Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Abstract This study compares the move structure and metadiscourse features of the results and discussion sections in English research articles and MA theses in applied linguistics. We collected 31 results and discussion sections in English research articles by expert writers and 31 MA theses in English by Chinese students. The quantitative analysis found notable differences in opening and closing moves, move frequency, move sequence, and the distribution of metadiscourse markers across moves. For example, M3S2 ( comparing results with literature ) and M3S3 ( accounting for results ) occurred more frequently in research articles. Frame markers occurred more frequently across M2 ( reporting results ) in MA theses. We also employed the qualitative approach to demonstrate the differences between these seemingly similar genres based on the textual analysis of data. The following possible reasons behind the differences were identified: the writing requirements, purposes, the writers’ prior learning and writing experience, English proficiency, and genre knowledge as well as the audiences. The findings not only provide insights into the interaction between move and metadiscourse, but also have implications for the learning and teaching of academic writing.
Guo et al. (Tue,) studied this question.