- John FlowerdewCity University of Hong Kong
Keywords:English for academic purposes (EAP), English for specific academic purposes (ESAP), writing, specific purposes writing, register and discourse analysis, genre analysis, corpora, ethnography, contrastive rhetoric, classroom methodology, critical approaches
This introductory review article for this special issue sets out a range of issues in play as far as English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing is concerned, but with a special emphasis on English for Specific Academic Purposes (ESAP) (as opposed to English for General Academic Purposes (EGAP)). Following the introduction, the article begins by outlining the different types of EAP and presenting the pros and cons of ESAP and EGAP for writing. It then goes on to review work in a range of areas of relevance to ESAP writing. These areas are register and discourse analysis; genre analysis; corpus analysis; ethnography; contrastive rhetoric; classroom methodology; critical approaches; and assessment. The article concludes by arguing that whichever model of writing is chosen (EGAP or ESAP), or if a hybrid model is the choice, if at all possible, students need to be exposed to the understandings, language and communicative activities of their target disciplines, with students themselves also contributing to this enterprise.
John Flowerdew, City University of Hong Kong
John flowerdew is a Professor in the Department of English, City University, Kowloon, Hong Kong.
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
Alqahtani, M. (2011). An Investigation into the language needs of Saudi students studying in British postgraduate programmes and the cultural difference impacting on them. Unpublished PhD thesis: University of Southampton. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/198175/6.hasCoversheetVersion/Binder1.pdf
Apple, M.W. (1988). Teachers and texts: A political economy of class and gender relations in education. New York: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00131728809335493
Barber, C. (1962). Some measurable characteristics of modern scientific prose. In F. Behre (Ed.), Contributions to English syntax and philology: Gothenburg studies in English (Vol. 14, pp. 21–43). Gothenburg: University of Gothenburg.
Bawarshi, A.S., & Reiff, M.J. (Eds.). (2010). Genre: An introduction to history, theory, research, and pedagogy. West Lafayette: Parlor.
Benesch, S. (2009). Theorizing and practicing critical English for academic purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(2), 81-85. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.09.002
Bhatia, V.K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100013668
Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511621024
Biber, D. (2006). Stance in spoken and written university registers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 97–116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.05.00
Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). “Take a look at…”: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 401-435. http://dx.doi:10.1093/applin/25.3.371
Bloor, M., & Bloor, T. (1986). Language for specific purposes: Practice and theory. Centre for Language and Communication Studies Occasional Papers, 19. Dublin: Trinity College, Centre for Language and Communication Studies. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED280285.pdf
Blue, G.M. (1988). Individualising academic writing tuition. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Academic writing: Process and product. Oxford: Modern English Publications.
Burgess, S., & Cargill, M. (2013). Using genre analysis and corpus linguistics to teach research article writing. In V. Matarese (Ed.), Supporting research writing: Roles and challenges in multilingual settings (pp. 55–71). Cambridge, UK: Woodhead Publishing.
Cargill, M., & O’Connor, P. (2013). Writing scientific research articles: Strategy and steps (2nd ed.). Chichester & West Sussex, UK; Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from http://www.idemployee.id.tue.nl/g.w.m.rauterberg/lecturenotes/2009-Writing_Scientific_Research_Articles.pdf
Charles, M. (2014). Getting the corpus habit: EAP students’ long-term use of personal corpora. English for Specific Purposes, 35, 30-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2013.11.004
Cheng, A. (2015). Genre analysis as a pre-instructional, instructional, and teacher development framework. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 19, 125-136. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.04.004
Chun, C. (2015). Power and meaning making in an EAP classroom. Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.008
Chun, C. (forthcoming). Critical literacy writing in ESP: Perspectives and approaches. In J. Flowerdew & T. Costley (Eds.), Discipline-specific writing: theory into practice. London: Routledge.
Connor, U. (1999). How like you our fish? Accommodation in international business communication. In M. Hewings and C. Nickerson (Eds.), Business English: Research into Practice (pp. 115–128). Harlow, UK: Longman.
Connor, U. (2000). Variation in rhetorical moves in grant proposals of US humanists and scientists. Text, 20(1), 1–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/text.1.2000.20.1.1
Connor, U. (2011). Intercultural rhetoric in the writing classroom. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
Cortes, V. (2006). Teaching lexical bundles in the disciplines: An example from a writing intensive history class. Linguistics and Education, 17, 391–406. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2007.02.001
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587951
Douglas, D. (2013). ESP and assessment. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 367–383). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118339855
Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M.J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes. Cambridge: CUP. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00026-5
Ewer, J.R., & Latorre, G. (1969). A course in basic scientific English. London: Longman.
Feng, H. (2008). A genre-based study of research grant proposals in China. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout & W.V. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: Reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 63–86). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Flowerdew, J. (1993). An educational, or process approach to the teaching of professional genres. ELT Journal, 47(4), 305–316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/47.4.305
Flowerdew, J. (2000). Discourse community, legitimate peripheral participation, and the non-native English-speaking scholar. TESOL Quarterly, 34(1), 127–150. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3588099
Flowerdew, J. (2004). Corpus of PhD literature reviews. Hong Kong: City University of Hong Kong.
Flowerdew, J. (2007). The non-Anglophone scholar on the periphery of scholarly publication. AILA Review, 20(1), 14-27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/aila.20.04flo
Flowerdew, J. (2013). English for research publication purposes. In B. Paltridge, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 301–321). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118339855.ch16
Flowerdew, J. (2015). John Swales’s ideas on pedagogy in Genre Analysis: A view from 25 years on. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 19, 102-112. http://dx.doi.org/1010.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.003
Flowerdew, J., & Forest R.W. (2015). Signalling nouns in English: A corpus-based discourse approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/CBO9781139135405
Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (2001). The EAP curriculum: Issues, methods, and challenges. In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock (Eds.), Research perspectives on English for academic purposes (pp. 176–194). Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524766.015
Flowerdew, J., & Wan, A. (2010). The linguistic and the contextual in applied genre analysis: The case of the company audit report. English for Specific Purposes, 29(2), 78–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.07.001
Flowerdew, J., & Wang, S.H. (forthcoming). Teaching English for research publication purposes with a focus on genre, register, textual mentors and language re-use: a case study. In J. Flowerdew & T. Costley (Eds.), Discipline-specific writing: Theory into practice. London: Routledge.
Flowerdew, L. (2010). Using corpora for writing instruction. In A. O’Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 444–457). London & New York: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203856949.ch32
Flowerdew, L. (2013). Needs analysis and curriculum development in ESP. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 325–346). Chichester, England: Wiley Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118339855.ch17
Flowerdew, L. (2015). Using corpus-based research and online academic corpora to inform writing of the discussion section of a thesis. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 58–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.06.001
Gardner, D., & Davies, M. (2013). A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics, 35, 1–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt015
Gardner, S., & Nesi, H. (2013). A classification of genre families in university student writing. Applied Linguistics, 34(1) 1–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams024
Gavioli, L. (2006). Exploring corpora for ESP learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/scl.21
Gee, J. (2014). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (4th ed.). London: Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00593_6.x
Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. (1996). Theory and practice of writing. Harlow: Longman.
Granger, S. (2015). Contrastive interlanguage analysis: A reappraisal. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 1(1), 7–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.1.1.01gra
Hadley, G. (2015). English for academic purposes in neoliberal universities: A critical grounded theory. Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ijlcr.1.1.01gra
Hafner, C., Miller, L., and Ng, C. (undated). Academic literacy practices of university science students: A needs analysis. Final report on academic literacy practices of university science students. Department of English. City University of Hong Kong. http://www1.english.cityu.edu.hk/acadlit/sites/default/files/Academic%20literacies%20in%20university%20science%20students.pdf
Halliday, M.A.K. (2014) An Introduction to functional grammar. (4th ed.). Revised by C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. London: Routledge.
Halliday, M., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The Linguistic sciences and language teaching. London: Longman. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3724120
Harwood, N., & Hadley, G. (2004). Demystifying institutional practices: Critical pragmatism and the teaching of academic writing. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 23, 355–377. http://eric.ed.gov/?redir=http%3a%2f%2fdx.doi.org%2f10.1016%2fj.esp.2003.08.001
Herbert, A.J. (1965). The structure of technical English. London: Longman Group Ltd.
Hood, S. (2010). Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. London: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662
Horowitz, D. (1986). What professors actually require of students: Academic tasks for the ESL classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 445–462. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586294
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes: A learning-centered approach. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/327576
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. London: Longman. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587657
Hyland, K. (2002a). Teaching and researching writing. London: Longman/Pearson. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.1.85
Hyland, K. (2002b). Specificity revisited: How far should we go? English for Specific Purposes, 21(4), 385–395. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2FS0889-4906%2801%2900028-X
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and second language writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000068
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2008). Academic clusters: Text patterning in published and postgraduate writing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 41-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111%2Fj.1473-4192.2008.00178.x
Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic writing. Cambridge: Cambridge Applied Linguistics. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams070
Hyland, K., & Sancho Guinda, C. (Eds.). (2013). Stance and voice in written academic Genres. London: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825
Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 693-722. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587930
Ivaniç, R. (1998). Writing and identity: The Discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/swll.5
Johns, A.M. (1997). Text, role and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587966
Johns, A.M. (2011). The future of genre in L2 writing: Fundamental, but contested, instructional decisions. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20, 56–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2010.12.003
Johns, T. (2002). Data-driven learning: The perpetual challenge. In B. Kettemann & G. Marko (Eds.), Teaching and learning by doing corpus analysis. (pp. 107–117), Amsterdam: Rodopi. http://dx.doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.7.1526-1531
Jordan, B. (2002). The growth of EAP in Britain. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 69–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(02)00004-8
Kaplan, R.B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in intercultural education. Language Learning, 16(1), 1–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Kuteeva, M. (2013). Graduate learners' approaches to genre-analysis tasks: Variations across and within four disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 32(2), 84–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2012.11.004
Kuteeva, M. & Mauranen, A. (Eds.). (2014). Writing for publication in multilingual contexts. Special issue of Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 13(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.11.002
Lee, D., & Swales, J. (2006). A corpus-based EAP course for NNS doctoral students: Moving from available specialized corpora to self-compiled corpora. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2005.02.010
Li, Y. (2006). A doctoral student of physics writing for publication: A sociopolitically-oriented case study. English for Specific Purposes, 24(4), 456–478. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.esp.2005.12.002
Li, Y. (2007). Apprentice scholarly writing in a community of practice: An “intraview” of an NNES graduate student writing a research article. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 55–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2007.tb00040.x
Lillis, T. (2008). Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing”. Written Communication, 25, 353–388. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0741088308319229
Lillis, T., & Curry, M.J. (2010). Academic writing in a global context: The politics and practices of publishing in English. London: Routledge.
Lillis, T., & Scott, M. (2007). Defining academic literacies research: Issues of epistemology, ideology and strategy. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 5-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/japl.v4i1.5
Lackstrom, J.E., Selinker, L., & Trimble, L.P. (1973). Technical rhetorical principles and grammatical choice. TESOL Quarterly, 7(2), 127–136. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3585556
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/acp.2350070111
Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1994). A communicative grammar of English (2nd ed.). London: Longman. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/329369
Maroko, G.M. (2013). Citation practices in selected science and humanities dissertations: Implications for Teaching. American Journal of Educational Research, 1(4), 126–136.
Martin, J.R., & Rose, D. (2012). Learning to write, reading to learn: Genre, knowledge and Pedagogy in the Sydney School. London: Equinox. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt044
Martín-Martín, P. (2003). A genre analysis of English and Spanish research paper abstracts in experimental social sciences. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 25–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00033-3
Moreno, A.I. (2004). Retrospective labelling in premise-conclusion metatext: An English-Spanish contrastive study of research articles on business and economics. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3, 321–339. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.07.005
Nesi, H., & Gardner, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/tesq.200
O’Dell, L., Goswami, D., & Herrington, A. (1983). The discourse-based interview: A procedure for exploring the tacit knowledge of writers in non-academic settings. In P. Mosenthal, L. Tamor & S.A. Walmsley (Eds.), Research on writing: principles and methods (pp. 220–236). New York: Longman.
Parkinson, J. (fortcoming). Teaching writing for science and technology. In J. Flowerdew & T. Costley (Eds.), Discipline-specific writing: Theory into practice. London: Routledge.
Pennycook, A. (1997). Vulgar pragmatism, critical pragmatism, and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, 16, 253–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00019-7
Prior, P. (1998). Writing/Disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Raimes, A. (1991). Out of the woods: Emerging traditions in the teaching of writing. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 407–430. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3586978
Sanderson, T. (2008). Interaction, identity and culture in academic writing: The case of German, British and American academics in the humanities. In A. Ädel & R. Reppen (Eds), Corpora and discourse: The challenges of different settings (pp. 57-92). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/scl.31.05san
Sharff, J., & Lessinger, J. (1994). The academic sweatshop: Changes in the capitalist infrastructure and the part-time academic. Anthropology Today, 10(5), 12-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/awr.19126.96.36.199
Simpson-Vlach, R., & Nick C.E. (2010). An academic formulas list: New methods in phraseology research. Applied Linguistics, 31(4), 463–512. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp058
Smart, G. (2006). Writing the economy: Activity, genre and technology in the world of banking. London: Equinox Publishing. 2006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021943608328081
Spack, R. (1988). Initiating ESL students into the academic discourse community: How far should we go? TESOL Quarterly, 22(1), 29–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3587060
Starfield, S. (2002). “I`m a second-language English speaker”: Negotiating writer identity and authority in sociology one. Journal of Language Identity and Education, 1(2), 121–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327701JLIE0102_02
Suárez, L., & Moreno, A.I. (2008). The rhetorical structure of academic book reviews of literature: An English-Spanish cross-linguistic approach. In U. Connor, E. Nagelhout & W. Rozycki (Eds.), Contrastive rhetoric: reaching to intercultural rhetoric (pp. 147–168). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.169.10sua
Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(92)90010-9
Swales, J.M. (2012). A text and its commentaries: Toward a reception history of “genre in three traditions” (Hyon 1996). Ibérica, 24, 103–115. Retrieved from http://www.aelfe.org/documents/09_24_Swales.pdf
Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (2000). English in today’s research world: a writing guide. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00025-X
Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (2012). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills (3rd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Swales, J.M., & Feak, C.B. (2015). Tensions between the old and the new in EAP textbook revision: A tale of two projects. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching textbooks: Content, consumption, production (pp. 299–319). London: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-27628-5_10
Tardy, C.M. (2012). Writing and language for specific purposes. In The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Wiley. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781405198431
Tarone, E., Dwyer, S., Gillette, S., & Icke, V. (1981). On the use of the passive in two astrophysics journal papers. The ESP Journal, 1(2), 123–140. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0272-2380(81)90004-4
Thompson, P. (2013). Thesis and dissertation writing. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), Blackwell Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (pp. 283–300). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118339855.ch15
Trimble, L.P. (1985). English for science and technology: A discourse approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(86)90011-6
Widdowson, H.G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Wilkins, D.A. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
A distinction is often made between EGAP and ESAP (Blue, 1988). EGAP – English for General Academic Purposes – deals with the language and practices common to all EAP students, whereas ESAP – English for Specific Academic Purposes – is concerned with the specific needs of students in particular disciplines.What is English for specific academic purposes? ›
English for specific purposes (ESP) is a subset of English as a second or foreign language. It usually refers to teaching the English language to university students or people already in employment, with reference to the particular vocabulary and skills they need.What are the main challenges you would face when writing in English for Academic Purposes? ›
- Different rhetorical patterns and discourse styles. - Persistent grammatical or lexical errors that may on occasions impede comprehension or distract the reader. -Frequent non-impeding, "non-distracting" errors which may lead to a negative evaluation of the writer's language level.What is the difference between English for Specific Purposes and English for Academic Purposes? ›
The review of previous studies reveals that EGP focuses on general English language abilities of students whereas ESP focuses on specific skills and needs of learners based on a detailed analysis of learners' professional/academic needs. This distinction has important implications for ESP teachers.What is the relationship between EGAP and ESAP provide examples? ›
EGAP isolates the skills associated with study activities such as listening to lectures and participating in seminars and tutorials, and teaches the skills that are common to all disciplines. ESAP integrates the skills work of EGAP with help for students in their actual subject tasks.