Lexical Bundles in Native and Non-native Scientific Writing

Salazar, Danica

doi:10.1075/scl.65

Cited by 81 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 270 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Although the referential bundles, which correspond to research-oriented bundles in Hyland's taxonomy, are confirmed to be the most dominant functional category in academic prose in many studies (e.g. Biber, 2009;Biber & Barbieri, 2007;Chen and Baker, 2010;Juknevičienė, 2009;Salazar, 2010), this category was followed by stance bundles, which correspond to participant-oriented bundles in Hyland's taxonomy in the other studies (e.g. Biber, 2009;Biber & Barbieri, 2007;Juknevičienė, 2009) as a different finding.…”

Section: Comparison Of Functional Types Of Lexical Bundlesmentioning

confidence: 83%

“…Chen and Baker, 2010;Salazar, 2010) also found that native writers used more research-oriented bundles and less participant-oriented bundles. For instance, Salazar (2010) found that 51.3% of the bundles were research-oriented, 42.4% were text-oriented, and 6.3% were participant-oriented bundles which is quite similar to the current study. The referential, discourse and stance bundles consist of 60%, 21% and 19% respectively in Chen and Baker's (2010) study.…”

Section: Comparison Of Functional Types Of Lexical Bundlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As the initiator of the lexical bundle research within the current definition, Biber et al's taxonomy has still been used in the structural classification of bundles. Although the functional taxonomy was developed by many researchers (Biber, Conrad, & Cortes, 2004;Hyland, 2008a), the current study makes use of Salazar's (2014) taxonomy which is a developed version of Hyland's (2008a) taxonomy as it was developed by reflecting the concerns of research writing.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, research articles in the field of educational sciences were collected from peer-reviewed journals considering the three criteria, namely topic, text type and author profile, as suggested by Salazar (2014). In other words, the corpus was comprised of the English research articles that were written by native English scholars in their L1 and Turkish scholars in their L2 in the field of educational sciences.…”

Section: Data (Corpus)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Comparative Analysis of Lexical Bundles Used by Native and Non-native Scholars

Güngör¹,

Uysal²

2016

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the recent years, globalization prepared a ground for English to be the lingua franca of the academia. Thus, most highly prestigious international journals have defined their medium of publications as English. However, even advanced language learners have difficulties in writing their research articles due to the lack of appropriate lexical knowledge and discourse conventions of academia. Considering the fact that the underuse, overuse and misuse of formulaic sequences or lexical bundles are often characterized with non-native writers of English, lexical bundle studies have recently been on the top of the agenda of corpus studies. Although the related literature has represented specific genres or disciplines, no study has scrutinized lexical bundles in the research articles that are written in the educational sciences. Therefore, the current study compared the structural and functional characteristics of the lexical-bundle use in L1 and L2 research articles in English. The results revealed the deviation of the usages of lexical bundles by the non-native speakers of English from the native speaker norms. Furthermore, the results indicated the overuse of clausal or verb-phrase based lexical bundles in the research articles of Turkish scholars while their native counterparts used noun and prepositional phrase-based lexical bundles more than clausal bundles.

show abstract

Section: Comparison Of Functional Types Of Lexical Bundlesmentioning

confidence: 83%

Section: Comparison Of Functional Types Of Lexical Bundlesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Data (Corpus)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Comparative Analysis of Lexical Bundles Used by Native and Non-native Scholars

Güngör¹,

Uysal²

2016

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Different discourses, from academic discourse to legal discourse, as well as different genres of texts have been the main sources for investigations of frequency, structural and functional features of lexical bundles. Different genres of spoken and written academic discourse have been investigated by , Cortes (2004), Biber et al (2004), Simpson (2004), Biber (2006), Hyland (2008b), Simpson-Vlach and Ellis (2010), Salazar (2010), Jalali and Moini (2014), Pan et al (2016), andYang (2017). Besides different studies focusing on the use of lexical bundles across different disciplines, many of the previous works on lexical bundles in academic discourse have focused on differences and similarities of the use of lexical bundles between L1 and L2 writers (Salazar 1996;De Cock 1998;Schmitt 2005;Salazar 2011;Juknevičienė 2011;Ädel & Erman 2012;Amirian et al 2013;Purificación 2013;Pan et al 2016;Güngör & Uysal 2016;Güngör 2016) as well as between novice and expert writers (Cortes 2004;Chen & Baker 2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%