Rhetorical Structure in Indonesian Research Article Introductions Using Loi’s Framework
Abstract
This study explores the rhetorical structure of Indonesian research article (RA) introductions by examining how they align with or diverge from Swales’ Create-A-Research-Space (CARS) model, as interpreted through Loi’s contrastive rhetoric framework. Using a qualitative genre analysis of 30 RA introductions from SINTA tier 1-3 Indonesian journals in linguistics and education, published between 2022-2024, the research identifies the presence and realization of the three CARS moves. Findings show that while Move 1 (establishing a territory) and Move 3 (occupying the niche) appear in all texts, and Move 2 (establishing a niche) in most, their rhetorical realization diverges from conventional Anglophone patterns. Indonesian authors tend to expand Move 1 with philosophical or policy-based narratives, express Move 2 indirectly without explicit critique, and delay or repeat Move 3 in a recursive fashion. These patterns reveal dominant cultural-rhetorical strategies such as indirectness, collective voice, and contextual elaboration. The findings underscore the influence of local discourse traditions on academic writing and call for more culturally responsive genre models in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) pedagogy.
Downloads
References
Anthony, L. (1999). Writing research article introductions in software engineering: How accurate is a standard model? IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 42(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1109/47.749366
Basturkmen, H. (2006). Ideas and options in English for specific purposes. Routledge.
Bhatia, V. (1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Longman.
Burgess, S. (2002). Packed houses and intimate gatherings: Audience and rhetorical structure. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse. Pearson.
Canagarajah, A. S. (2002). A geopolitics of academic writing. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), 211–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90196-2
Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Writing in professional settings. Multilingua, 15(3). https://doi.org/10.2307/3588238
Duszak, A. (1997). Intellectual styles and cross-cultural communication. Mouton de Gruyter.
Feak, C. & J. swales. (2011). Creating contexts: Writing introductions across genres. University of Michigan Press.
Flowerdew, J. (2001). Research Perspectives on English for Academic Purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R. B. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across languages. Addison-Wesley.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations across Nations. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(02)00184-5
Holliday, A. (1999). Small cultures. Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 237–264. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/20.2.237
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. University of Michigan Press.
Kaplan, R. (1966). Cultural Thought Patterns in Intercultural Education. Language Learning. Language Learning, 16, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Loi, C. K. (2010). Research article introductions in Chinese and English: A comparative genre-based study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 267–279. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.09.004
Nwogu, K. (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
Ramanathan, V., & Atkinson, D. (1999). Individualism, academic writing, and ESL writers. Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 45–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(99)80112-X
Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00023-5
Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English For Specific Purpose, 24(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2001). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach (2nd ed.). Blackwell.
Shehzad, W. (2008). Move two: Establishing a niche. Ibérica, 15, 25–49.
Sheldon, E. (2011). Rhetorical differences in RA introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 30(4), 238–250. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.08.004
Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
An author who publishes in Pioneer: Journal of Language and Literature agrees to the following terms:
- Author retains the copyright and grants the journal the right of first publication of the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal
- Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book) with the acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Author is permitted and encouraged to post his/her work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of the published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
