Genre Analysis: Introduction Sections Of English Medical Research Articles Written By Chinese Medical Writers

With the development of the international cooperation and exchange of information in academic settings, how to help researchers of different nationalities to be efficient readers and writers of English in order to be kept informed of the latest trend in their research fields and to exchange the results of their research work with colleagues all over the world has drawn greater attention of applied linguists as well as language educators, especially those in the field of English for Specific Purpose (ESP). ESP genre analysis approach, a most frequently used approach in the analysis of spoken and written discourse in academic and professional settings, has contributed to a better understanding of what actually constitutes the structures and linguistic features of a certain genre such as research articles (RAs).Many researches have been conducted on the analysis of generic structures and linguistic features of RAs either as a whole or section-wise in natural and social sciences. There have been some studies reported on medical RAs (MRAs) as a whole or on the methods sections written by native English speaking medical writers (NESMWs). But few researches, toour knowledge, have been reported on the English MRAs (EMRAs) written by Chinese medical writers (CMWs), as a whole or section-wise. Though some studies have been conducted in the analysis of MRA introduction sections, either those written in English by NESMWs or those written in languages other than English, few researches have been reported on the EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs and few contrastive analyses have been reported in the comparison of EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs and those by NESMWs. The present study, therefore, was designed to analyze and compare the generic structures and two linguistic features — tenses and the first personal pronouns — in the EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs as well as those written by NESMWs, hoping to gain a deeper insight into the generic structures and the linguistic features of the introduction sections in EMRAs written by CMWs and to explore any possible differences between the EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs and those by NESMWs.In the study, a pretest of generic structure was conducted in 10 EMRA introductions, with 5 written by NESMWs and 5 by CMWs, aiming to attest the feasibility of the research. Following the pretest, two different-sized corpora named ANESMW and BCMW were established by stratified random sampling, as this study was designed mainly on the EMRA introductions written by CMWs. The BCMW was composed of 50 EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs and randomly selected from ten core or source medical journals with English edition published in China, and the ANESMW of 20 by NESMWs from four authoritative journals published in USA and Britain. Employing the 5-step procedures suggested by Nwogu (1997), we first identified the moves and steps, the analytical units, in the EMRA introductions in the two corpora. Using Swales' model (1990), we then analyzed the EMRA introductions in the two corpora interm of moves and steps in the functional perspective respectively. Applying Salager-Meyer's analysis method to tenses and Kuo's analysis method and our qualitative method to the first personal pronoun, we investigated the distribution of these two linguistic features and their relation with the corresponding moves. The frequencies of these linguistic features were counted and recorded manually and the results were calculated. Chi-Square Test and Fisher Exact Test were applied to analyzing the results of the comparison between the EMRA introductions in the two corpora.The main results from our study were: 1) Sixteen out of 20 EMRA introductions (80%) in ANESMW and 37 out of 50 (74%) in BCMW were found to fit Swales' (1990) model, having the three obligatory moves in the model. One sample in ANESMW was found absent of Move 1, and 3 samples in ANESMW and 13 in BCMW were found omitting Move 2. 2) Move 1 (averaging 200.1w, ANESMW; 213.46w, BCMW) was found significantly longer than the other two moves in the EMRA introductions in the two corpora, covering about 76% of the total average length of the EMRA introductions under study. 3) Step 3 in Move 1 (95%, ANESMW; 98%, BCMW), Step 1B in Move 2 (75%, ANESMW; 68%, BCMW) and Step 1B in Move 3 (85%, ANESMW; 74%, BCMW) were found to be the most frequently used steps in each particular move. 4) Other than the steps in Swales' model, a step — evaluating present research — was found in Move 3 in 8 EMRA introductions (16%) written by CMWs. 5). For the contrastive structural analysis, Step 2 in Move 1 was more favorably applied in the EMRA introductions written by CMWs (82%) than those by NESMWs (50%) (p<0.05) and the step — evaluating present research — was found used in the EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs. No significant difference was found in other moves and steps between the twocorpora. 6) The simple present tense was predominantly present in Move 1 (57.33%, ANESMW; 58.35%, BCMW) and Move 2 (76.92%, ANESMW; 63.64%, BCMW). The simple past tense was mainly used in Move 3 (68.97%, ANESMW; 73.86%, BCMW). 7) The first personal pronoun was exclusively present in Move 3 and was employed only in plural forms, but it was found more favorably used in the EMRA introduction sections written by NESMWs (85%) than those by CMWs (54%) (p<0.05).From the results above, we can conclude that: 1) The EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs have a set structural organization, consisting of three obligatory moves in their assigned order: Move 1 — Establishing a territory, Move 2 — Establishing a niche, and Move 3 — occupying the niche. Of the three moves, Move 1 is significantly longer than the other two moves in the two corpora, owning to its multiple functions in EMRA introductions. This structure is consistent with that of the EMRA introduction sections written by NESMWs. 2) Except for the step — evaluating present research, the steps to realize each move in the EMRA introduction sections written by CMWs are mostly the same as those in the EMRA introduction sections written by NESMWs, despite some difference in their occurrence frequency. The significant difference in the use of the step of making topic generalizations between CMWs and NESMWs may be attributable to cultural differences. The steps of reviewing items of previous research, indicating a gap and announcing present research are the most favorably used steps to accomplish the communicative functions of each particular move of the EMRA introductions in the two corpora. 3) The distribution and frequencies of tenses under study in the EMRA introductions written by CMWs are roughly in accordance with those in the EMRA introductions written by NESMWs. Compared with NESMWs, Chinese medial writers use...