A Study On The Generic Structure Of The Methods Section In Students’ And Published English Scientific And Research Papers

Genre knowledge of English research articles is vital for members of international scientific discourse community to communicate and distribute advanced science and technology information. Thus a comprehensive analysis of research articles on generic structure and its linguistic features can not only facilitate the academic communication and cooperation but also improve the domestic teaching efficiency of academic English. However, relatively few researches are found on such analysis of the Methods section.This thesis analyzes the Methods section of 12 students’ research articles of science from an International symposium and 12 published research articles of science from SCI journals. Based on the studies of Swales, Skelton, Nwogu,Kanoksilapatham and Lim, this thesis puts forward a generic analysis framework of the Methods section comprising of three central moves and eight constituent steps:Two coders conduct the move-step identification according to the proposed analysis framework and Cohen’s K is calculated to test their agreement of identification. The average K of the eight constituent steps is 0.99, which means the identification of the two coders is strictly consistent. Findings are as follows:1 The frequencies of step 2.3, 1.1, 3.1, 2.1 and step 2.2 have no significant difference between students’ and published samples. However, in the realization of step 1.1, 2.2 and step 3.1, student writers prefer the “listing-name” method, which only lists the names of the research sample, experimental equipment and statisticalmethods while in published samples, the source, characteristics and the application methods of the above three items have been illustrated in detail.2 The frequencies of the three validation steps are relatively low and the discrepancy of the frequencies between student samples and published samples is great.3 There exists no significant discrepancy in linguistic resources between students’ samples and published samples. The similarities are summarized as follows:(1) In the realization of step 1.1 and step 2.2, noun phrases, phrases beginning with V-ing and locative-preposition phrases provide a detailed explanation for the source and specific characteristic of the research samples and the experimental equipment.The passive verb-preposition combination indicates the way by which the research sample and equipment are acquired.(2) In the realization of step 2.1 and step 2.3,passive verbs and temporal conjunctions cooperate to recount the research steps chronologically. Besides, the temporal adverbials, adverbials of condition, purpose,place or manner work as the supplement to facilitate the realization of the communicative purpose of this two steps.(3) In the realization of step 3.1, apart from the usage of passive verbs and temporal conjunctions, the defining verb-preposition combination and means adjuncts offer an elaborate definition and statement of the measurements involved in the research.4 In the realization of the three validation steps, step 1.2, 2.4 and step 3.2,linguistic resources indicating citation and reasons are widely employed.The findings of this research indicate that(1)student writers have mastered the elementary writing skill of the central moves in the Methods section. However, in the realization of the communicative purposes of the generic structure of the Methods section, published writers are more flexible and efficient.(2) The lack of validation awareness is severe in the writing of the Methods section, especially in student writers.(3) Student writers have mastered the application of the linguistic resources in writing Methods section.