2021).

Williams, Ian. A. 1999. Results sections of medical research articles: Analysis of rhetorical categories for pedagogical purposes. English for Specific Purposes 18 (4): 347–366.

Wood, Alistair. 2001. International scientific English: The language of research scientists around the world. In Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes, edited by J. Flowerdew and M. Peacock, 71-83. Cambridge University Press.

Yang, Ruiying, and Desmond Allison. 2003. Research articles in applied linguistics: moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes 22: 365-385.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 2334-9182 (Print)
ISSN 2334-9212 (Online)