“WE ARGUE FOR NEW KNOWLEDGE”: ARGUMENT STYLES IN DISCUSSIONS OF SCOPUS-INDEXED ELT JOURNALS
Main Article Content
Abstract
Numerous studies over the past decade examined rhetorical structure and linguistic features of research articles (RAs); however, the investigation of writers’ arguments in research article discussions (RADs) in reputable international journals in specific disciplines remains scarce. This present study aims to investigate argument styles (AS) and the linguistic clues that characterise the arguments in RADs of English Language Teaching (ELT) Scopus-indexed journals. 115 RADs were collected purposively from twelve ELT journals and analysed using the adapted framework of Arsyad et al. (2020). The results revealed that new knowledge claims in RADs were constructed with strong and complete arguments, where interpreting the findings (AS-1) was obligatory, while contrasting the findings with previous research (AS-6) was optional. Other argument styles, such as elaborating (AS-2), illustrating (AS-3), stating the reasons for the findings (AS-4), comparing with previous studies (AS-5), and stating the contribution of the findings (AS-7) were very commonly used by the writers. Furthermore, each argument was characterised by distinct linguistic realisations that demonstrated the writers’ expertise in academic writing. These findings contribute to the academic writing instruction in the English for Academic context in that novice writers can emulate the writing style of the RAD in reputable international ELT journals.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Al-Shujairi, Y. B. J. (2021). Review of the discussion section of research articles: Rhetorical structure and move. LSP International Journal, 8(2), 9-25. https://doi.org/10.11113/lspi.v8.17099
Alsowat, H. H. (2020). Evidence-based practices of English language teaching: A meta-analysis of meta-Analyses. English Language Teaching, 13(11), 75-93. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v13n11p75
Amnuai, W. (2025). A comparison of citations in the discussion sections of English research articles written by international and Thai writers. MEXTESOL Journal, 49(2), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.61871/mj.v49n2-1
Arizavi, S., Jalilifar, A., & Riazi, A. M. (2023). Analysis of argumentation in the discussion sections of published articles in ESP journal: A diachronic corpus‑based approach. Argumentation, 37(1), 119-146. https://doi.org/0.1007/s10503-022-09588-0
Arizavi, S., Jalilifar, A., & Riazi, A. M. (2025). Argument schemes and soundness/strength in published research article discussion sections: A chronological study. Journal of Argumentation in Context, 14(1), 61-97. https://doi.org/10.1075/jaic.23004.ari
Arsyad, S., Nur, S., Nasihin, A., Syahrial, & Adnan, Z. (2021). Writing in a foreign language: The rhetorical and argument styles in research article drafts by nonnative speakers of English in linguistics and language education. International Journal of Language Education, 5(3), 135-151. https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v5i3.19506
Arsyad, S., Purwo, B. K., & Adnan, Z. (2020). The argument style in research article discussions to support research findings in language studies. Studies in English Language and Education, 7(2), 290-307. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v7i2.16626
Arsyad, S., Syahrial, S., & Hakim, H. (2021). Citing others’ works in academic texts: How non-native writers of English across-disciplines use reporting verbs and reporting signals in their research article introductions. Jurnal Arbitrer, 8(1), 59-71. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.8.1.59-71.2021
Arsyad, S., Widiarti, V., & Wulandari, M. F. (2021). Argument strategies and linguistic realizations of the discussion sections in local, national, and international journal articles in English education by Indonesian authors: How do they differ and/or Resemble? ENGLISH FRANCA : Academic Journal of English Language and Education, 5(1), 111-130. https://doi.org/10.29240/ef.v5i1.2040
Ash’ari, N., Barabadi, E., & Shirvan, M. E. (2023). The rhetorical organization of discussions sections of qualitative research articles in Applied Linguistics and the use of meta-discourse markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, Article 101310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101310
Basturkmen, H. (2012). Genre-based investigation of the discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004
Beck, J., & Stolterman, E. (2016). Examining the types of knowledge claims made in design research. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2(3), 199-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2017.02.001
Bhatia, V. K. (2025). Language for specific (professional) purposes: A critical genre analysis inspired view. Iberica, 2025(50), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.50.5
Biber, D. (1993). Representativeness in corpus design. Literary and Linguistic Computing, 8(4), 243-257. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1093/llc/8.4.243
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Reppen, R. (1998). Corpus linguistics: Investigating language structure and use. Cambridge University Press.
Brown, J. D. (1996). Testing in language programs. Practice Hall Regents.
Casal, J. E., Lu, X., Qiu, X., Wang, Y., & Zhang, G. (2021). Syntactic Complexity across academic research article part-genres: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 52, Article 100996. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100996
Chien, S.-C., & Li, W.-Y. (2022). Problems of writing the doctoral dissertation discussion section: Advisors’ and their doctoral students’ perspectives from natural and applied sciences and social sciences. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 60, Article 101183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101183
Deng, L., Cheng, Y., & Gao, X. (2024). Promotional strategies in English and Chinese research article introduction and discussion/conclusion sections: A cross-cultural study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 68, Article 101344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101344
Dobakhti, L. (2016). A genre analysis of discussion sections of qualitative research articles in applied linguistics. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(7), 1383-1389. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0607.08
Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis for ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in Written Text Analysis (pp. 219-228). Routledge.
Esfandiari, R., & Ahmadi, M. (2024). Syntactic complexity in novice and expert L2 academic writing: The role of syntactic Elaboration and Diversity. Scientific Quarterly Journal of Language Horizons, Alzahra University, 8(1), 115-138. https://doi.org/10.22051/lghor.2023.43081.1780
Farr, F. (2026). Corpus linguistics and language teacher education. International Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 11, 624-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95504-1.01327-2
Flowerdew, J. (2021). Genre in the classroom: A linguistic approach. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410604262-8
Flowerdew, J., & Wan, A. (2010). The linguistic and the contextual in applied genre analysis: The case of the company audit report. English for Specific Purposes, 29(2), 78-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.07.001
Halliday, M. (1994). An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. Edward Arnold.
Hao, J., Jin, Q., & Gao, Y. (2026). Knowledge construction modes in humanities and social sciences: A cross-disciplinary analysis through linguistic complexity lens. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 79, Article 101600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2025.101600
Hardiah, M., Arsyad, S., & Yunita, W. (2026). Rhetorical moves in research article discussions: Does the quartile value of a journal matter? Jurnal Arbitrer, 13(2), 229-242. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.13.2.229-242.2026
Hernandez, H. P., & Genuino, C. F. (2022). Compression and implicitness through dependent phrases in academic ESL writing by Filipino researchers across disciplines. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 15(2), 546-577. https://so04.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/LEARN/article/view/259940
Hilmi, A. Z., Toyyibah, & Afiifi, N. (2021). A genre analysis on the discussion section of quantitative and qualitative research articles in ELT and Linguistics. JEELS (Journal of English Education and Linguistics Studies, 8(2), 341-369. https://doi.org/10.30762/jeels.v8i2.3264
Holmberg, K., & Vainio, J. (2018). Why do some research articles receive more online attention and higher altmetrics? Reasons for online success according to the authors. Scientometrics, 116(1), 435-447. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2710-1
Hyland, K. (2003). Second language writing. Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K., & Guinda, C. S. (2012). Stance and voice in written academic genres. Palgrave Macmillan.
Jarunthawatchai, O. C., Jarunthawatchai, W., & Gilbert, L. (2025). Connecting reading and writing in foreign language instruction: A process-genre approach. LEARN Journal: Language Education and Acquisition Research Network, 18(2), 493-518. https://doi.org/10.70730/SOGP3675
Kankam, P. K., Acheampong, L. D., & Dei, D. G. J. (2024). Dissemination of scientific information through open access by research scientists in a developing country. Heliyon, 10(7), Article e28605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e28605
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24(3), 269-292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.08.003
Liu, Y., & Buckingham, L. (2018). The schematic structure of discussion sections in applied linguistics and the distribution of metadiscourse markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.04.002
Ming, C., & Wenbin, W. (2024). “Contrary to findings from previous studies …”: Paradigmatic and ethnolinguistic influences on disagreement negotiation in research article discussions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 74, Article 101456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2024.101456
Moyetta, D. (2016). The discussion section of English and Spanish research articles in psychology: A contrastive study. ESP Today, 4(1), 87-106. https://esptodayjournal.org/pdf/current_issue/3.6.2016/DANIELAMOYETTA-full%20text.pdf.
Noor, N. A. M., Mahamod, Z., & Nasri, N. M. (2025). Systematic review of teaching methods in language education: trends and innovation. International Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 14(3), 2031-2041. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijere.v14i3.31774
Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for Specific Purposes, 16(2), 119-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)85388-4
Parkinson, J. (2011). The discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for Specific Purposes, 30(3), 164-175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.11.001
Phoocharoensil, S. (2021). Semantic prosody and collocation: A corpus study of the near-synonyms persist and persevere. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 240–258. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.911269
Samanhudi, U. (2020). New knowledge claims in discussions in applied linguistics research articles: A contrastive investigation of Indonesian and International journals [Doctoral Dissertation, Queen’s University Belfast]. Queen's University Research Portal. https://pure.qub.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/new-knowledge-claims-in-discussions-in-applied-linguistics-resear/
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.
Thanajirawat, Z., & Chuea-Nongthon, C. (2022). Move and text analysis of the discussion section in humanities and social sciences research articles. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(1), 217-231. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.911531
Tikhonova, E. V., Kosycheva, M. A., & Golechkova, T. Y. (2025). Scoping review rhetorical structure of discussion section: Genre specifics and principles of modeling. Research Result. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 80-117. https://doi.org/10.18413/2313-8912-2025-11-2-0-4
Ulya, S. (2022). Rhetorical moves variations of research article discussion section published in reputable journals. Premise: Journal of English Education, 11(3), Article 632. https://doi.org/10.24127/pj.v11i3.5615
Walková, M., & Bradford, J. (2022). Constructing an argument in academic writing across disciplines. ESP Today, 10(1), 22-42. https://doi.org/10.18485/ESPTODAY.2022.10.1.2
Wallwork, A. (2022). Writing an academic paper in English: Intermediate level. Springer.
Wang, M., & Deng, L. (2023). Modeling claim - evidence - stance link in the discussion section of research genres: A comparative case study of expert and student writers in applied linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and Translation, 9(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijalt.20230901.11
Wardhana, D. E. C., & Hindarto, K. S. (2022). Problems in writing a qualified journal article publishing an article in a reputable international journal: What makes it a mission impossible? (Especially at the result and discussion). Education Quarterly Reviews, 5(1), 35-39. https://doi.org/10.31014/aior.1993.05.02.465
Warsidi, W., & Maniam, V. (2024). Academic conflicts in research article discussions: The case of Indonesian and Malaysian authors. Issues in Language Studies, 13(2), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.33736/ils.5865.2024
Wu, J., & Pan, F. (2023). Changing patterns of the grammatical stance devices in medical research articles (1970–2020). Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, Article 101305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101305
Yasuda, S. (2023). What does it mean to construct an argument in academic writing? A synthesis of English for general academic purposes and English for specific academic perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 66, Article 101307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101307
Yue, C. (2024). We make viewpoints in different ways: the use of stance adverbials across academic levels and disciplines. Cogent Arts and Humanities, 11(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2024.2435169
Ziaeian, E., & Golparvar, S. E. (2022). Fine-grained measures of syntactic complexity in the discussion section of research articles: The effect of discipline and language background. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 57, Article 101116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2022.101116
Zuo, J., & Mahfoodh, O. H. A. (2026). Rhetorical organization of Discussion sections across research articles, master’s theses, and doctoral dissertations: A move-based analysis of frequency, sequencing, and embedding. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 82, Article 101720. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2026.101720