Applied Sciences
| Open Access |
DOI: From Summarizing to Persuading: Comparative Analysis of English And Uzbek Scientific Discourse
Abduganiyeva Zebuniso Abduhafizovna , PhD Student, Uzbekistan State World Languages University, Tashkent, UzbekistanAbstract
Research article abstracts function as both informational summaries and access points to disciplinary knowledge. This study compares the rhetorical organisation and linguistic realisation of English and Uzbek research article abstracts, focusing on promotional and expository orientations. The corpus comprises 68 abstracts published between 2023 and 2025 and equally divided between the two languages. The texts were analysed using a five-move, fifteen-step model. Purpose and Results emerged as the most stable moves in both corpora, while Method and the complete five-move structure were more consistently represented in English abstracts. English writers more often separated communicative functions through finite research verbs, explicit data statements, reporting frames, and contribution claims. Uzbek abstracts more frequently integrated purpose, method, results, and evaluation through nominal-predicative constructions, action nominals, passive predicates, and extended enumerations. These differences are interpreted as discoursal and institutional preferences rather than fixed cultural traits. The main contrast concerns rhetorical visibility and information packaging, not the communicative functions themselves.
Keywords
Academic writing, generic structure, move analysis
References
Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. N. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication: Cognition, culture, power. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. Longman.
Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. John Benjamins.
Can, S., Karabacak, E., & Qin, J. (2016). Structure of moves in research article abstracts in applied linguistics. Publications, 4(3), Article 23.
Cross, C., & Oppenheim, C. (2006). A genre analysis of scientific abstracts. Journal of Documentation, 62(4), 428-446.
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: A marker of national culture or academic discipline? Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1807-1825.
Gillaerts, P., & Van de Velde, F. (2010). Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 128-139.
Graetz, N. (1985). Teaching EFL students to extract structural information from abstracts. In J. M. Ulijn & A. K. Pugh (Eds.), Reading for professional purposes (pp. 123-135). ACCO.
Hartley, J. (2003). Improving the clarity of journal abstracts in psychology. Science Communication, 24(3), 366-379.
Hartley, J. (2004). Current findings from research on structured abstracts. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 92(3), 368-371.
Huckin, T. N. (2001). Abstracting from abstracts. In M. Hewings (Ed.), Academic writing in context (pp. 93-103). University of Birmingham Press.
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Longman.
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207-226.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Kafes, H. (2015). Cultural or discoursal proclivity: Rhetorical structure of English and Turkish research article abstracts. Anthropologist, 21(1-2), 240-254.
Lorés, R. (2004). On research article abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organisation. English for Specific Purposes, 23(3), 280-302.
Martín, P. M. (2003). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 22(1), 25-43.
Paltridge, B. (1994). Genre analysis and the identification of textual boundaries. Applied Linguistics, 15(3), 288-299.
Pho, P. D. (2008). Research article abstracts in applied linguistics and educational technology: A study of linguistic realisations of rhetorical structure and authorial stance. Discourse Studies, 10(2), 231-250.
Salager-Meyer, F. (1990). Discoursal flaws in medical English abstracts: A genre analysis per research- and text-type. Text, 10(4), 365-384.
Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141-156.
Santos, M. B. dos. (1996). The textual organisation of research paper abstracts in applied linguistics. Text, 16(4), 481-499.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2009). Abstracts and the writing of abstracts. University of Michigan Press.
Tseng, F.-P. (2011). Analyses of move structure and verb tense of research article abstracts in applied linguistics journals. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(2), 27-39.
Yakhontova, T. (2002). “Selling” or “telling”? The issue of cultural variation in research genres. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 216-232). Longman.
Download and View Statistics
Copyright License
Copyright (c) 2026 Abduganiyeva Zebuniso Abduhafizovna
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.