A Comparative Study of Reporting Verbs in Research Articles Written by Native Speakers of English and Vietnamese

• Main Authors: Nguyen Vi Thong, 阮維東
• Other Authors: Chia-Yen Lin
• Format: Others
• Language: en_US
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/24663793414492150609

碩士 === 元智大學 === 應用外語學系 === 101 === Research articles have been well known as publications by which scientific community can share their knowledge and research achievements. As highlighted in Hyland (2005), when writing up research articles, writers aim not only to report several previous studies and claim their findings but – more importantly – to set their own position or voice in these reports and claims. One of the most effective academic writing techniques in setting the writers’ stance that has been admitted in a number of studies is to choose appropriate reporting verbs for these reports and claims (Swales 1990, 2004; Thompson & Ye 1991; Hyland 1999, 2001; Charles 2006; Bloch 2009, 2010). In addition, Thompson (2000) addresses that choosing an appropriate reporting verb is not simply based on its dictionary meanings but its rhetorical implications so that the credibility of the reports or claims can be assured. Unfortunately, the rhetorical purposes of reporting verbs are often ignored or overlooked in L2 classrooms (Hyland, 2008). This situation may lead to a phenomenon that the writing devices used by nonnative speakers are usually less assertive than those by L1 speakers (McEnery & Kifle, 2002). The present study aims to investigate and evaluate the similarities and differences in using reporting verbs in English research articles written by native speakers of Vietnamese and English. Furthermore, the study attempts to examine how cultural and disciplinary variations affect the ways of employing reporting verbs. To serve these purposes, 167 research articles in three disciplines – Engineering, Mathematics, and Applied Linguistics – are chosen as research data. The framework of this study is a combination of Charles’s (2006) and Bloch’s (2010) models. That-complimentizer is assigned as a key word to find all the reporting clauses with the aid of AntConc corpus tool. The reporting verbs are first examined from perspectives of classification and tense assignment. Then, their rhetorical purposes will be carefully analyzed and evaluated. The findings show that disciplinary variation is the major factor that affects the reporting verb usages in journal articles in both groups of speakers. It determines verb groups, tenses rhetorical implications of the verbs. However, cultural variation is also recognized as a factor more or less influencing these usages. For example, in different cultures, verb choices within disciplines can be different; or the same verbs can be used with different rhetorical purposes between native speakers of Vietnamese and English. The findings can be meaningful to EAP researchers, teachers, and students in terms of how to set their own stance in reports or claims by using appropriate reporting verbs. The study is also expected to contribute to the establishment and development of EAP in Vietnam.