...
首页> 外文期刊>Ampersand >Move analysis of research articles across five engineering fields: What they share and what they do not
【24h】

Move analysis of research articles across five engineering fields: What they share and what they do not

机译:将研究论文的分析移至五个工程领域:它们共享什么,不共享什么

获取原文

摘要

While many genre researchers have examined the rhetorical structure of research articles in various disciplines, few have investigated the complete structure of articles for students in engineering, a discipline that includes a wide range of fields. Using Swales’ move framework (1990), this paper analyzes the rhetorical structure of 67 engineering research articles from five subdisciplines: structural engineering, environmental engineering, electrical engineering, chemical engineering, and computer science. Six engineering researchers participated in the study by coding texts of full-length papers into moves and steps. The study found that the abstract, introduction, and concluding sections and some of their moves were conventional across all subdisciplines. The finding of no common move patterns throughout the papers across the subdisciplines is explained by the differences in the nature of research in each field. There were, however, limited subdisciplinary similarities such as the use of Move 5, Step 2 observed in environmental, electrical, and chemical engineering. The study results provide practical pedagogical resources, a theoretical background to guide writing in an engineering school, and implications for collaboration with researchers in specialized fields. Highlights ? The study examines 67 engineering research articles from 5 subdisciplines. ? Six engineering researchers coded full-length articles into moves and steps. ? There are some sections and moves conventional across all subdisciplines. ? No common move patterns exist throughout the papers across the subdisciplines. ? Limited similarities exist, such as the use of Move 5 Step 2 in 3 subdisciplines.
机译:尽管许多类型的研究人员已经研究了各个学科中研究论文的修辞结构,但很少有人研究了工程学学生的完整论文结构,而该学科涵盖了广泛的领域。本文使用Swales的移动框架(1990),分析了来自五个子学科的67篇工程研究文章的修辞结构:结构工程,环境工程,电气工程,化学工程和计算机科学。六名工程研究人员通过将全长论文的文本编码为动作和步骤来参与了这项研究。研究发现,摘要,引言和结语部分以及它们的某些动作在所有子学科中都是常规的。各个学科之间的论文中,没有发现共同的运动方式,这是由各个领域研究性质的差异所解释的。但是,在子学科上的相似性有限,例如在环境,电气和化学工程中观察到的使用Move 5,Step 2。研究结果提供了实用的教学资源,指导工程学校写作的理论背景,以及与专业领域研究人员合作的意义。强调 ?该研究检查了来自5个子学科的67篇工程研究文章。 ?六名工程研究人员将全长文章编码为动作和步骤。 ?在所有子学科中都有一些部分和常规操作。 ?在整个跨学科的论文中,没有常见的移动方式。 ?存在有限的相似性,例如在3个子学科中使用“移动5步骤2”。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利