How Doctors Report: A Corpus-based Contrastive Analysis of Reporting Verbs in Research Article Introductions Published in International and Thai Medical Journals

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Sep 20, 2012
DOI: https://doi.org/10.31524/bkkmedj.2012.09.007
Keywords:
reporting verb, medical research article, corpus, contrastive analysis

Main Article Content

Naruemol Jirapanakorn, MD, MA

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to explore the differences in the use of reporting verbs between medical research article introductions published in the international and Thai medical journals, using a corpus-based approach.


MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two comparable corpora were compiled from 50 medical research article introductions published in English language during 2005-2009: 25 introductions from 5 international journals and 25 introductions from 5 Thai journals. All reporting verbs were identified and categorized into 3 types: experimental, discourse and cognition verbs. The differences in the list of these reporting verbs and their usage were examined.


RESULTS: The frequency of occurrence of reporting verbs in the international corpus was 12.61 per 1,000 words, while that of the Thai corpus was 9.87 per 1,000 words. The international journals used 40 reporting verbs, whereas 24 reporting verbs were identified in the Thai journals. In all three categories, the international journals used more reporting verbs than the Thai medical journals.


CONCLUSION: Reporting verbs were used in the international medical research articles with higher frequencies and a wider variety than the Thai medical research articles. The list and examples from both corpora would assist medical researchers in using reporting verbs to write their research articles appropriately.

Article Details

How to Cite
1.
Jirapanakorn N. How Doctors Report: A Corpus-based Contrastive Analysis of Reporting Verbs in Research Article Introductions Published in International and Thai Medical Journals. BKK Med J [Internet]. 2012 Sep. 20 [cited 2024 Nov. 24];4(1):39. Available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/bkkmedj/article/view/217968
Issue
Vol. 4 (2012): September
Section
Original Article

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

1. Zeiger M. Essentials of Writing Biomedical Research Papers. New York: Mcgraw-Hill, 1991.
2. Manske PR. Structure and Format of Peer-Reviewed Scientific Manuscripts. The Journal of Hand Surgery 2006; 31:1051-5.
3. Godfrey J. How to Use Your Reading in Your Essays. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
4. Thomas S, Hawes TP. Reporting Verbs in Medical Journal Articles. English for Specific Purposes 1997;16:119-38.
5. Anthony L. Issues in the Design and Development of Software Tools for Corpus Studies: The Case for Collab oration. In: Baker P, editor. Contemporary Corpus Linguistics. London: Continuum, 2009.
6. Nwogu KN. The Medical Research Paper: Structure and Functions. English for Specific Purposes 1994;13:129-48.
7. Wang J, Liang S, Ge G. Establishment of a Medical Academic Word List. English for Specific Purposes 2008;27:442-58.
8. Wang Y, Bai Y. A Corpus-Based Syntactic Study of Medical Research Article Titles. System 2007;35:388-99.
9. Millar N, Budgell BS, Kwong A. Quantitative Corpus based analysis of the Chiropractic Literature -A Pilot Study. Journal of Canada Chiropractic Association 2011;55:56-60.
10. Clugston M. An Analysis of Citation Forms in Health Science Journals. Journal of Academic Language and Learning 2008;2:A11-A22.
11. Banpho P. A Survey of Writing Techniques, Authorship, Tenses, Voices and Length of Opening Sentences of Medical Research Articles. PASAA 2004;35:69-87.
12. Maher J. The Development of English as an International Language of Medicine. Applied Linguistics 1986;7:206-18.
13. Mišak A, Marušić M, Marušić A. Manuscript Editing as a Way of Teaching Academic Writing: Experience from a Small Scientific Journal. Journal of Second Language Writing 2005;14:122-31.
14. Benfield JR, Howard KM. The Language of Science. European Journal of Cardiothoracic Surgery 2000; 18:642-8.
15. Cho DW. Science Journal Paper Writing in an Efl Context: The Case of Korea. English for Specific Purposes 2009;28:230-9.
16. Li L, Ge G. Genre analysis: Structural and Linguistic Evolution of the English-medium Medical Research Article (1985-2004). English for Specific Purposes 2009;28:93-104.
17. Office of the Higher Education Commission. List of Approved National/International Journals. (Accessed June 27, 2012, at http://www.research.chula.ac.th/rs_ news/2554/files/304-9533.pdf.)
18. Ädel A. Recurrent Word Combinations in Academic Writing by Native and Non-Native Speakers of English: A Lexical Bundles Approach. English for Specific Purposes 2012;31:81-92.
19. Abdulsata P. An Error Analysis of Srinakharinwirot University Second-Year English Major Student Compo sition. M.A. Thesis, Srinakharinwirot. University, 2000.
20. Thep-Ackrapong T. Teaching English in Thailand: An Uphill Battle. Journal of Humanities Parithat 2005;27 :51-62.
21. Scully C, Jenkins S. Publishing in English for Non-native Speakers. Oral Oncology 2006;42:753.
22. verson C. US Medical Journal Editors’ Attitudes Toward Submissions from Other Countries. Science Editor 2002;25:75-8.
23. Breugelmans R, Barron JP. The Role of In-House Medical Communications Center in Medical Institutions in Nonnative English-Speaking Countries. Chest 2008; 134:883-5.
24. Eastwood S, Derish PA, Berger MS. Biomedical Publication for Neurosurgery Residents: A Program and Guide. Neurosurgery 2000;47:739-48.