A comparative study of lexical bundles across paradigms and disciplines

Corpora ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-128
Author(s):  
Feng Cao
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Noun Phrase ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Functional Variation ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Data Analyses ◽  
Linguistic Structures

Research on lexical bundles has shed much light on disciplinary influences on the employment of these multi-word expressions in academic discourse, particularly in research articles. Little work, however, has been done on how research paradigms may impact on lexical bundles in academic discourse. This study aims to investigate the extent to which lexical bundles vary in quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods research articles across two disciplines. All four-word lexical bundles were extracted from a specially built corpus of research articles and were analysed for their linguistic structures and discourse functions. The data analyses revealed marked structural and functional variation between different research paradigms and disciplines. Across paradigms, the quantitative articles differed from the qualitative articles by employing significantly more verb phrase bundles and participant-orientated functions whereas the qualitative articles employed significantly more prepositional phrase bundles and text-orientated functions. Across disciplines, the mixed methods articles in education employed significantly more noun phrase bundles and research-orientated functions, whereas the mixed methods articles in psychology used more prepositional bundles and text-orientated functions. These paradigmatic and disciplinary differences in lexical bundles are explained by examining the underlying perceptions of knowledge and knowledge-making practices in different research paradigms and disciplines.

scholarly journals Paradigmatic influences on lexical bundles in research articles in the discipline of education

Corpora ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-263
Author(s):  
Duygu Candarli ◽  
Steven Jones
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Academic Writing ◽  
Structural Characteristics ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Quantitative And Qualitative Research ◽  
Writing Research ◽  
Novice Writers ◽  
English Academic Writing

Lexical bundles are pervasive in English academic writing; however, little scholarly attention has been paid to how quantitative and qualitative research paradigms influence the use of lexical bundles in research articles. In order to investigate this, we created two equal-size corpora of research articles in the discipline of education. We examined four-word lexical bundles in terms of their structural characteristics and discourse functions in the quantitative and qualitative research articles published in international English-medium journals. We attribute intra-disciplinary variations in the use of lexical bundles to the knowledge-making practices that are specific to quantitative and qualitative research articles. This paper provides further evidence that the research article is not a unitary construct. The results have implications for academic writing, and corpus building and design in academic discourse. One of the key implications of this study is that L2 novice writers need to take into account the influences of research paradigms on the use of lexical bundles when writing research articles for English-medium journals in the discipline of education.

scholarly journals Collaboration Patterns as a Function of Article Genre among Mixed Researchers: A Mixed Methods Bibliometric Study

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
John Jordan ◽  
Melanie Wachsmann ◽  
Susan Hoisington ◽  
Vanessa Gonzalez ◽  
Rachel Valle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Empirical Research ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Bibliometric Study ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Quantitative Phase ◽  
Research Journal ◽  
Collaboration Patterns ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Qualitative Phase

Surprisingly, scant information exists regarding the collaboration patterns of mixed methods researchers. Thus, the purpose of this mixed methods bibliometric study was to examine (a) the distribution of the number of co-authors in articles published in the flagship mixed methods research journal (i.e., Journal of Mixed Methods Research [JMMR]) as a function of article genre (Quantitative Phase); (b) the relationship between the genre of articles published in JMMR and degree of collaboration in these articles (Quantitative Phase); (c) the difference between the number of authors in empirical research articles and non-empirical research articles published in JMMR (Quantitative Phase); and (d) select leading mixed methods researchers’ collaboration experiences as a function of genre of article (Qualitative Phase). An analysis of all articles published in JMMR from 2007 (its inception) to 2015 (the latest complete year at the time that the study was conducted) revealed (a) a statistically significantly higher proportion of empirical research articles (63.2%) than non-empirical research articles (36.8%), (b) that empirical research articles were 1.4 times (95% confidence interval = 1.10, 1.78) more likely to involve multiple authors than were non-empirical research articles; and (c) that empirical research articles contained statistically significantly more authors than did non-empirical research articles. With respect to the qualitative phase, four themes (i.e., mental perception, mixed methods research, publication and research aids, and independent/group work) emerged regarding collaboration for empirical articles versus for non-empirical research articles. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Moving from Tension to Texture

2016 ◽  
pp. 28-38
Author(s):  
Preston B. Cosgrove ◽  
Peter M. Jonas
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Research Paradigm ◽  
Qualitative And Quantitative ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Puzzle Box

Much like a jigsaw puzzle box top guides one in how to connect the pieces, an individual's research paradigm operates as a conscious or subconscious influence in conducting a research project. This chapter starts by making the argument for the critical role of research paradigms before moving into a thorough investigation of the paradigmatic origins of the qualitative-quantitative “debate.” While mixed-methods research is often seen as the mediator in the dispute, the authors then articulate four broad ways in which mixed methods research addresses the paradigm divide at the heart of qualitative and quantitative research. The result is paradigmatically complex, but offers researchers flexibility as they seek to address their research question.

scholarly journals Applied Research Paradigms

2021 ◽  
pp. 197-202
Author(s):  
Jason García Portilla
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Applied Research ◽  
Objective Data ◽  
Complex Thinking ◽  
Research Paradigms ◽  
Data Treatment ◽  
Personal Paradigm

AbstractThis chapter discusses the research paradigms underpinning this study––i.e. dialectical pluralism (DP) (mixed methods research) and a complex thinking perspective. The chapter also explains the researcher’s scientific and personal paradigm biases and details some strategies utilised for objective data treatment.

scholarly journals A Methodology for Conducting Integrative Mixed Methods Research and Data Analyses

2010 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 342-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felipe González Castro ◽  
Joshua G. Kellison ◽  
Stephen J. Boyd ◽  
Albert Kopak
Keyword(s):  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Data Analyses

scholarly journals Indonesian lexical bundles in research articles: Frequency, structure, and function

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 292-303
Author(s):  
Adi Budiwiyanto ◽  
Totok Suhardijanto
Keyword(s):  
Structural Characteristics ◽  
Academic Discourse ◽  
Structure And Function ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Learning Material ◽  
Lexical Bundles ◽  
Discourse Function ◽  
Frequency Structure ◽  
And Function ◽  
Lexical Bundle

Recent studies show that lexical bundles in English are pervasively found in academic discourse. In addition, the characteristics of lexical bundles found vary and differ across registers and genres. Nevertheless, it is still interesting to carry out in languages other than English. This study aims to discover the characteristics of Indonesian lexical bundles that cover frequency, structure, and function in research articles. This study adopted a mixed-method. Identification of the lexical bundle was carried out using WordSmith 7.0 on a corpus comprising 3,125,546 words, taken from 1126 texts, and consisting of six disciplines. With a frequency threshold of 40 per million words and a minimum distribution of 5 texts, 197 lexical bundles have been obtained, consisting of three- to six-word bundles with a total occurrence of 51,813 times. In terms of structure, the incomplete structure is dominating the bundles by 78.7%, with a total frequency of occurrence 38,749 times. This research finds that the pattern of lexical bundles can be classified into five types: noun-based, prepositional-based, verb-based, adjective-based, and clause-based bundles. Lexical bundles in research articles are generally clause-based (49.2%). This indicates that Indonesian lexical bundles vary in structure. The use of clause fragments and passive verbs are the main features in this genre. In terms of the discourse function, research-oriented bundles are the functions that are commonly used, while participant-oriented bundles are the least. Each discourse function has its own structural characteristics. It is also found that one lexical bundle can have two functional categories. These findings contribute to a better understanding of the characteristics of written academic discourse. From the pedagogical point of view, the findings can be used as learning material for both native and non-native speakers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document