What is it about?
This study revolves around the issue of whether or not in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) is specific, that is, whether language can be similar in different fields or that depending on the field, the language used is not necessarily the same. Comparing lexical bundles between the International Business Management (IBM) articles and Academic Formulas List (AFL), this study answer the debate.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
This study has been able to determine that lexical bundles in IBM and AFL vary significantly and are specific to their own field. Based on a trusted research approach, this study has been able to show that teaching and learning for EAP should be specific to a particular field.
Perspectives
The debate regarding specificity in EAP has been going on for a long time and I truly believe that the result of this study, which compares two articles of different fields, proves that language is specific based on its field. Therefore, I think that this study is important and necessary, as it can help me and others in EAP setting to enhance how we teach and learn in terms of syllabus and understanding.
Assoc Prof Dr (Ph.D) Kim Hua Tan
Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Specificity in English for Academic Purposes (EAP): A Corpus Analysis of Lexical Bundles in Academic Writing, 3L The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, June 2018, Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM Press),
DOI: 10.17576/3l-2018-2402-07.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
