Generic Structure Of Chinese PhD Dissertation Concluding Chapters: Cross-Disciplinary And Cross-Cultural Perspectives

Genre analysis of academic discourse,which has attracted much scholastic interest ever since 1980s,tends to concentrate on the research article genre rather than longer texts such as theses and dissertations for research degrees.For example,the generic pattern of specific chapters of MA or PhD dissertations has by and large been neglected in the literature,with the exception of Bunton(1998, 2005).The present study aims to investigate,with reference to Bunton(1998, 2005),the generic structure of Chinese PhD dissertation concluding chapters for possible generic differences between disciplines and across cultures,proposing models for Chinese PhD dissertation Conclusions.The corpus of the research consists of 30 Chinese-language PhD dissertations,which are equally divided into two categories of science & technology(ST),and humanities & social science (HSS).Significant cross-disciplinary variations and cross-cultural differences between Chinese and English Conclusions are found.The results show that the sampled Chinese Conclusions,with two exceptions,which do not have a concluding chapter,fall into the category of thesis-oriented Conclusions as classified by Bunton(2005) and employ the four moves identified in Bunton's model for thesis-oriented PhD Conclusions—Introductory restatement, Consolidation of research space,Practical applications/implications,and Future research.Cross-disciplinary variations lie in that the Chinese HSS texts tend to be longer,with more varied titles and section headings as well as a higher number of references than their ST counterparts.The variations are also observed in terms of the steps within each of the four moves rather than the moves themselves.Within the Consolidation move,the ST Conclusions are found to specially report on the methods and products of the research;however,the Significance and Limitations steps are favored by the HSS writers.Within the Practical applications/implications move,the applications part dominates in the ST Conclusions,whereas it is usually the implications part that serves the purpose in the HSS texts.Cross-cultural differences are significant with regard to the steps within each move.In the Introductory restatement move,the purpose of the study,research questions or hypotheses,which are restated with a high frequency in the English HSS Conclusions,are found to be neglected in their Chinese counterparts.Within the Consolidation move,the Background information step is favored in the Chinese concluding chapters while it is seldom found in their English counterparts; the Reference to previous research step,occurring in a large majority of the English concluding chapters with a high frequency of occurrence,by contrast,are found in less than 30%of the Chinese texts.Furthermore,the Chinese-language dissertation writers prefer Future research as the closing move,while their English HSS colleagues favor the Practical applications/implications move.The findings of the present study are expected to shed light on the contrastive studies between the Chinese language and the English language in general and,in particular,the study of Chinese academic discourse.Pedagogically,they are expected to be of use to Chinese PhD instructors and candidates in terms of cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural variations of the genre,helping them to publish in English in international journals.