CC BY-ND
21
https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.16163
Research Article Introductions in Applied Linguistics: A Comparative Study on the Use of Appeals
M. Affandi Arianto , Maulluddul Haq , Jufrizal-
Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia
ABSTRACT
Introduction: Although extensive studies have been carried out on the rhetorical structure of research article introduction (RAI), centrality as a promotional strategy has received very little attention.
Purpose: To address this lacuna in research literature, this study investigates centrality claims and how the appeals are realized strategically and linguistically.
Method: 60 RAIs from three-corpora, i.e., 20 English L1 corpus (written by native authors in English), 20 English FL Corpus (written by Indonesian authors in English), and 20 Indonesian L1 corpus (written by Indonesian authors in Indonesian Language), in the field of applied linguistics (AL) were analyzed. The analysis started from the step of claiming centrality found in the authors' RAIs using the Swales' (1990) framework. Wang and Yang's (2015) framework was used to identify the types of appeals in the claiming centrality.
Results: This study indicates that the three groups of authors use four types of appeals, namely the appeal to salience, magnitude, topicality, and problematicity. The appeals appear in varied ways, i.e., referring to the research world and the real world. Although application of each appeal in the step of claiming centrality is relatively different in the three groups, some share similarities in using the appeals in terms of referring to the research world and the real world. Conclusion: This study provides pedagogical implications for teaching academic writing, particularly in writing research articles for publication.
KEYWORDS
appeal, claiming centrality, research article introduction
INTRODUCTION
Citation: Arianto M. A., Haq M., & Jufrizal (2023). Research Article Introductions in Applied Linguistics: A Comparative Study on the Use of Appeals. Journal of Language and Education, 9(2), 12-24. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2023.16163
Correspondence:
M. Affandi Arianto, affandia@fbs.unp.ac.id
Received: October 17, 2022 Accepted: June 15, 2023 Published: June 30, 2023
Previous scholars who focused on genre analysis of research articles (RAs) focused their attention onto research article introductions (RAIs). They investigated the moves and steps in the section (Muang-samai, 2018; Msuya, 2020; Rochma et al., 2020). In comparative study, some scholars examined the cross-disciplinary variations in rhetorical styles (Afshar et al., 2018; Behnam & Nikoukhesal, 2017; Nabilla et al., 2021), while some others highlighted the differences of moves and steps used by native and non-native speakers of English (Deveci, 2020; Farnia & Barati, 2017; Gao & Pramoolsook, 2023; Klimova, 2017). Along with the growing interest in investigating move-step structure in RAIs, some recent studies have also examined and highlighted linguistic features in the section, such as the use of
lexical bundles (Fajri, 2020; Cortes, 2013; Yang, 2022) and metadiscourse markers (Alghazo et al., 2021a; Alghazo et al., 2021b; Alotaibi & Arabi, 2020; Al-Zubeiry & Assaggaf, 2023; Liao, 2020).
The findings of previous studies have provided fruitful and meaningful insights and have assisted non-native and novice authors in writing well-organized introductions, as expected by the gatekeepers of science (journal editors and reviewers). However, other specific aspects need to be examined more deeply, if we are to discuss the introductory section of RA. Previous studies had focused on a specific move in the introduction section, namely establishing a niche (e.g., Chen and Li, 2019; Lim, 2012; Zainuddin & Shaari, 2017). Such specific investigations also attracted the interest of other scholars to take a deeper look into a spe-
cific step. For example,, Arianto et al. (2021) and Arianto and Basthomi (2021) identified several strategies in indicating research gaps: one of the steps being establishing a niche. A question of theoretical and pedagogical importance is whether authors also use strategies in other steps in other moves.
At the beginning of the introduction section, authors should promote the topics of their studies by employing a crucial step: claiming centrality (one of the steps in establishing a territory), in order to attract readers' attention (Swales, 1990; 2004). The use of this globally recognizable step is to provoke, persuade, and convince readers about the topics being discussed. Little is known about the practices of authors in using strategies in this step in their RAIs, particularly those who are non-native and novice authors. Up to now, far too little attention has been paid to the issue.
The few studies (e.g., Abdi & Sadeghi, 2018; Wang & Yang, 2015) have been mostly limited to authors' appeals (strategies in claiming centrality), namely appeals to salience, magnitude, topicality, and problematicity. At the same time, so far no investigation has been conducted s far into the differences in using the types of appeals by the authors of English L1 (native English authors writing RAIs in English), English FL (Indonesian authors writing RAIs in English), and Indonesian L1 (Indonesian authors writing RAIs in Indonesia). It is of empirical interest to carry out a study to address this gap. This will help to establish both rhetorically and linguistically to what extent Indonesian authors writing English RAIs transfer, underuse, or overuse rhetorical features, e.g., strategies claiming centrality of their first language. This study aims to investigate the types of appeals in English RAIs written by native authors (English L1) and Indonesian authors (English FL), and Indonesian RAIs written by Indonesian authors (Indonesian L1), by answering two research questions:
1. How frequently do authors make appeals in their applied linguistic RAIs to promote their research topics?
2. What are the differences, if any, in the frequency of appealing strategies used in English RAIs written by native authors (English L1) and Indonesian authors (English FL), and in Indonesian RAIs written by Indonesian authors (Indonesian L1)?
LITERATURE REVIEW
Promotional Strategy (i.e., the Step of Claiming Centrality) in Research Article Introductions
The introduction section plays a crucial role in promoting research topics (Wang & Yang, 2015), so there is a need to
study strategy types used by authors use to promote the research topics and how the linguistic features are realized in each strategy type. The step of claiming centrality step is one of the steps in establishing a territory. It is a promotional strategy since it consists of appeals that have a clear function to boost authors' academic promotion, and make their introductions more impressive (Wang & Yang, 2015; Swales, 1990, 2004). Therefore, although extensive studies have been carried out on the moves and steps of the introductory section of RAs, the existence of appeals as the strategies to promote the research topics in the claiming centrality step should not be ignored.
Few studies have focused on the types of appeals authors use to promote their research topics. For example,, Lindeberg (2004) found six types of appeals used by economists: appeals to practitioners, economy, authority, research, scope, and topicality. Harwood (2005) studied promotional acts in four disciplines (i.e., Physics, Economics, Computing Science, Business & Management). He suggested that using I and we can be claimed as self-promotional devices to highlight the authors' position in persuading their research topics. Meanwhile, Afros and Schryer (2009) focused on the realization of promotion through the application of metadis-course markers. They found that using evaluative lexis and self-citations in the introductions are claimed as the most promotional values in language and literary studies.
In the field of AL, Wang and Yang (2015) considered adapting the frameworks of Martin and Rose (2007), Martin and White (2005), and Hood (2010) to identify the types of appeals used by applied linguists. They found that the authors used the appeal to magnitude, followed by the appeal to salience, topicality, and problematicity. Conceptualized, the appeals can be identified in the following way:
1. The appeal to salience is how authors invoke the readers about how valuable and important the topic is (Wang & Yang, 2015). This appeal functions to demonstrate the value of importance and significance, as well as the advantages of conducting the research topic (Abdi & Sadeghi, 2018; Arsyad & Wardhana, 2023)
2. The appeal to magnitude can be portrayed by looking at how authors show the growth research topics and expose them as prevalent and need to be discussed. Showing the multiplicity of studies or amount of research can be used as graduation or amplification to indicate the popularity of the research topics (Arsyad & Wardhana, 2023; Wang & Yang, 2015).
3. The appeal to topicality is how readers see the currency and newness of the topics introduced by the authors (Wang & Yang, 2015). The novelty of the research can be strengthened by using this appeal,
since it offers new knowledge from the research (Abdi & Sadeghi, 2018; Arsyad & Wardhana, 2023)
4. The appeal to problematicity is the way in which authors unveil the problems or conflict of the topics and attract the readers that the problematicity of the topics is worth conducting. The expectation from promoting the provoking problems or challenges in relation to the research topics is that the authors can create further endavours to solve the problems (Wang & Yang, 2015)
A few years later, by adopting the four appeals categorized by Wang and Yang (2015), Abdi and Sadeghi (2018) compared the use of the four appeals by native and non-native authors (Iranian authors). The results showed that the appeal to salience is most frequent in English L1 and L2. However, they found that English L1 authors referred to the entities in the real world more than L2 authors. In contrast to what was identified by Wang and Yang (2015), the English L1 authors used entities in the real world more than the research world.
The contradictory findings found by previous scholars are a matter for considerable discussion and further studies. Another question of theoretical and pedagogical importance is whether the use of appeal in English L1 and FL also differs from the mother tongue language of the authors, for example, the Indonesian language. This may be because the mother tongue language possibly influences the rhetorical structure of English RA. The previous studies have not compared the rhetorical styles of RAIs written in English and Indonesian in order to identify the differences between the use of moves and steps and the research traditions influenced by Indonesian styles, and the extent to which they should be ruled out. This is particularly relevant to writing a good English RAI, to be accepted in broader communities. Research has to be published internationally and readable in the wider discourse communities. Although, from a practical standpoint, there might be differences between the RAIs written in English and Indonesian, it should be noted that the research topics must be convincing and attract readers'
Figure 1
Swales'(1990) and Wang and Yang's (2015) frameworks
attention using the appeals and the linguistic choices employed by the authors in promoting the topics.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Corpus Selection and Data Collection
In order to address the research questions, 60 introductions of AL RAs were randomly taken from reputable peer-reviewed journals (published from 2019-2022). The corpus in English L1 includes ten from Applied Linguistics and ten from System. Of 20 introductions in English FL, ten from Studies in English Language and Education (SiELE) and ten from the Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL). The journals are indexed by internationally reputable academic research databases, such as Scopus, Social Sciences Citation Index, Language Teaching, Education Research Index, etc. Meanwhile, the corpus in Indonesian L1 includes ten from Diglossia and ten from Lingua Didaktika. The two journals have been accredited by the Indonesian Directorate of Higher Education (DIKTI) and are indexed by Science and Technology Index (SINTA). Accordingly, all RAIs were coded according to their groups, EngL1 01-20 for English L1 (written by native authors), EngFL 01-20 for English FL (Indonesian authors who wrote the RAIs in English), IndL1 01-20 for Indonesian L1 (Indonesian authors who wrote the RAIs in Indonesia).
Data Analysis
In analyzing the data, two frameworks, Swales' (1990) and Wang and Yang's (2015) frameworks, were adopted (Figure 1). Swales' (1990) framework is considered more suitable in this study since it accommodates the claiming centrality step which belongs to establishing a territory. Accordingly, for this study, we took the framework as our starting point, in order to identify the step used by the authors of the three groups. The frequency of occurrences of claiming centrality step was first identified from each group. The total frequency of occurrences of the step used was descriptively counted and compared (in percentages).
Swales (J 990) Establishing a territory (Move 1) Wang and Yang (2015)
f Steps: The Appeal to Salience
| • Claiming centrality J The Appeal to Magnitude f
The Appeal to Topicality
The Appeal to Problematicity 1 j
• Making 1 opic Generalizations • Reviewing Previous Items of Previous Research
Then, the framework of Yang and Wang (2015) was used to identify the four appeals and their corresponding linguistic realizations (Table 1). They are contained in the promotional strategy (i.e., claiming centrality) that the occurrences had previously been identified and highlighted. The types of appeals were identified and coded accordingly for quantitative analysis. The chi-square test was used to examine whether there is a statistically significant difference in using the appeals across the three groups of authors.
In order to ensure reliability, we invited another coder with experience in move analysis to analyze 15 RAIs selected randomly from the corpus. The inter-coding result was calculated using Cronbach alpha. It showed a 92% agreement between two coders regarding their step of claiming centrality identifications and 87% regarding types of appeals identifications. The disagreement between coders was discussed, and we resolved it based on the inputs received .
RESULTS
The Use of Appeals in RA Introductions by AL Authors
Based on the data analysis, all four appeals were found in the three groups, i.e., English L1, English FL, and Indonesian L1.
As can be seen in Table 2, the appeal to salience was the promotional strategy most used by AL authors. This strategy functions to show the usefulness or the importance of the proposed topics being promoted in the RA introductions. The second highest appeal strategy used by the AL authors was the appeal to problematicity. It indicates that the au-
thors still consider showing challenges, problems, and difficulties of certain issues as a strategy to convince readers that they are worth conducting. However, the appeal to topicality was the second lowest strategy used, followed by the appeal to topicality as the lowest type of appeal used in the AL RA introductions.
The Differences in Using Appealing Strategies across the Three Groups (English L1, English FL, and Indonesian L1 Authors)
Some differences were found in terms of the distribution of the appeals. Across groups, in the Indonesian L1 Group (93 times/46.03%), the use of the appeal to salience was the most frequently used appeal. Also, the appeal to problematicity was mostly used by the authors in the group (73 times/48.66%). The authors in the English L1 employed the appeal to magnitude (22 times/50%) and topicality (18 times/51.42%) in most.
Based on statistical analysis, there is a significant difference in the use of appeal strategies across the three groups (p<.05). The number of appeals to salience used by the Eng-L1 group differs significantly from Indo-L1 group, but it is not remarkably different from Eng-FL group. Furthermore, although the frequency of the appeal to problematicity used by the Eng-L1 group was not different from the Indo-L1 group, there is a significant difference between the group of Eng-FL and Indo-L1 in terms of frequency. Surprisingly, there are significant differences in using the appeal to magnitude and topicality between the two groups of authors (Eng-L1 and Eng-FL groups) and Indo-L1 groups. It indicated that the Indonesian authors understood how to propose and strengthen their arguments about the topics in their English RA introductions using the four appeals. The
Table 1
Types of Appeals and Their Linguistic Realization (Adapted from Wang & Yang, 2015)
No Types of appeals
Linguistic realization
The appeal to salience
The appeal to magnitude
Attitudinal expressions (e.g., allows...to improve).
Adjectives denoting the significance or the importance of research topics (e.g., important, useful).
Noun denoting the advantages of conducting a research topic (e.g., advantages, benefits).
An attitudinal expression denoting graduation (e.g., amount of research, a sizable body of research, many studies).
Phrases denoting popularity (e.g., popular topics, prevalent issues, etc.). The prevalence of a phenomenon by referring to its frequency (e.g., most frequently) 3 The appeal to topicality Phrases indicating urgency (.still discussed).
Temporal pointers (e.g., recently, recent, has started to, now).
The appeal to problematicity
Words indicating problematic conditions (e.g., problems, conflicts, challenges, difficulties, limitations,
controversies)
Note: Adapted from "Claiming Centrality as Promotion in Applied Linguistics Research Article Introductions", by W. Wang and C. Yang, 2015, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 162-175
2
4
Table 2
Frequency of Occurrences and Distribution of the Appeals by Type in Each Group
No Promotional Strategies in Claiming Centrality F %
1 The appeal to salience 202 46.86
2 The appeal to magnitude 44 10.20
3 The appeal to topicality 35 8.12
4 The appeal to problematicity 150 36.89
Total 431 100
result showed that the frequency of occurrences of the appeals used by the Eng-L1 and Eng-FL groups was not significantly different.
The appeal to salience appeared most in the AL RAIs, with the highest frequencies in the three groups - Indonesian L1 (50.06%), English FL (46.72%), and English L1 (37.14%). The lowest use of appeal was found in the appeal to topicality -Indonesian L1 (2 times), English FL (15 times), and English L1 (18 times). In terms of orientation to the research world and real-world entities, almost all appeals were made with reference to both entities. However, in Indonesian L1, the authors did not make the claim related to their popularity of topics regarding the research world (Table 3 and Figure 1).
Table 3 and Figure 1 indicate that the authors in Indonesian L1 and English L1 groups were more likely to claim the importance of their research topics with regard to the research world. Meanwhile, in the English FL group, the authors tended to show the appeal to salience in the research world more than the real one. However, in the English L1 group, it was found that the three appeals to magnitude, topicality, and problematic, were often turned towards the research world. However, the three appeals were made with the reference to the real world in English FL and Indonesian L1 groups. This showsthat ways to promote research topics in English RAIs (written by Indonesian authors) are still influenced by the style commonly used in writing Indonesian RAIs, in which the real-world entity was more often used in the three appeals.
Appeal to Salience
This strategy is used when the authors need to show the importance of their research topics. Wang and Yang (2015) suggest that the topics' usefulness, significance, or advantages should be clearly stated in the introduction section. They add that authors need to use phrases denoting the importance of their research topics (i.e., as an essential aspect of knowledge, the advantages of...) and attitudinal expressions (i.e., to improve, allows, aids), in order to indicate the importance of the research topics. In our study, the authors from the three groups used this strategy when they promoted their topics. Excerpts can be seen below:
Excerpt 1
The provision of comprehensible input to students is essential in English as a foreign language (EFL) and second language (L2) classrooms (e.g., Krashen, 1982, 1985; Schmidt, 1992). ...,4s several prior studies have shown the positive effects of gestures on learners, it can be concluded that gestures play an important role as input to learners for comprehension.
(Sys-RAl-05)
Excerpt 2
It has also become a consensus that obtaining feedback from the teacher is more important than that from peers (Wihastyanang et al., 2020). To sum up, studies show that teacher feedback keeps worth employing. Furthermore, the advent of technology leads online written feedback to take its pivotal role in English L2 writing.
(lJAL-RAl-004)
Excerpt 3
Ketika mengalami kendala pada saat berkomunikasi, seorang penutur akan menggunakan cara-cara ter-tentu yang berkesinambungan. Cara-cara yang dap-at digunakan misalnya dengan strategi komunikasi penghindaran, strategi komunikasi pengganti, dan strategi komunikasi meminta bantuan.
#When someone gets problems in communication, she
or he utilizes certain strategies. Those are, for example, avoidance, alternative, and appeal for help strategies.#
(Diglossia-RAl01)
Excerpt 1 indicates that an appeal to salience (i.e., essential), from the entity the provision of comprehensible input, was powered by the number of citations. The next sentence also indicates the importance of the proposed topic (i.e., gestures): the experiential meanings around researchers (i.e., several prior studies have shown...). Similar to Excerpt 2, the authors from English FL also showed an invoked attitude by referring to the previous study (Wihastyanang et al., 2020) that teacher feedback is essential and worth employing. It indicates that making reference to previous researchers' claims may increase the authors' confidence in showing the importance of their proposed research. It also makes the claims more appealing and convincing. Meanwhile, the au-
Table 3
Chi-Square Test Result
Chi-Square Tests
Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square 44.488a 6 .000
Likelihood Ratio 53.309 6 .000
Linear-by-Linear Association .246 1 .620
N of Valid Cases 431
Appeals * Groups Cross-Tabulation
Groups Total
Eng-L1 Eng-FL Indo-L1
Count 52a 57a, b 93 b 202
Appeal to Salient Expected Count % within Appeals 64.2 25.7% 57.2 28.2% 80.6 46.0% 202.0 100.0%
Adjusted Residual -2.53 -.04 2.44
Count 22a 18a 4b 44
Appeal to Magnitude Expected Count % within Appeals 14.0 50.0% 12.5 40.9% 17.6 9.1% 44.0 100.0%
Appeals Adjusted Residual 2.74 1.96 -4.41
Count 18a 15a 2b 35
Appeal to Topicality Expected Count % within Appeals 11.1 51.4% 9.9 42.9% 14.0 5.7% 35.0 100.0%
Adjusted Residual 2.60 1.99 -4.31
Count 45a, b 32b 73a 150
Appeal to Problematicity Expected Count % within Appeals 47.7 30.0% 42.5 21.3% 59.9 48.7% 150.0 100.0%
Adjusted Residual -.58 -2.35 2.71
Count 137 122 172 431
Total Expected Count 137.0 122.0 172.0 431.0
% within Appeals 31.8% 28.3% 39.9% 100.0%
thors in the Indonesian L1 group preferred to state the importance of the strategy of avoidance, alternative, and appeal for help by making reference to real-world situation to show that the strategies can solve problems in communication.
Appeal to Magnitude
Abdi and Sadeghi (2018) claim that this strategy can be detected when authors indicate the relatively large number of studies related to the topics being discussed, such as indicating the popularity of the topic over a long time. Wang and Yang (2015) summarize the linguistic features authors
use in the appeal to magnitude, for example, phrases denoting the amount of research (i.e., a sizable body of...), attitudi-nal expression leading to increasing popularity of topics (i.e., burgeoning interest, indisputable worldwide popularity), or an adverb of frequency (i.e., .is most frequently used.).
Excerpt 4
In academic contexts where second language (L2) writing is involved, machine translation (MT) through PCs, mobile phones, and the web is a widely used
source of reference during writing.
(Sys-RAI-07)
Table 4
Orientation to Research/Real-World Entities across the Three Groups
English L1 English L2 Indonesian L1
No Promotional Strategies in Claiming Centrality Research Real World World Research World Real World Research Real World World
F (%) F (%) F (%) F (%) F (%) F (%)
1 The appeal to salience 24 (42.30) 28 (53.84) 36 (63.15) 21 (36.84) 19 (20.43) 74 (79.56)
2 The appeal to magnitude 12 (54.54) 10 (45.45) 8 (44.44) 10 (55.55) 0 (0) 4 (100)
3 The appeal to topicality 12 (66.66) 6 (33.33) 8 (53.33) 7 (46.66) 1 (50) 1 (50)
4 The appeal to problematicity 28 (62.22) 17 (37.77) 10 (31.25) 22 (68.75) 8 (10.95) 65 (89.04)
Total 79 (56.42) 61 (43.57) 62 (50.81) 60 (49.18) 28 (16.27) 144 (83.72)
Figure 2
Research World and Real-World Orientation in Each Group
English Ll Group English FL Group Indonesian L1 Group
■ Orientation to Research World ■ Orientation to Real World
Excerpt 5
Necessarily, there have been many investigations showing limited impacts of WCF on students' learning.
(SiELE-RAI-002)
Excerpt 6
TPACK studies have been conducted in various countries. In Asia, the results of TPACK studies have been from a number of countries such as Vietnam, Singapore, China, Turkey, and Malaysia. Many of the studies involved pre-service teachers (e.g., Graham et al., 2012; Pamuk, 2011), followed by in-service teachers (e.g., Chai et al., 2013; Guerrero, 2010),...
(SiELE 07)
Excerpt 7
Penelitian tentang penyangga dalam proses pembelaja-ran banyak dikaji dari tipe tipe penyangga yang digu-nakan oleh guru dan eksperimentasi dampak pengu-naan penyangga terhadap hasil belajar siswa.
#Research on scaffolding in the learning process is widely investigated from the types of scaffolding used by teachers and is experimented with to see its effect on students' learning outcomes.#
(LingDi-RAI05)
Based on excerpt 4, promotion using the appeal to magnitude can be identified when the authors use a premodifier denoting attitudinal expression leading to increasing popularity of a topic (i.e., widely used source of reference). The aim is to draw readers' attention to the issue of machine translation. Another way of using the appeal to magnitude is also found in this study when the authors promote their research topics (i.e., WCF on students' learning, TPACK, scaffolding) using phrases denoting the extensive amount of research, such as widely investigated, many of the studies, many investigations, as seen in excerpt 5, 6, and 7.
Another important piece of information from the data in this study is that authors in the English L1 and English FL groups tended to use adverbs indicating the prevalence of a phenomenon (e.g., widely, largely, mostly, frequently, excessively, extensively, broadly, globally). Invoking attitudes by grading experiential meanings in terms of the amount of research (e.g., large-scale designs, large-scale data, a large amount of., a large Germany-wide representative sample of immigrants, many) and scope (e.g., the widespread use of MT, extensive line of research, the global position of.) were also found in English L1 corpus. In contrast, Indonesian L1 rarely used such linguistic markers indicating the popularity or prevalence of their research topics.
Appeal to Topicality
This strategy refers to how authors inform the readers that their topics are current. Wang and Yang (2015) state that it involves the way in which authors emphasize the novelty of their research topics by using adverbs (e.g., recently), phrases (e.g., recent thinking), and verbs (e.g., has started...), in order to indicate the newness or recency of their research topics. In this study, the strategy was also found in the three corpora. The realization of the strategy can be seen below:
Excerpt 7
Early MT studies were conducted primarily within the context of translation studies and often viewed MT as a source of errors (Belam, 2003; Kliffer, 2005; Ni~no, 2008), specifically lexico-grammatical errors that must be corrected through post-editing. However, with the widespread use of MT for writing in a foreign or second language, studies have been conducted recently to highlight its significance in L2 writing.
(Sys-RAl-07)
Excerpt 8
As the demand for providing good models of academic and scientific texts keeps increasing for publication, the subject (move analysis) has been getting a considerable amount of attention for the past few years (Mare-fat & Mohammadzadeh, 2013).
(lJAL-RAl-006)
Excerpt 9
Pendidikan di era sekarang ini merupakan permasa-lahan yang sangat menarik didiskusikan pada banyak forum, dari forum formal maupun nonformal; mulai dari kebijakan, sistem, sampai sumber daya tenaga pendidiknya.
#Education in this era is a very interesting issue to be discussed in many forums, from formal and non-formal forums; ranging from policies, and systems, to the resources of the educators.#
(Diglossia, RA104)
In the excerpts above, the research topic concerned is first promoted by indicating the research roadmap related to the topic. In order to emphasize the newness of the topic (i.e., Machine Translation is abbreviated to MT), the authors used a temporal adverbial (i.e., recently). Another temporal adverbial, i.e., currently, was also found in both groups (English L1 and FL) to indicate the urgency of the topic in the recent situation. Also, the appeal to topicality concerning entities in the research world is shown in Excerpt 8. Here the authors emphasized the sustainability of the topic, as indicated by the present perfect progressive used. Moreover, the word few in the phrase past few years can also indicate that the research topic is not outdated and still has contributions in this current situation. On the other hand, the recency of the topic can still be invoked by describing it as a living field
(Wang & Yang, 2015), as it is shown in Excerpt 9 that the authors used a circumstance time indicating current condition (i.e., di era sekarang ini-in this era) to describe the current situation related to the topic.
Appeal to Problematicity
This type of appeal emphasizes how authors claim their proposed topics as challenging topics. Authors can promote the topic by showing its problems, challenges, conflicts, or difficulties. They can use words to indicate the use of the strategy (e.g., challenge(s), limitation(s), problem(s), controversies, etc.) (Wang & Yang, 2015).
Excerpt 10
A mismatch between the linguistic knowledge base and opportunities for language use is understood to be problematic for L2 development. Specifically, opportunities for language use that draw on a limited linguistic knowledge base likely lead to limited L2 development (DeKeyser 1997, 2017). To date, however, the role of prior linguistic knowledge in understanding the nature and extent of linguistic development during SA is not well understood.
(AL-RA1-6)
Excerpt 11
Indonesian teachers are often encountered with a dilemma in carrying out duties. On the one hand they have to provide students with adequate support
to learning within a formal education setting; on the other hand, they are faced with contextual problems as the impacts of the education system.
(1JAL-RA1-003)
Excerpt 12
Salah satu faktor yang dapat memengaruhi kendala tersebut adalah mothertongue interference. Hal ini ses-uai dengan yang diungkapkan Ellis (1997:51) bahwa ba-hasa ibu sebagai bahasa pertama dapat menyebabkan terganggunya pemerolehan bahasa kedua.
#One of the factors contributing to the difficulties is mother tongue interference. This is in line with what Ellis (1997: 51) stated that the mother tongue as a first language can disrupt second language acquisition. #
(LingDid, RA104)
The three excerpts above illustrate that the authors in the three corpora agreed to raise the problems to show the appeal to problematicity. They used words or phrases indicating problems (i.e., dilemma, problematic, limited, not well understood, difficulties, disrupt). As shown in excerpts 10 and 12, the authors began with the controversial issue related to their proposed topics. Then, they referred to what has been claimed in the previous research, in order to strengthen their arguments. To make it more problematic, we may raise another issue, as shown in Excerpt 10, where in the
third sentence the authors stated another controversial opinion. Meanwhile, the authors in excerpt 11 pointed out the problematic situation made with reference to entities in the real world.
DISCUSSION
Our investigation was motivated by the study conducted by Abdi and Sadeghi (2018) and Wang and Yang (2015). Wang and Yang (2015) considered Swales' (1990) conceptualization of appeals and Lindeberg's (2004) elaboration of appeals, in order to investigate the types of appeals in the introductory sections of AL RAIs. They identified four types of appeals used by the authors in the discipline, namely appeal to salience, to magnitude, to problematicity, and topicality. A few years later, Abdi and Sadeghi (2018) compared the appeals used by English L1 and L2 in AL RAIs. Our study adds another group for comparison with the two groups, namely, Indonesian L1, assuming that Indonesian authors might be influenced by their first language when they write the introductions in English, particularly in claiming centrality step. Therefore, we compare the use of appeals used by English L1, English FL, and Indonesian L1 authors and discuss argu-mentatively the logical reasons why the underuse or overuse of appeals happens as Indonesian authors promote their topics in claiming centrality in English.
Based on this study, we found that authors from the three corpora used four types of appeals to promote their topics. Although this finding corroborates those of the previous researchers (i.e., Abdi & Sadeghi, 2018; Wang & Yang, 2015), some differences in using each appeal between this present study and the previous ones were found. In this study, English L1 authors used the appeal to salience most often. However, the study conducted by Wang and Yang (2015) found that the appeal magnitude occurred in a vast majority. This might be due to the trend of research from 2019-2022 in which the use of technologies during the pandemic era influenced scholars to examine, investigate, and observe the implementations of technologies in language learning. Consequently, authors need to show the importance and usefulness of their proposed topics to convince their audiences at that moment in time. This might also differ in promoting topics if Covid-19 becomes endemic.
Moreover, our finding confirms the findings of Abdi & Sadeghi (2018) that the most frequently used type of appeal in AL RAIs written by native (English L1) and non-native English (English L2) is the appeal to salience, followed by the appeal to problematicity, magnitude, and topicality. Surprisingly, the order of the frequency of using the appeals is also similar to what has been found in the Indonesian L1 group. Authors in the Indonesian L1 group also appear to believe that persuading readers by showing the importance of the
topics is a necessary to attract readers' attention. They are also more likely to claim the salience of their research topics concerning the real world, and it is similar to the group of English L1. However, the difference between the orientation to the research world and the real world in the Indonesian L1 group is too significant. It differs from English L1 group where the difference between real-world and research-world orientation is insignificant. The overwhelming use of the appeal in the Indonesian L1 group indicates that the authors still primarily express inscribed attitudes, rather than promote the usefulness of the topics argumentative-ly by turning entities into the research world. On the other hand, in the English FL group, it is the other way around. The author tended more to use the appeal to salience with the orientation to research the world. Therefore, although practitioner interests are considered (Wang & Yang, 2015), authors need to give strong arguments, based on supporting evidence from previous studies, concerning the advantages of research to solve problems in a real-world context. It should be noted that the difference between the orientation to real-world and research world while using the appeal should not too significant.
The appeal to problematicity was found as the second-highest type of appeal used by the three groups. In the introduction section, authors may introduce problems before proposing solutions to solving them (Arianto et al., 2021; Arianto & Basthomi, 2021; Nabila et al., 2022). They can also highlight the limitations of previous studies as problems which become the signal of gaps which can be proposed for further studies (Chen & Li, 2019). In the context of applied linguistics, particularly in language learning, problematicity might be a foundation to provoke readers that there are still some problems that need to be solved. The problems or cases tend to be specific to those which authors have encountered in particular situations (Mirahayuni, 2002) The research results are expected to give contributions to the advancement of theories leading to resolving other practitioners' problems. However, it should be noted that the problems shown should also be representative of other researchers' problems. Audiences who read the statements containing the appeal will be provoked to admit the authors' claims.
Moreover, the second least common type of appeal was that of topicality, which aims to show the recency or currency of the topics discussed in the introductions. Disciplinarily speaking, the AL authors in all three groups of corpora considered the use of the appeal. The appeal was made with reference to entities in both research and real worlds, and the authors are more likely to claim their research areas in the research world. This finding corroborates the previous study (i.e., Wang & Yang, 2015). However, in the Indonesian L1 group, only a minority of authors used the appeal (twice, 50% in the research world and 50% in the real world). Some
factors might influence the low number of occurrences of the appeal. First, the lack of references might be a factor as to why the authors in the group used the appeal inadequately. Furthermore, the editorial team of national journals might be highly provoked to see the urgency of the research. This is related to the way in which authors state the importance of the topics and problems observed in certain specific situations. However, to the best of our knowledge, the marketization of research should be seen through the ways in which the authors persuade readers not only about the importance or urgency of the topics but also about the newness of the topics. International journal editors may also see the currency of the article, if the authors are able to show the novelty of a phenomenon. Consequently, the concern of appealing to topicality must be more directed towards a research world where readers will highlight the currency of a topic by identifying the lists of current studies shown in the introductions. Therefore, authors need to contextualize their issues by synthesizing the current studies or emerging research trends worldwide, in order to get their research published internationally, and achieve broader readability.
Magnitude is considered the least appeal used by the three groups. Authors from English FL and Indonesian L1 were more likely to claim magnitude with reference to the real world. On the other hand, in the English L1 group, the entity is more associated to the research world. Our findings, related to the distribution of the appeal to magnitude in the English L1 group, is relatively similar to Wang and Yang (2015). We agree that authors are expected to show evidence by listing several previous studies, if they need to state that many studies have been conducted., a large amount of studies., a plentiful of research. , or other phrases denoting the abundance of the previous related research. Moreover, authors who introduce the recency of research topics, the newness of phenomena, or conflicts related to topics, are also expected to associate their claims with the research world more than with the real world. We cannot ensure that an issue or a topic is new or it can give a novel contribution without reviewing the contextualization of the topic in the current research situation. Furthermore, we cannot mention the problems, if the claims of previous researchers support the problems. As suggested in previous studies (Arianto et al., 2021; Arianto & Basthomi, 2021), when establishing a territory, authors have to study the research, and then establish the problems from research rather than the real world This will make theoretical contributions which automatically contribute to practitioners.
Our findings also indicate that in the English FL and Indonesian L1 groups, the authors are more likely to use the appeal to magnitude and problematicity with reference to the real world. If real-world orientation is massively shown in move 1, it will undoubtedly affect the authors' difficulties in positioning their research gaps in move 2 (establishing a niche) (Arianto et al., 2021; Hamp-Lyons & Heasley, 2009; Kanok-
silapatham, 2005). A further influential socio-cultural factor may the infrequency of references to the research world, particularly in claiming the popularity, prevalence, difficulties, and challenges of a research topic or phenomenon. Establishing a territory, particularly in a centrality claim step, constitutes a fundamental step where the authors provide sufficient information to meet the expectation of their discourse communities. They can refer to previous literature or studies playing key role in strengthening their arguments and occupying a large amount of information in the introduction (Xiao et al., 2022; Saricaoglu, 2021). Indonesian authors need to acknowledge that the core of justifying potential research is how they claim their research topics and contextualize their topics to the current situations made from referring to the current studies (research world). In other words, sharing schemata that conventionally occurs in Indonesian RAIs (Safnil, 2003) should include references. Accordingly, when Indonesian authors or other non-native English authors promote their research topics in English RAIs, particularly in the field of AL, they have to follow the standards of marketization of research topics using promotional strategies (Wang & Yang, 2015). They need to know that the marketization of research in claiming centrality is dissimilar to what they do in their mother language RAIs .
CONCLUSION
This study explored authors' promotional strategies used by English L1, English FL, and Indonesian L1 authors. Our study identified four major types of appeals: salience, magnitude, topicality, and problematicity. These are strategies applied by the three groups of authors in varied ways relating the entities to research and real worlds. The three groups of authors integrated the four strategies, in order to increase the persuasive promotion of their research topics and make their topics appealing. The findings also indicate that although the three groups share similarities in the order of using strategies from the most to the least, they displayed dissimilarities in using the appeals in terms of frequency of occurrences of referencing the research world and the real world. English FL authors seem to be influenced by the cultural norms of the Indonesian language. They used the appeal to magnitude and problematicity made with reference to entities in the real world more than in the research world, and this is similar to the Indonesian L1 group in which the entities in the real world were more preferably used in terms of applying the two appeals.
This study is not without limitations. Since this study focused on comparing the application of appeals strategically and linguistically in applied linguistic RAIs only, we suggest that further study investigates appeals in the claiming centrality step in RAIs across disciplines. This will give a more comprehensive description among scientists in each discipline. Furthermore, it will provide insightful information, if oth-
er studies focus on how the cultural norms of the mother tongue language influence the use of appeals in English RAIs qualitatively. In other words, other researchers can triangulate their data. For example,, after examining the use of appeals by calculating the number of occurrences of the strategies, they can use qualitative methods of data collection, such as using (semi-) structured interviews. As a result, they can identify why certain appeals are prominently used to promote research topics using their mother language.
Furthermore, this study has pedagogical implications. The need to acquire knowledge about the rhetorical structure of RAI, particularly in understanding how appeals are constructed in the step of claiming centrality, is critically important for students, particularly those who are studying academic writing courses. EFL teachers may consider integrating the findings of this study into their teaching materials, especially with regard to writing research articles for international publications. They should also discuss the use of appeals and show how each appeal is constructed with reference to entities in either the research world or the real world.
FUNDING
The authors would like to thank Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Masyarakat Universitas Negeri Padang for funding this work with contract number 725/UN35.13/ LT/2022.
DECLARATION OF COMPETITING INTEREST
None declared.
AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTION
M. Affandi Arianto: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Resources, Supervision, Visualization, Writing - original draft, Writing - review & editing.
Maulluddul Haq: Methodology, Validation, Writing - review & editing.
Jufrizal: Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Writing - review & editing.
REFERENCES
Abdi, J., & Sadeghi, K. (2018). Promotion through claiming centrality in L1 and L2 English research article introductions. International Journal of English Studies, 18(1), 53-70. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2018/1/297381
Afross, E., Schryer, C. F. (2009). Promotional (meta)discourse in research articles in language and literary studies. English for Specific Purposes, 28(1), 58-68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2008.09.001
Afshar, H, S, Doosti, M, & Movassagh, H. 2018. A genre analysis of the introduction section of applied linguistic and chemistry research articles. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21 (1), 163-214.
Alghazo, S. M., Al Salem, M. N., & Alrashdan, I. (2021a). Stance and engagement in English and Arabic research article abstracts. System, 103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102681
Alghazo, S. M., Al Salem, M. N., Alrashdan, I., & Rabab'ah, G. (2021b). Grammatical devices of stance in written academic English. Heliyon, 7(11), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016Zj.heliyon.2021 .e08463
Alotaibi, H. S., & Arabi, H. (2020). Taking authorial stance in Arabic research articles introductions. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 20(2), 41-62. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes2000.20.2.2
Al-Zubeiry, H. Y. A., & Assaggaf, H. T. (2023). Stance-marking of interaction in research articles written by non-native speakers of English: An analytical study. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(1), 235-250. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele. v10i1.26648
Arianto, M. A., & Basthomi, Y. (2021). The authors' research gap strategies in ELT research article introductions: Does Scopus journal quartile matter? Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17(4), 1743-1759. https://doi.org/10.52462/jlls.127
Arianto, M. A., Saukah, A., Basthomi, Y., & Wulyani, A. N. (2021). Previous studies have several limitations ...: Indonesian doctoral students', Indonesian academics', and international authors' research gap strategies in ELT research article abstracts and introductions. Journal of Language and Education, 7(2), 25-44. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2021.11735
Arsyad, S., & Wardhana, D. E. C. (2023). Marketing journal articles: How Indonesian scholars in English education use mar-ketization strategy in their article introductions. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Educational Science and Teacher Profession (ICETeP 2021), 680, 2352-5398. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-494069-19-0_4
Behnam, B., & Nikoukhesal, A. (2017). A contrastive study of move structure in the introduction section of physical versus social sciences research articles in English. The Asian ESP Journal, 13(2), 180-211.
Chen, X., & Li, M. (2019). Chinese learner writers' niche establishment in the Literature Review chapter of theses: A diachronic perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 39, 48-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2019.03.006
Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjeap.2012.11.002
Deveci, T. (2020). The introduction section of research articles in English and Turkish: The case of educational sciences - a preliminary study. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 119-140. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.710233
Fajri, M. S. A., Kirana, A. W., & Putri, C. I. K. (2020). Lexical bundles of L1 and L2 English professional scholars: A contras-tive corpus-driven study on applied linguistics research articles. Journal of Language and Education, 6(4), 76-89. https://doi. org/10.17323/jle.2020.11271
Farnia, M., & Barati, S. (2017). Writing introduction sectionsvof research articles in applied linguistics: Cross-linguistics study of native and non-native writers. 1ndonesianJournal of Applied Lingustics, 7(2), 486-494. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v7i2.8357
Gao, S., & Pramoolsook, I. (2023). A cross-cultural move analysis of electronic engineering research article introductions: The case of Chinese, Thai, and native English scholarly writers. Ampersand, 10, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2022.100106
Hamp-Lyons, L., & Heasley, B. (2009). Study writing, A course in writing skills for academic purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Harwood, N. (2005). 'We do not seem to Have a theory ... The theory I present here attempts to fill this gap': Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics, 26(3), 343-375. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ami012
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. Palgrave Macmillan.
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 269-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
Klimova, K. (2017). Writing research article introduction in Italian. XLinguae, 10(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.18355/ XL.2017.10.01.06
Liao, J. (2020). Metadiscourse, cohesion, and engagement in L2 written discourse. Languages, 5(25), 1-22. https://doi. org/10.3390/languages5020025
Lim, J. M.-H. (2012). How do writers establish research niches? A genre-based investigation into management researchers' rhetorical steps and linguistic mechanisms. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 229-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jeap.2012.05.002
Lindeberg, A.-C. (2004). Promotion and Politeness: Conflicting Scholarly Rhetoric in Three Disciplines. ABO Academy University Press.
Martin, J. R., & Rose, D. (2007). Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.). Continuum.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mirahayuni, N. K. (2002). Investigating generic structure of English research articles: Writing strategy differences between English and Indonesian writers. TEFL1N Journal, 13(1), 22-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v13i1/22-57
Msuya, E. A. (2020). Analysis of writing styles of research article introductions in EFL academic context: A case of University of Dar Es Salaam journal authors. Athens Journal of Philology, 7(4), 257-272. https://doi.org/10.30958/ajp.7-4-2
Muangsamai, P. (2018). Analysis of moves, rhetorical patterns and linguistic features in New Scientist articles. Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences, 39(2), 236-243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.kjss.2018.03.006
Nabilla, S., Kurniawan, E., & Gunawan, W. (2020). Rhetorical move structure of soft and hard science research article introductions by novice Indonesian authors. Jurnal Bahasa, Sastra, Seni, dan Pengajarannya, 49(2), 135-151. https://dx.doi. org/10.17977/um015v49i22021p135
Rochma, A. F., Triastuti, A., & Ashadi. (2020). Rhetorical styles of Introduction in English language teaching (ELT) research articles. 1ndonesianJournal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 304-314. https://doi.org/10.17509/ijal.v10i2.28593
Saricaoglu, A., Bilki, Z., & Plakans, L. (2021). Syntactic complexity in learner-generated research paper introductions: Rhetorical functions and level of move/step realization. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 53, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jeap.2021.101037
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genre: Exploration and applications. Cambridge University Press.
Wang, W & Yang, C. (2015). Claiming centrality as promotion in applied linguistics research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 162-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/jjeap.2015.05.002
Yang, M. (2022). Connecting the functions of lexical bundles and moves in published research articles: The case of developmental and educational psychology. NordicJournal of English Studies 21(1), 141-189. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.743
Xiao, W., Liu, J., & Li, L. (2022). How is information content distributed in RA introductions across disciplines? An entropybased approach. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 10(1), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.10.01.04
Zainuddin, S. Z. & Shaari, A. H. (2017). Contextual layers in the establishment of research niche in doctoral thesis introductions by Malaysian writers. GEMA Online: Journal of Language Studies, 17(2), 146-162. http://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2017-1702-09
