INDONESIAN AUTHORS WRITING THEIR DISCUSSION SECTIONS BOTH IN ENGLISH AND INDONESIAN RESEARCH ARTICLES

Lulus Irawati, Ali Saukah, Suharmanto Ruslan

Abstract


Abstract: The study aims to investigate how Indonesian authors write their English and Indonesian research article (RA) discussion sections. There were 7 Indonesian authors who write 1 English research article and 1 Indonesian research article published in national accredited journals. The study executed rhetorical moves designed by Swales (1990) to be used here as the instrument. In general, the findings show that 7 Indonesian authors operate not too different rhetorical patterns of English and Indonesian RA discussion sections viewed from moves occurrences, completeness, and order of the move structures. Nearly all 7 Indonesian authors show 5 moves in the English RA discussion section consisting of statement of the results-(un)expected outcome-reference to previous research-explanation-deduction and hypothesis. They use 6 moves in the Indonesian RA discussion section consisting of statement of the results-(un)expected outcome-reference to previous research-explanation-exemplification-deduction and hypothesis. However, each author has his/her specific move structure seen from the moves order and moves frequency. The specific uses of move structure are explained with examples in the forms of sentences or phrases. Thus, the authors are in the position of having their rhetorical patterns suited the context and communities.

Keywords: Indonesian authors, research articles (RA), discussion sections, rhetorical patterns

 

PILIHAN POLA RETORIKA PENULIS INDONESIA DALAM MENULIS BAGIAN PEMBAHASAN ARTIKEL PENELITIAN BERBAHASA INGGRIS DAN BERBAHASA INDONESIA

 

Abstrak: Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk meneliti bagaimana penulis Indonesia menulis bagian pembahasan artikel penelitian berbahasa Inggris dan berbahasa Indonesia. Data diperoleh dari 7 penulis Indonesia yang pernah menulis dan mempublikasi 1 artikel penelitian berbahasa Inggris dan 1 artikel penelitian berbahasa Indonesia di jurnal ilmiah terakreditasi nasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan pola retorika (moves) yang dikembangkan oleh Swales (1990) sebagai instrumen untuk menganalisis bagian pembahasan artikel penelitian. Secara umum, hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ketujuh penulis Indonesia memilih pola retorika yang tidak terlalu berbeda pada bagian pembahasan yang berbahasa Inggris dan berbahasa Indonesia, dilihat dari frekuensi kemunculan moves, kelengkapan moves, dan urutan movesnya. Sebagian besar penulis memilih 5 moves pada bagian pembahasan yang berbahasa Inggris, yaitu statement of the results-(un)expected outcome-reference to previous research-explanation-deduction and hypothesis. Bagian pembahasan yang berbahasa Indonesia memiliki 6 moves, yaitu statement of the results-(un)expected outcome-reference to previous research-explanation-exemplification-deduction and hypothesis. Walaupun begitu, setiap penulis memiliki pilihan moves tertentu dari segi urutan moves dan frekuensi kemunculannya. Dapat disimpulkan bahwa penulis-penulis Indonesia tersebut memilih pola retorikanya disesuaikan dengan konteks dan komunitas pembaca artikel penelitian di jurnal ilmiah yang mereka pilih.

Kata Kunci: Penulis Indonesia, artikel penelitian (RA), bagian pembahasan, pola retorika

Keywords


Indonesian authors; research articles (RA); discussion sections; rhetorical patterns

Full Text:

PDF

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 262 | views : 0

References


Al-Qathani, A. K. (2006). A Contrastive Rhetoric Study of Arabic and English research article Introductions. Unpublished Dissertation. Oklahoma State University.

Anwar, K. (2010). Rhetorical Patterns of Research Articles in Language Teaching Journals. Unpublished Dissertation. Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Malang.

Arsyad, S. (2013). A Genre-Based Analysis on Discussion Section of Research Articles in Indonesian Written by Indonesian Speakers. International Journal of Linguistics 5(4), 50-70, from http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v5i4.3773

Atai, M. R. & Falah, S. (2010). A Contrastive Genre Analysis of Result and Discussions of Applied Linguistic Research Articles Written by Native and non-Native English Speakers with Respect to Evaluated Entities and Ascribed Values. Paper presented at the 10th Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics Conference in Edinburgh University. Retrieved from http://www.paaljapan.org/resources/proceedings/PAAL10/pdfs/atai.pdf

Basthomi, Y. (2006). The Rhetoric of Research Article Introductions Written in English by Indonesians. Unpublished Dissertation. Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Malang.

Chakorn, O. (2002). Contrastive rhetoric of English persuasive correspondence in the Thai business context: cross-cultural sales promotion, request and invitation. Unpublished PhD thesis. University of Warwick.

Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Cross-cultural aspects of second language writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Connor, U. (2002). New Directions in Contrastive Rhetoric. TESOL QUARTERLY, 36 (4), 493-510, from https://doi.org/10.2307/3588238.

.

Holmes, R. (1997). Genre Analysis and the Social Sciences: An Investigation of the Structure of Research Article Discussion Sections in Three Disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321-337, from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00038-5.

Hopkins, A & Dudley-Evans, T. (1988). A Genre- Based Investigation of the Discussion Sections in Articles and Dissertations. English for Specific Purposes, 7(2), 113-121, from https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(88)90029-4.

Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural Thought Patterns in Intercultural Education. Language Learning, 16(1), 1-20, from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x.

Kuntjara, E. (2004). Cultural Transfer in EFL Writing: A Look at Contrastive Rhetoric on English and Indonesian. K@ta Journal, 6(1), 13-29, from https://doi.org/10.9744/kata.6.1.13-29

Mirahayuni, N. K. (2002). Investigating Generic Structure of English Research Articles: Writing Strategy Differences between English and Indonesian Writers. TEFLIN Journal, 13(1), 22-57, from http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v13i1/22-57.

Ozmen, K.S. (2016 Rhetorical Analysis of the Doctoral Abstracts on English Language Teaching inTurkey. i-manager’s Journal Teaching on English, 6(1), 25-35, from https://doi.org/10.26634/jelt.6.1.4808.

Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative Moves in the Discussion Section of Research Articles. System, 30(4), 479-497, from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00050-7.

Safnil. (2013). A Genre-Based Analysis on the Introductions of Research Articles Written by Indonesian Academics. TEFLIN Journal, 24(2), 180-200, from http://dx.doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v24i2/180-200.

Susilo. (1999). Rhetorical Patterns as Reflected in Argumentative Discourse in the Jakarta Post. Unpublished Thesis. Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Malang.

Susilo. (2004). Thought Patterns Reflected in the Linguistic Features in Indonesian and English Letters Written by Indonesian. Unpublished Dissertation. Pascasarjana, Universitas Negeri Malang.

Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tseng, F. P. (2011). Analysis of Move Structure and Verb Tense of Research Article Abstracts in Applied Linguistics Journals. International Journal of English Linguistics, 1(2), 27-39. Doi: 10.5539/ijel.v1n2p27.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.21831/cp.v38i3.21536

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Printed ISSN (p-ISSN): 0216-1370 
Online ISSN (e-ISSN): 2442-8620
 

Our Journal has been Indexed by:

 

 Creative Commons License
Jurnal Cakrawala Pendidikan by Lembaga Pengembangan dan Penjaminan Mutu Pendidikan UNY is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at http://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/cp/index.

Translator
 
 web
analytics
View Our Stats

Flag Counter