语言学与应用语言学学术论文英文摘要的写作How to Write an Abstract for a Research Paper in Linguistics and Applied Linguistics

中山大学 黄国文<flshgw@mail.sysu.edu.cn>

《中国外语》（双月刊）， CSSCI 来源期刊

感谢各位专家、同行过去 5 年多来对《中国外语》的大力支持！

希望专家、同行继续支持、帮助我们！ 《中国外语》宗旨：立足改革、高扬创新 www.cflo.edu.cn / flc@pub.hep.cn

感谢上海海事大学提供这次学术交流的机会！

几本参考书 黄国文、 M. Ghadessy （ 2008 ）《英语学位

论文写作教程》，高等教育出版社（普通高等教育“十一五”国家级规划教材）。

黄国文、张美芳、 M. Ghadessy （ 2006 ）《英语学术论文写作》，重庆大学出版社（普通高等教育“十一五”国家级规划教材）。

黄国文、王宾、林裕音（出版中 /2011 ）《英语专业毕业论文写作手册》，上海外语教育出版社。

Outline

1 Introduction 2 Structure of an Abstract 3 Questions on the Abstract 4 Elements of structure in an Abstract 5 The language of an Abstract 6 Summary

1 Introduction An essay may be based on what is termed as

common knowledge or the personal experiences of a student, but a research paper should draw upon a number of other primary and secondary sources of information to complete the project.

Writing a research paper is a complex and demanding task. It requires a lot of planning and preparation before the final copy is produced.

A research paper can be written on any topic/subject under the sun. The level of required research for a paper depends on many factors.

Because of its importance in academic writing, a research paper has a special form/format that has to be followed if one is to get a good grade from the instructor marking the paper or have the paper published/accepted.

Each section and sub-section should be clearly marked.

This is done by using different names/labels for the sections and sub-sections of the paper.

For example, the paper has a Method section that is further sub-divided into Data Collection and Methodology.

Experts on the subject have proposed slightly different formats for the paper but a general format may consist of Abstract, Introduction, Background, Previous Studies, Method, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, and References.

2 Structure of an Abstract An Abstract of a research paper is the first

source of information for a would-be reader. Of course the title of the research paper would

provide information about the topic of investigation but it is the Abstract that provides a bird’s eye view of the subject matter, the purpose of the study, the way the research is carried out, some important findings, the implications, and a conclusion.

The Abstract summarizes the study for people who would like to spend no more than a few minutes on the paper.

An important issue here is the time for the writing of the Abstract.

Usually it is written after the study/research is completed but this is not always the case as, for example, people send abstracts of unfinished papers to conferences they would like to participate in.

Such abstracts are not totally different from those written for finished papers; they may include less information in some parts like in the Results and Implications sections.

Because of its importance, the Abstract has acquired a very rigid structure used by most writers.

In order to find out what this structure is, we look at an Abstract of a research paper from the Journal of Asian Pacific Communication and then ask a number of questions.

Here is the title of the paper and the Abstract; the questions follow. (Numbers have been added to the sentences for ease of reference.)

George Braine, ‘From a teacher-centred to a student-centred approach: A study of peer feedback in Hong Kong writing classes’, Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 12/2, 2003.

(1) There is a common belief that, owing to the highly teacher-centred form of education, Chinese students are passive learners. (2) As a result, a student-centred approach such as process writing is believed to be difficult to implement in classes that consist mainly of Chinese students. (3) This study tested these beliefs by introducing peer feedback, the backbone of process writing, to Chinese students enrolled in university writing classes and by measuring the effectiveness of the feedback both quantitatively and qualitatively. (4) The study showed that, with proper training, Chinese students could quickly adapt to a student-centred approach, and also provide rich and useful feedback on the writing of their peers. (5) This study has promising implications for educational contexts where students are considered passive learners, teacher-centred learning is the norm, or the process approach to writing faces daunting challenges to its implementation.

(1) There is a common belief that, owing to the highly teacher-centred form of education, Chinese students are passive learners.

(2) As a result, a student-centred approach such as process writing is believed to be difficult to implement in classes that consist mainly of Chinese students.

(3) This study tested these beliefs by introducing peer feedback, the backbone of process writing, to Chinese students enrolled in university writing classes and by measuring the effectiveness of the feedback both quantitatively and qualitatively.

(4) The study showed that, with proper training, Chinese students could quickly adapt to a student-centred approach, and also provide rich and useful feedback on the writing of their peers.

(5) This study has promising implications for educational contexts where students are considered passive learners, teacher-centred learning is the norm, or the process approach to writing faces daunting challenges to its implementation.

1. What is the subject matter/area the research paper is dealing with? The following words and expressions tell the reader

what the subject matter is, i.e. answer to question concerning the subject matter:

teacher-centred (S-1), student-centred (S-2), process-writing (S-2), peer feedback, the backbone of process writing (S-3), writing classes (S-3), the effectiveness of the feedback (S-3), a student-centred approach (S-4), useful feedback on the writing of their peers (S-4), teacher-centred learning (S-5), the process approach to writing (S-5).

2. What background information is provided by the author(s)? The first two sentences give the background

information: (1) ‘There is a common belief that, owing to

the highly teacher-centred form of education, Chinese students are passive learners. (2) As a result, a student-centred approach such as process writing is believed to be difficult to implement in classes that consist mainly of Chinese students.’

3. What is the purpose of the present study? The third question is concerned with the purpose

of the study, and tested these beliefs. (S-3) indicates the purpose of research.

(3) This study tested these beliefs by introducing peer feedback, the backbone of process writing, to Chinese students enrolled in university writing classes and by measuring the effectiveness of the feedback both quantitatively and qualitatively.

4. How is the research to be done? The fourth question is ‘How is the research to

be done?’, which is concerned with the method of the research.

The two prepositional phrases in Sentence (3) by introducing peer feedback, the backbone of process writing and by measuring the effectiveness of the feedback both quantitatively and qualitatively clearly indicate how the research is to be carried out.

5. What are some of the important findings? (4) The study showed that, with proper

training, Chinese students could quickly adapt to a student-centred approach, and also (that Chinese students) provide rich and useful feedback on the writing of their peers.

Sentence (4) serves the purpose of giving the reader two findings of the study.

6. What are some of the implications of the study? (5) This study has promising implications for

educational contexts where students are considered passive learners, teacher-centred learning is the norm, or the process approach to writing faces daunting challenges to its implementation.

This final sentence in the abstract tells the reader the implications for the study, and thus it answers the last question in the abstract, i.e. ‘What are some of the implications of the study?’

An analysis of another abstract Biber, D. et al., ‘Speaking and Writing in the

University: A Multidimensional Comparison’. TESOL Quarterly, 2002.

  (1) The dozens of studies on academic discourse

carried out over the past 20 years have mostly focused on written academic prose (usually the technical research article in science or medicine) or on academic lectures. (2) Other registers that may be more important for students adjusting to university life, such as textbooks, have received surprisingly little attention, and spoken registers such as study groups or on-campus service encounters have been virtually ignored. (3) To explain more fully the nature of the tasks that incoming international students encounter, this article undertakes a comprehensive linguistic description of the range of spoken and written registers at U.S. universities.

(4) Specifically, the article describes a multidimensional analysis of register variation in the TOEFL 2000 Spoken and Written Academic Language Corpus. (5) The analysis shows that spoken registers are fundamentally different from written ones in university contexts, regardless of purpose. (6) Some of the register characterizations are particularly surprising. (7) For example, classroom teaching was similar to conversational registers in many respects, and departmental brochures and Web pages were as informationally dense as textbooks. (8) The article discusses the implications of these findings for pedagogy and further research.

(1) The dozens of studies on academic discourse carried out over the past 20 years have mostly focused on written academic prose (usually the technical research article in science or medicine) or on academic lectures.

(2) Other registers that may be more important for students adjusting to university life, such as textbooks, have received surprisingly little attention, and spoken registers such as study groups or on-campus service encounters have been virtually ignored.

(3) To explain more fully the nature of the tasks that incoming international students encounter, this article undertakes a comprehensive linguistic description of the range of spoken and written registers at U.S. universities.

(4) Specifically, the article describes a multidimensional analysis of register variation in the TOEFL 2000 Spoken and Written Academic Language Corpus.

(5) The analysis shows that spoken registers are fundamentally different from written ones in university contexts, regardless of purpose.

(6) Some of the register characterizations are particularly surprising.

(7) For example, classroom teaching was similar to conversational registers in many respects, and departmental brochures and Web pages were as informationally dense as textbooks.

(8) The article discusses the implications of these findings for pedagogy and further research.

3 Questions on the Abstract 1. What is the subject matter/area the research

paper is dealing with? 2. What background information is provided by

the author(s)? 3. What is the purpose of the present study? 4. How is the research to be done? 5. What are some of the important findings? 6. What are some of the implications of the

study?

 1. It is not difficult to answer the first question. The subject matter is ‘academic discourse’ and with

in this reference is made to ‘written academic prose’ and ‘academic lectures’ (S-1).

But these two sub-areas are not the concern of the paper.

The paper focuses on the language of ‘textbooks’, ‘study groups’, and ‘service encounters’ (S-2).

.        2. The authors provide some general background

information. For example, there have been some studies

‘dozens of studies’, ‘over the past 20 years’ (S-1), and ‘Other registers … have received surprisingly little attention’ and ‘have been virtually ignored’ (S-2).

In addition to providing background information, the authors give a reason to justify the present research.

They refer to a gap in knowledge on academic discourse that they would like to fill. This is labeled as ‘gap indication’.

3.  The purpose of the paper is given next by ‘this article undertakes a …’ (S-3).

At the same time we see that there is a focus on ‘incoming international students’ and ‘at U.S. universities’ (S-3).

4. The methodology of the research is indicated next by ‘a multidimensional analysis of register variation’ and the proposed source of data by ‘the TOFEL … Corpus’ (S-4).

5. Reference to findings is indicated by ‘The analysis shows …’ (S-5).

The authors also state that the findings ‘are surprising’ (S-6), i.e. ‘classroom teaching was similar to conversational registers’ and ‘departmental brochures were as informationally dense as textbooks’ (S-7).

6. And finally we get the reference to ‘implications … for pedagogy’ and ‘further research’ (S-8).

4 Elements of structure in an Abstract We can see that by asking a number of

questions we can discover the structure of the Abstract.

We can refer to each section as an ‘element of structure’. The six elements of structure can then be referred to as

Topic Specification (TS), Background Information (BI), Purpose Statement (PS), Methodology and Data (MD), Results/Findings (RF), and Implications/Conclusions (IC).

Although the example discussed above has ALL the structural elements of an Abstract, we are not saying that ALL other Abstracts have the same elements as well.

We can say that some elements are obligatory and some are optional.

Let us look at another Abstract to see how the elements are presented.

Elizabeth Black: Metaphor, simile and cognition in Golding’s The Inheritors This article discusses the relationship between underlexicalisation, metaphor and simile in Golding’s The Inheritors. It argues that they are deployed to reflect the developing cognitive and linguistic abilities of the novel’s characters. It is suggested that certain structures, which may appear metaphorical, are best treated as cases of underlexicalisation.

(Editor: Mick Short: Language and Literature, 1(2) (1993): pp. 37-48.

(1) This article discusses the relationship between underlexicalisation, metaphor and simile in Golding’s The Inheritors.

(2) It argues that they are deployed to reflect the developing cognitive and linguistic abilities of the novel’s characters.

(3) It is suggested that certain structures, which may appear metaphorical, are best treated as cases of underlexicalisation.

Questions on the abstract 1. Subject matter (1) “the relationship between underlexicalisation, metaphor an

d simile” 2. Background information No background information. 3. Purpose (1) “discusses the relationship between…” 4. Methodology (2) “argues…” 5. Findings (3) “it is suggested that …” 6. Implications No implications mentioned.

Obligatory and Optional? 1. What is the subject

matter/area the research paper is dealing with?

3. What is the purpose of the present study?

4. How is the research to be done?

5. What are some of the important findings?

2. What background information is provided by the author?

6. What are some of the implications of the study?

Thomas T. Ballmer: Words, sentences, texts, and all that (Text 1(2) (1981): pp. 163-189)

(1) The topic of this paper concerns the relation between three levels of language: words, sentences, and texts. (2) After a presentation of state of the art of text linguistics it is shown that the somewhat neglected area of lexicology casts new light on the issue of text vs. sentence linguistics. (3) A dynamic conception of language based on its mechanism of context change together with the lexical analysis of the word thesaurus of a language leads the way to a description of the expressions, text structures, and context structures. (4) This conception makes it possible to proceed further and characterize the task of text theory. (5)The formal prerequisites are language reconstruction systems, context-change logic, and the background of optimization.

(1) The topic of this paper concerns the relation between three levels of language: words, sentences, and texts.

(2) After a presentation of state of the art of text linguistics it is shown that the somewhat neglected area of lexicology casts new light on the issue of text vs. sentence linguistics.

(3) A dynamic conception of language based on its mechanism of context change together with the lexical analysis of the word thesaurus of a language leads the way to a description of the expressions, text structures, and context structures.

(4) This conception makes it possible to proceed further and characterize the task of text theory.

(5)The formal prerequisites are language reconstruction systems, context-change logic, and the background of optimization.

1. Subject matter (1) “The topic of this paper concerns the relation” 2. Background information No background information. 3. Purpose (1) “this article deals with one particular problem” 4. Methodology (2) “After a presentation of state of the art of text linguistics it is sho

wn that…” (3) “A dynamic conception … leads the way to a description…” (4) “This conception makes it possible to proceed further and charac

terize the task of text theory”. 5. Findings (5) “The formal prerequisites are language reconstruction systems,

… and the background of optimization” 6. Implications No implications mentioned.

Ballmer

No background information. No implication mentioned. The expression of “findings” not clear. Description of “Methodology” not clear.

Robert de Beaugrande: Linguistic theory and metatheory for a science of texts (Text 1(2) (1981): pp. 113-161) (1) This article explores the typical reactions which occur when an e

stablished science confronts a new object of inquiry, as we find when linguistic theory encounters the text. (2) The usual discussions are not productive as long as the old ‘paradigm’ is still accepted as the framework for achievement. (3) The issues are therefore re-examined in terms of the metatheory of science (e.g. Sneed, Stegmüller, Lakatos, Feyerabend, Hempel), and some general solutions are expounded for the problems of validating theories on the basis of empirical content. (4) A paradigmatic example is then presented in order to show a possible role for logical linguistics in future theories: a computer grammar that parses text sentences into a progressive network and back again via theorem-proving, with further capacities for applying schemas, answering questions, and generating summaries. (5) This example serves as an application of general design values and criteria for preferring and comparing alternative theories.

(1) This article explores the typical reactions which occur when an established science confronts a new object of inquiry, as we find when linguistic theory encounters the text.

(2) The usual discussions are not productive as long as the old ‘paradigm’ is still accepted as the framework for achievement.

(3) The issues are therefore re-examined in terms of the metatheory of science (e.g. Sneed, Stegmüller, Lakatos, Feyerabend, Hempel), and some general solutions are expounded for the problems of validating theories on the basis of empirical content.

(4) A paradigmatic example is then presented in order to show a possible role for logical linguistics in future theories: a computer grammar that parses text sentences into a progressive network and back again via theorem-proving, with further capacities for applying schemas, answering questions, and generating summaries.

(5) This example serves as an application of general design values and criteria for preferring and comparing alternative theories.

1. Subject matter (1) “the typical reactions which occur when an established science c

onfronts a new object of inquiry” 2. Background information (2) “The usual discussions are not productive as long as the old ‘par

adigm’ is still accepted as the framework for achievement.” 3. Purpose (1) “This article explores the typical reactions” 4. Methodology (3) “The issues are re-examined in terms of the metatheory of scienc

e …” “and some general solutions are expounded” (4) “A paradigmatic example is… presented …” 5. Findings ?(4) “… to show a possible role for logical linguistics in future theorie

s” 6. Implications (5) “This example serves as an application of general design values

and criteria for preferring and comparing alternative theories.”

R. de Beaugrande

Argumentation (vs description) Speculative, literature review, library research,

theorizing Element structures of the abstract not clearly-

cut

M. Couthard: The linguist as expert witness (Linguistics and the Human Sciences 1(1) (2005 This article illustrates the problems faced and the techniques used by the linguist w

hen acting as an expert witness. Examples are drawn from a wild variety of cases. The article first exemplifies disputes about the meaning of individual morphemes in a trademark case, where the American burger chain McDonalds claimed ownership of the morpheme “Mc” on the grounds that they had invented a “McLanguage”, and about the interpretation of individual words like “sufficient”, “preclude” and “impairment” in jury instructions and health insurance proposals, where convincing evidence is offered that cooperative readers would not have derived the meaning intended by the legal authors of the texts. The articles then examines the contribution linguists made in two specific cases to resolving questions about the degree of grammatical complexity in a disputed letter and a statute whose interpretation had been appealed, before moving on to use the concept of linguistic uniqueness to help resolve the question of the “ownership” of particular words and phrases in two cases of suspected plagiarism. The concepts used in the plagiarism cases are then used to resolve a dispute about whether a whole interview record had been fabricated by the police in a murder case. Throughout the article examples are provided of the wide range of techniques that forensic linguists have developed and now use to reach and support their opinions, ranging from evidence derived from corpora and questionnaires to insights drawn from morphology, grammar, lexis, pragmatics, semantics and discourse and text analysis.

(1) This article illustrates the problems faced and the techniques used by the linguist when acting as an expert witness.

(2) Examples are drawn from a wild variety of cases. (3) The article first exemplifies disputes about the meaning o

f individual morphemes in a trademark case, where the American burger chain McDonalds claimed ownership of the morpheme “Mc” on the grounds that they had invented a “McLanguage”, and about the interpretation of individual words like “sufficient”, “preclude” and “impairment” in jury instructions and health insurance proposals, where convincing evidence is offered that cooperative readers would not have derived the meaning intended by the legal authors of the texts.

(4) The articles then examines the contribution linguists made in two specific cases to resolving questions about the degree of grammatical complexity in a disputed letter and a statute whose interpretation had been appealed, before moving on to use the concept of linguistic uniqueness to help resolve the question of the “ownership” of particular words and phrases in two cases of suspected plagiarism.

(5) The concepts used in the plagiarism cases are then used to resolve a dispute about whether a whole interview record had been fabricated by the police in a murder case.

(6) Throughout the article examples are provided of the wide range of techniques that forensic linguists have developed and now use to reach and support their opinions, ranging from evidence derived from corpora and questionnaires to insights drawn from morphology, grammar, lexis, pragmatics, semantics and discourse and text analysis.

1. Subject matter (1) “This article illustrates the problems faced and the techniques

used by the linguist” 2. Background information ???(2) “Examples are drawn from a wild variety of cases.” 3. Purpose ??? 4. Methodology ???(3) “The article first exemplifies disputes about the meaning” ???(4) “The articles then examines the contribution” ???(5) “The concepts used in the plagiarism cases are then used

to resolve a dispute about whether a whole interview record had been fabricated by the police in a murder case.”

???(6) “Throughout the article examples are provided of the wide range of techniques”

5. Findings ??? 6. Implications ???

M. Couthard “Purpose” is not clearly stated. “Methodology” is not clearly stated. No obvious “findings”. No obvious “implications”. The use of examples has been emphasized

(e.g. Sentences (2) & (6).)

Discussion Types of research and ways of presentation Different disciplines have different norms and

conventions Differences between linguistics and applied

linguistics (e.g., previous studies, implications)

Some ‘senior people’ may not follow the norm, and they are often allowed to have deviations.

5 The Language of an abstract The information in an abstract is condensed

in nominal groups with special types of verbs. There are certain grammatical patterns that

are usually used. The best way is to see, from a purely

linguistic/grammatical perspective how people write abstracts.

Some examples This paper, this article, this study, this resear

ch, this project, the author, we, I, Argue, report, investigates, focus on, survey,

review, present, address, give, look, examine, outline, explore, deal with, consider, discuss, suggest, be concerned with, approach, analyse, describe, demonstrate, illustrate, evaluate,

Aim to challenge, attempt to argue, seek to argue,

The secret of a successful Abstract is in giving the most information in the least number of words in a coherent structure.

This can be achieved by reading good Abstracts and then imitating them when you need to write one.

Pieces of advice We can safely assume that if a research paper is

accepted by an international journal, then its Abstract can be imitated by people learning to write this kind of text.

If someone is recognized in the field, his way of writing is also accepted. (but…)

To write a good Abstract, we have to follow the conventions set by more experienced people in the field.

If you want to have a paper accepted by a journal, you should read the journal and see the underlying principle/requirement.

6 Summary We have focused on the discourse

structure. The two main features of an Abstract are

its discourse structure and the language used for condensing the information.

The secret of a successful Abstract is in giving the most information in the least number of words in a coherent structure. This can be achieved by reading good Abstracts and then imitating them when you need to write one.

Reminder: Six questions on the Abstract 1. What is the subject matter/area the research pap

er is dealing with? 2. What background information is provided by the

author(s)? 3. What is the purpose of the present study? 4. How is the research to be done? 5. What are some of the important findings? 6. What are some of the implications of the study?