ANALYZING LEXICO-SYNTACTIC FEATURES IN ACADEMIC ABSTRACT TEMPLATES: A CONTENT-BASED ANALYSIS OF THESES ABSTRACTS
Keywords:
Academic Theses Abstract Templates, Bryman's (2008) Technique, Content-Based Analysis, Lexico-Syntactic Features, Purposive MethodAbstract
The research examines the divided structure of these templates. They are analyzed in the context of mixed methods approach using descriptive methods to discover the common pattern and structure of academic writing. The primary focus is the structure of lexical sentences, paragraphs and sentence structure, as well as the lexico-syntactic features. Abstracts for this article are chosen based on a method of purposive sampling. Researchers employ Bryman's (2008) technique to present specific descriptions of the elements that are used to evaluate qualitatively texts. The research is separated into sections that cover the aspects of the lexical items, syntax, and abstract segmentation, in order to find particular syntactic patterns that are frequently used. The results show that specific features of syntactic, such as the usage of nominatives as well as passive voice and complex sentence structure have been used consistently to communicate professionalism and impartiality. The research highlights the value of these characteristics to enhance clarity, coherence and the quality abstracts These findings provide practical methods to enhance teaching and understanding in academic writing. Particularly, it helps in improving students' ability to create simple and accurate abstracts.
Downloads
References
Bauer, L. (2003). Introducing linguistic morphology. Edinburgh University Press.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings. Longman.Academic writing across disciplines (pp. 62-76). John Benjamins.
Bryman, A. (2008). Why do researchers integrate/combine/mesh/blend/mix/merge/fuse quantitative and qualitative research Advances in mixed methods research, 21(8), 87-100.
Cargill, M., & O'Connor, P. (2009). Writing scientific research articles: Strategy and steps. Wiley-Blackwell.
Carnie, M., Watson, T., & Worsley, D. (2012). UV filtering of dye‐sensitized solar cells: the effects of varying the UV cut‐off upon cell performance and incident photon‐to‐electron conversion efficiency. International Journal of Photoenergy, 2012(1), 506132.
Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Mouton.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. MIT Press.
Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Blackwell Publishing.
Devlin, J., et al. (2018). BERT: Bidirectional encoder representations from transformers. InProceedings of the 2019 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (NAACL-HLT).
Hagoort, P. (2019). The neurobiology of language beyond single-word processing. Science, 366(6461), 55-58.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Longman.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. Continuum.
Liu, Y., et al. (2020). Multi-task learning for joint prediction of syntactic and semantic dependencies. In Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL).
Manning, C., &Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. MIT Press.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive rhetoric in academic writing: A case study of university students' texts. Multilingual Matters.
Stockwell, R., & Minkova, D. (2001). English words: History and structure. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. M., &Feak, C. B. (2009). Abstracts and the writing of abstracts. University of Michigan Press.
Tesnière, L. (1959). Éléments de syntaxestructurale. Klincksieck.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Makhmoor Fatima, Dr. Ali Hussain Bin Sadiq (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
