ENGLISH FOR

SPECIFIC
English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 PURPOSES
www.elsevier.com/locate/esp

An integration of corpus-based and

genre-based approaches to text analysis
in EAP/ESP: countering criticisms
against corpus-based methodologies
Lynne Flowerdew *

Language Centre, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology,

Clear Water Bay Road, Kowloon, Hong Kong

Abstract

In the past few years, several corpus-based studies have been carried out which either
explicitly in some cases, but more subtly in others, draw on aspects of genre theory for their
analyses. The purpose of this paper is to review those corpus studies which specifically draw on
either the English for Specific Purposes (following the Swales tradition of genre) or the New
Rhetoric approaches to genre. Through a review of such studies, it will be shown that the inte-
gration of both corpus-based and genre-based approaches to text analysis in EAP/ESP can, to
some extent, counteract some of the major criticisms that have been leveled against corpus lin-
guistic analyses, namely that such analyses apply bottom–up rather than top–down method-
ologies and that they do not consider the socio-cultural context as they deal with
decontextualized corpus data.
Ó 2004 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

*
Tel.: +852 2358 7855; fax: +852 2355 0249.
E-mail address: lclynne@ust.hk.

0889-4906/$30.00 Ó 2004 The American University. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.esp.2004.09.002
322 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

1. Introduction

In the past few years more emphasis has been put on corpus-based analyses in
EAP/ESP from a textlinguistic perspective to complement those analyses of lexical
and grammatical items or lexico-grammatical patternings carried out at the sen-
tence-level. Notably, many of the textlinguistic corpus studies reported on in the lit-
erature are genre-based in nature. The purpose of this article is to review those
corpus studies which specifically draw on aspects of either the English for Specific
Purposes (following the Swales (1990) tradition of genre) or the New Rhetoric ap-
proaches to genre theory. In so doing, I hope to show that the approaches taken
in these genre-based corpus studies can counteract some of the main criticisms which
have been levelled against corpus-based approaches to text analysis. The following
section provides a brief overview of the English for Specific Purposes and New Rhet-
oric approaches to genre theory which either explicitly in some cases, but more sub-
tly in others, underpin the corpus studies reviewed in the following sections.

2. Genre traditions

References in the literature have identified three different theoretical positions on

genre in applied linguistics, namely: (1) English for Specific Purposes according to
the Swalesian tradition of genre, (2) North American New Rhetoric studies, and
(3) Australian systemic functional linguistics (see Hyon (1996) for an overview article
of these three traditions). However, in this article I will only be concerned with the
first two approaches to genre and discuss areas where they overlap with each other in
the section below.

2.1. English for specific purposes

One approach put forward by Swales (1990), whose work has been seminal in
shaping genre theory in English for specific purposes (ESP), emphasises both the so-
cial function and form of spoken and written language in academic and research set-
tings, most notably research article introductions and grant proposals. For Swales, a
genre represents:
A class of communicative events, the members of which share some set of com-
municative purposes. These purposes are recognised by the expert members of
the parent discourse community, and thereby constitute the rationale for the
genre. This rationale shapes the schematic structure of the discourse and influ-
ences and constrains choice of content and style. . . .exemplars of a genre exhi-
bit various patterns of similarity in terms of structure, style, content and
intended audience (Swales, 1990, p. 58)
SwalesÕ research concentrates on genre in academic settings, with emphasis on the
introduction and discussion sections of research articles. Central to the notion of
genre in the ESP domain is the Ômove structureÕ analysis, which classifies segments
 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 323

of text according to their prototypical communicative purpose for a particular genre.

Swales (1990, p. 141) proposed the Create a Research Space (CARS) model for arti-
cle introductions consisting of three basic move structures: Move 1: Establishing a
territory; Move 2: Establishing a niche; Move 3: Occupying the niche. However,
Swales (2002b) has since cautioned against adopting too rigid and mechanistic a
framework towards move structure analysis and now proposes variations on this
CARS model to include Opening a Research Option, together with other possible
move structures.
Bhatia (1993), taking SwalesÕ work as the starting point for further development
of the notion of genre, has extended SwalesÕ work to include professional settings,
sub-genres within genres, and the mixing of genres. For example, the genre of the
research article can exhibit genre embedding such as an experimental laboratory-
based study, a survey article, a review article, and a state-of-the-art article. Bhatia
has also analysed the move structures of job application letters and sales letters, dem-
onstrating that they both belong to the promotional genre as they share the same
communicative purpose. Grant proposals, which have generic affinity to both aca-
demic research papers (Swales, 1990) and promotional genres (Bhatia, 1993, 1995)
have been researched by Connor and Mauranen (1999) who demonstrate that they
can be considered as instances of persuasive writing on the basis of their move struc-
ture patterning.
Although Hyon (1996, p. 695) has pointed out that Ô. . .many ESP scholars have
paid particular attention to detailing the formal characteristics of genres while focus-
ing less on the specialized functions of texts and their surrounding social contextsÕ,
this sociocultural context has been addressed in more recent ESP genre-based work.
For example, Bhatia (1999, 2002) emphasises the importance of intertextuality, the
relationship of the text under investigation to other related written and spoken texts
of the sociocultural context. It is the social constructivist view of language which is
very much to the fore in the New Rhetoric approach outlined below.

2.2. New Rhetoric

The New Rhetoric is concerned with composition studies and professional writing
in an L1 context whereas the ESP approach is directed towards NNS writing. As
mentioned previously, the work of the New Rhetoric school also places emphasis
on the social purposes that genres fulfil in certain situational contexts (see Bazerman,
1988, 1994; Freedman & Medway, 1994; Miller, 1984). Bazerman (1988) argues that
knowledge of social context surrounding texts is essential for helping writers select
rhetoric that is appropriate for a particular writing situation and that it is not suffi-
cient just to give students Ôthe formal trappings of the genres they need to work inÕ (p.
320). Freedman and Medway (1994, p. 11–12) also put forward a similar argument
when they say that Ôwhat has to be attended to . . . are features of the situation. . .
Knowing the gross surface features is the easy part, and insufficient on its ownÕ. . .
These scholars thus view genres as dynamic, social texts, which are not static but
ongoing processes of discourse production and reception shaped and influenced by
other related texts and utterances (intertextuality) of the sociocultural context.
324 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

Another way in which the New Rhetoric approach differs from the ESP one is
that with the emphasis on the sociocultural aspects of genres, scholars in the New
Rhetoric field have tended to use ethnographic (i.e., participant observation and
interviews) rather than linguistic or rhetorical methods, such as the move struc-
tures for analysing texts. It should also be emphasized that these two approaches
to genre should be seen as complementary to one another as they both recognize
the importance of the socio-cultural context and linguistic knowledge for shaping
a genre, albeit to quite differing degrees. Whilst acknowledging the overall goal of
genre as Ôsocial actionÕ, Berkenkotter and HuckinÕs (1995) work could be seen as
forming a bridge between the ESP and New Rhetoric approach as their work also
embraces both the form and content of genre knowledge as consistent with the
ESP approach.

3. Criticisms against corpus-based methodologies

Before discussing corpus-based studies which have recourse to genre-based ap-

proaches, it is first of all necessary to review criticisms against corpus-based method-
ologies. The most common tool for analyzing corpora is concordancing software for
displaying the key-word-in-context. One criticism that has been levelled against anal-
ysis based on concordance output is that the very methodology itself, in the form of
concordance and keyword searches, limits the analysis to a somewhat atomized, bot-
tom–up type of investigation of the corpus data. As Swales (2002a) claims, this type
of analysis is at odds with the more top–down kind of process-based analysis com-
mon to the genre approach to text analysis, where the starting point is with the mac-
rostructure of the text with a focus on larger units of text rather than sentence-level,
lexico-grammatical patterning.
Another main argument that has been put forward against a corpus-based meth-
odology for analysis of text is that it does not take into account the contextual fea-
tures of the text. As Widdowson (1998, 2002) points out, corpus data are but a
sample of language, as opposed to an example of authentic language, because it is
divorced from the communicative context in which it was created: Ôthe text travels
but the context does not travel with itÕ (see Tribble, 2002, p. 134–135, for a descrip-
tion of all the contextual features that should be considered in addition to the lin-
guistic analysis of a corpus). In fact, Hunston (2002, p. 23) sees the absence of
visual and social context for the interpretation of concordance lines as one of the
most serious drawbacks in using corpus analysis. This lack of contextual features
is particularly problematic for the corpus analyst when dealing with pragmatic fea-
tures of text, which may only be recoverable from the socio-cultural context.
The same arguments relating to the decontextualized nature of corpus data have
also been raised for pedagogy. Widdowson (1998) questions how corpus data can be
transformed from samples to examples of language, i.e., how can students authenti-
cate the corpus data to suit the socio-cultural and linguistic parameters of their own
environment? Meanwhile, Aston (1995, p. 260) also draws attention to this same as-
pect of corpus data:
 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 325

. . .in so far as it [concordancing] involves the decontextualisation of individual

instances from their original communicative setting, concordance analysis fails
to engage the learners in those processes of negotiating meaning in its prag-
matic aspects. . .
In the following sections, I will review those corpus-based studies which rely on a
genre approach for their analyses and show how the methodologies applied in these
studies do go some way towards counteracting the criticisms leveled against corpus-
based methodologies outlined above.

4. Genre-based corpus studies

More integration of genre analysis and corpus-based investigations has been

called for in very recent work on genre analysis (Paltridge, 2001; Wennerstrom,
2003). The studies of EAP/ESP writing reported on below, which have been con-
ducted according to the genre principles of either the ESP or New Rhetoric ap-
proaches, bear witness to this synthesis of genre and corpus linguistic approaches.
Although, in some cases, the studies do not explicitly state the approach they are
adopting, it is clear from their methodological descriptions that they adhere to
various genre principles of ESP-type text analysis. Other studies combining ele-
ments of both approaches to genre can be viewed as broadly genre-based in
nature.

4.1. Corpus-based studies from an ESP perspective

Several researchers (Bondi, 2001; Connor, Precht, & Upton, 2002; Gledhill, 2000;
Henry & Roseberry, 2001; Marco, 2000; Thompson, 2000; Upton, 2002; Upton &
Connor, 2001) have conducted corpus-based studies which can be considered as
firmly based in the ESP genre camp. What is noteworthy about these studies is that
many of these corpus linguists have devised tagging systems for coding the generic
Ômove structuresÕ of the ESP texts under investigation. In fact, Flowerdew (1998),
based on a suggestion by Leech (1991), advocated that more work could be carried
out on the discourse level of text through inserting tags Ôto indicate the generic Ômove
structuresÕ such as background, scope, and purpose in the introductory sections of
reportsÕ (p. 549). The following three studies recount research where such a method-
ology has been successfully applied.
The first example is ThompsonÕs (2000) examination of the use of citations in a
corpus of 20 Ph.D. theses (RAT, Reading Academic Texts Corpus) written by native
speakers from different disciplines within the field of Agriculture at the University of
Reading. Based on Swales (1990, p. 149) concept of integral citations (those citations
appearing within the sentence) and non-integral citations (citations which are sepa-
rated from the sentence by brackets and which play no explicit role in the sentence),
Thompson drew up a tagging system which differentiates between these two impor-
tant types of citations.
326 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

Upton (2002) reports on research being carried out at the Indiana Center for
Intercultural Communication (ICIC) at Indiana University on non-profit philan-
thropic discourse. The sub-corpus used in the study is drawn from the ‘‘ICIC Fund-
raising Corpus’’ compiled under the direction of Ulla Connor, and comprises
146,693 words of 242 direct mail letters from 71 organizations. A Ômove structureÕ
tagging system was devised in order to identify the rhetorical structure of this type
of persuasive discourse. As Upton points out, Bhatia (1998) has already identified
a basic six-move structure (e.g., establishing credentials, introducing the cause) for
fundraising discourse. However, as genre analysts are keen to emphasise, Ômove
structuresÕ should not be seen as a rigid set of labels for coding text but instead
should accept variations of the prototypical move structure patterning for a genre.
Indeed, Upton also discusses the rationale for the changes and modifications made
to the basic moves proposed by Bhatia to accommodate the more diffuse data in the
ICIC corpus, where some moves such as Ôoffering incentivesÕ were found to be
embedded in other moves.
Another study which also makes use of a tagset to code salient Ômove structuresÕ is
a corpus analysis of job application letters written by Belgian, Finnish and American
business studies students (see Connor et al., 2002; Upton & Connor, 2001). What is
novel about this research is that it analyses move structure patterning, specifically
politeness strategies, in relation to cross-cultural differences, thus acknowledging
the cultural role that the participants could play in shaping the discourse (see Bhatia
(1999) for a discussion on the role of participants).
In a study conducted by Flowerdew and Dudley-Evans (2002) on a genre analysis
of 53 editorial letters to international journal contributors, corpus methodologies in
the form of frequency lists and concordancing were used to extract interpersonal fea-
tures within various move structures. For example, Flowerdew and Dudley-Evans
found that a word frequency count showed ÔIÕ to be the second most frequent lexical
item in the letters and a concordance of this item revealed that it was most often used
in the construction ÔI think you + modal verbÕ in providing recommendations.
It is evident that the corpus studies reviewed above, which rely on tagging for the
identification of move structure patterning, are indebted to the ESP approach to
genre analysis. There are two other studies (cf. Gledhill, 2000; Marco, 2000), which
are also in the ESP camp approach to text analysis. For example, GledhillÕs study
examines the phraseologies of various prepositions in different sections of research
articles. Although neither of these studies relies on a set of tags for delineation of
the rhetorical structure of the text, the phraseologies uncovered by concordancing
software are correlated with specific sub-sections of the text.
The studies cited above do provide some counter-evidence to SwalesÕ criticism
that concordancing software encourages a more bottom–up rather than top–down
processing of text. While SwalesÕ point may be valid for those analyses carried out
on 2000-word samples of text, a bottom–up approach can be partly avoided by
working with whole texts, as in the case of all the studies reviewed above. This is be-
cause the location in a text of a particular item may be of relevance for indicating the
overall rhetorical structure, as exemplified in GledhillÕs work. SwalesÕ criticism is also
obviated, in part, by the tagging of larger stretches of text for rhetorical features as in
 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 327

the studies carried out by Thompson (2000), Connor et al. (2002) and Upton (2002),
where lexico-grammatical features are examined in discourse-based move structures
rather than at the level of truncated concordance lines or sentences.
However, this tagging software is constrained by several factors. First, the dis-
course-based tagging would have to be done manually and would therefore be
well-nigh impossible to carry out on large-scale corpora running into millions of
words. Another difficulty is that it demands close scrutiny of the text, which is obvi-
ously very time-consuming. Its application is therefore mainly restricted to small,
specialized corpora, such as the ones described above. Discourse-type tags can be
utilized for those genres which exhibit a fairly formulaic, conventionalized rhetorical
structure, such as job application letters, but this type of tagging would probably not
be a viable option for use with texts comprising mixed genres or exhibiting a wide
range of move structures or embedding of move structures, as it would probably
be too unwieldy to implement (Flowerdew, 2000, 2002). However, software tools
for analysis are becoming more sophisticated and a tool such as WinMax has the
flexibility to code embedded move structures.
Another reason offered by McEnery and Wilson (1996, p. 52) for the restricted use
of discourse-tags is that it may be difficult to assign a specific function to certain rhe-
torical features on account of the fact that their interpretation relies on contextual
features: Ô. . .linguistic categories such as politeness are necessarily context-dependent
and their identification in texts is a greater source of dispute between different lin-
guists than the identification of other linguistic phenomenaÕ. The following section
reviews corpus-based investigations which do consider this aspect of context-
dependence.

4.2. Corpus-based studies from a New Rhetoric perspective

Although none of the studies mentioned below explicitly make reference to the
ÔNew RhetoricÕ approach, they do seem to take into account the ethnographic
dimension as they rely on various aspects of the socio-cultural dimension for inter-
pretation of the corpus data.
For example, both Gledhill (1996) and Hyland (1998) rely on interview data to
supplement their corpus analyses. Gledhill (1996), in addition to taking an ESP ap-
proach to the analysis of a corpus of medical research articles referred to in the fore-
going section, has also adopted an ethnographic approach to his choice of texts for
inclusion in his corpus by consulting specialist informants for their advice on which
texts they considered to be most representative of the field in order to obtain a bal-
anced corpus. Meanwhile, Hyland (1998) has consulted specialist informants for
his study on the use of hedging devices in a corpus of 80 research articles in cell
and molecular biology. To ensure a faithful interpretation of hedging devices, Hyland
involved in his analysis four native-speaker biologists, who were all experienced
researchers and writers in the field, by asking them to voice their reactions to under-
lined features in the text and also by having them participate in small focus group dis-
cussions to elucidate why the ÔexpertÕ writing under investigation was appropriately
phrased for the readers. In connection with the writer vs. reader role, Flowerdew
328 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

(2000) considered this dimension in her analysis of how recommendations were for-
mulated in a 200,000-word corpus of 90 analytical reports written by undergraduates.
She found that, in many cases, the recommendations were expressed in a too direct
way (e.g. Therefore, we strongly recommend that. . .) that was socioculturally inappro-
priate for the context as the students were writing these reports to departmental heads
in which case more mitigating expressions would be in order.
Proponents of the New Rhetoric approach also consider the influence of other re-
lated texts in the construction of discourse. This aspect of ÔintertextualityÕ, i.e., the
relationship of the text under investigation to other related texts, is a feature that
has been considered by several corpus linguists in their explanations of certain fea-
tures of learner writing. For example, Milton (1998) compared a 500,000-word inter-
language corpus consisting of Hong Kong ÔUse of EnglishÕ examination scripts with
scripts receiving the highest grades from the Cambridge Examinations Syndicate
ÔGeneral StudiesÕ Examination. He investigated the overused and underused four-
word strings used by students, concluding that the overuse of such expressions such
as All in all, In a nutshell, could be traced back to the lists of expressions distributed
by Hong Kong tutorial schools, where high school students register to cram vocab-
ulary and model answers before public examinations. Another corpus study which
compares learner writing with native-speaker writing is that by McEnery and Kifle
(2002) which examined the use of epistemic markers in a 22,000 word learner corpus
compiled from 92 short argumentative compositions written by Eritrean students
with similar devices in a comparable corpus of argumentative essays written by Eng-
lish native-speaker schoolchildren. Interestingly, they found that the Eritrean stu-
dents used weaker epistemic devices, signalling possibility rather than probability,
than the native-speaker students did, which contradicts similar corpus studies com-
paring NS and NNS writing (see Aijmer, 2002; Hewings & Hewings, 2002; Lorenz,
1998; Hyland & Milton, 1997) where student writing was seen to be too direct and
unhedged. The explanation they give for this phenomenon is the influence of the
coursebook used in Eritrean schools which encourages students to use more tentative
and uncertain language. A third corpus-based study carried out by Flowerdew
(2003) found that to compensate for their lack of knowledge of appropriate lex-
ico-grammatical phrases for positing solutions to problems, students over-relied
on the rubrics provided in the guidelines for the report-writing assignment.
The above three accounts thus show the importance of contextual and intertextual
features in the interpretation of corpus data, where a satisfactory explanation for the
corpus data might not be available from the text alone. Knowledge of contextual fea-
tures may also facilitate greater use of discourse-based tags, the use of which has pre-
viously been fairly restricted (McEnery & Wilson, 1996). (Other corpus linguists,
such as Tognini-Bonelli (2001) & Stubbs (1996), have a different theoretical and
philosophical orientation towards the role of ethnography in corpus linguistics as
they view corpus-based analyses as revealing, rather than illuminated by, contextual
and ideological aspects of the ethnographic dimension.)
WiddowsonÕs argument, summarized earlier, that corpus investigations are based
on decontextualized instances of text may be true for those analyses using large-scale
corpora where contextual features are not easily recoverable from the text alone.
 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 329

However, this criticism does not hold so much weight for those corpus-based inves-
tigations where the analyst is also in the privileged position of being a Ôspecialist
informantÕ. This is where I see the value of working with small, specialized corpora
of EAP/ESP texts such as the ones reviewed in this article (see Flowerdew, in press,
2005, for more detailed discussion of such corpora), where the analyst is probably
also the compiler and does have familiarity with the wider socio-cultural context
in which the text was created, or else has access to specialist informants in the area.
The compiler-cum-analyst can therefore act as a kind of mediating ethnographic spe-
cialist informant to shed light on the corpus data. As Aston (2002, p. 11) notes: ÔIt is
much easier to interpret concordances or numerical data if you know exactly what
texts a corpus consists of, since this allows a greater degree of top–down processingÕ.
Also, it can be argued that corpus data may not be completely devoid of contextual
features. For example, the Michigan Corpus of Spoken Academic English (MI-
CASE) is accompanied by a comprehensive set of speech event and speaker attri-
butes to aid analysis (see Powell & Simpson, 2001). Its British counterpart, the
BASE corpus (Nesi, 2000) is made up of video recordings of academic lectures,
which can thus reflect various contextual features of the discourse.
The exploitation of small corpora is useful not only for analysis, but also for ped-
agogic purposes. The more the corpus draws on features from the studentsÕ own so-
cio-cultural environment, the easier it should be for the teacher to act as a kind of
mediating specialist informant of the raw corpus data, thereby authenticating the
data for classroom use to fit the studentsÕ reality.
In this section, I have reviewed those studies which draw on the kind of ethno-
graphic features which are associated with the New Rhetoric approach to genre.
(It should be stated here that these corpus studies, unlike those cited for the ESP ap-
proach, are not derived directly from the New Rhetoric approach, but should be seen
as having recourse to its major tenets.). Such studies using various contextual fea-
tures for interpretation of corpus data have been insightful in shedding light on
the corpus analysis, thus offsetting the argument that corpus data is Ôdecontextua-
lisedÕ. It is interesting to note that more recent studies of small, specialised corpora
bear witness to the increasingly important role that the ethnographic dimension now
plays in corpus analysis (see Connor & Upton, in press, 2005).
In sum, the corpus-based studies reviewed above are testament to the fact that
carefully-chosen and appropriately constructed texts do lend themselves to more
top–down processing and ethnographic analysis on account of the fact that they
are amenable to discourse-based tagging and situated within a socio-cultural frame-
work with which the analyst is familiar.

5. Conclusion

This article has demonstrated that many worthwhile corpus-based investigations

either emanating directly from the Swales tradition of ESP, or incorporating ele-
ments of the New Rhetoric approach to genre, have been undertaken during the past
few years. Corpus-based methodologies have been informed by genre principles of
330 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

text analysis, while at the same time it has been shown that genre theories can profit
from corpus-based methodologies. Most importantly, though, this article has at-
tempted to rebut, by citing some recent investigations in the field, some of the major
criticisms that have been raised against corpus linguistic methodologies, thus proving
their worth as an investigative tool.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

References

Aijmer, J. (2002). Modality in advanced Swedish learnersÕ written language. In S. Granger et al. (Eds.) (pp.
55–76).
Aston, G. (1995). Corpora in language pedagogy: Matching theory and practice. In G. Cook & B.
Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp. 257–270). Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Aston, G. (2002). The learner as corpus designer. In B. Kettemann & G. Marco (Eds.), Language and
computers: Studies in practical linguistics (pp. 9–25). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in
science. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
Bazerman, C. (1994). Systems of genres and the enactment of social intentions. In A. Freedman & P.
Medway (Eds.), Genre and the new rhetoric (pp. 79–101). London: Taylor and Francis.
Berkenkotter, C., & Huckin, T. (1995). Genre knowledge in disciplinary communication. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (1995). Applied genre analysis and ESP. TESOL France Journal, 2(2), 161–179.
Bhatia, V. K. (1998). Generic patterns in fundraising discourse. New Directions for Philanthropic
Fundraising, 22, 95–110.
Bhatia, V. K. (1999). Integrating products, processes, purposes and participants in professional writing. In
C. Candlin & K. Hyland (Eds.), Writing: Texts, processes and practices (pp. 21–39). London:
Longman.
Bhatia, V. K. (2002). A generic view of academic discourse. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse
(pp. 21–39). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Bondi, M. (2001). Small corpora and language variation: Reflexivity across genres. In M. Ghadessy et al.
(Eds.), Small corpus studies and ELT (pp. 135–174). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Connor, U., & Mauranen, A. (1999). Linguistic analysis of grant proposals. English for Specific Purposes,
18(1), 47–62.
Connor, U., & Upton, T. (Eds.). (in press, 2005). Discourse in the professions: Perspectives from corpus
linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Connor, U., Precht, K., & Upton, T. (2002). In S. Granger, J. Hung, & S. Petch-Tyson (Eds.), Computer
learner corpora, second language acquisition and foreign language teaching (pp. 175–194). Amsterdam:
John Benjamins.
Flowerdew, L. (2000). Corpus-based analyses in EAP. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse
(pp. 95–114). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Flowerdew, J., & Dudley-Evans, T. (2002). Genre analysis of editorial letters to international journal
contributors. Applied Linguistics, 23(4), 463–489.
Flowerdew, J. (Ed.). (2002). Academic discourse. London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Flowerdew, L. (1998). Corpus linguistic techniques applied to textlinguistics. System, 26(4), 541–552.
 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332 331

Flowerdew, L. (2000). Investigating referential and pragmatic errors in a learner corpus. In L. Burnard &
T. McEnery (Eds.), Rethinking language pedagogy from a corpus perspective (pp. 117–124). Frankfurt
am main: Peter Lang Publishers.
Flowerdew, L. (2003). An analysis of the problem-solution pattern in an apprentice and professional
corpus of technical writing from a systemic-functional perspective. TESOL Quarterly, 37(3), 489–511.
Flowerdew, L. (in press, 2005.) The argument for using English specialized corpora to understand
academic and professional language. In U. Connor & T. Upton (Eds.), Discourse in the professions:
Perspectives from corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Freedman, A., & Medway, P. (1994). Genre and the New Rhetoric. London: Taylor & Francis.
Gledhill, C. (1996). Science as a collocation: Phraseology in cancer research articles. In S. Botley et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of teaching and language corpora conference 1996 UCREL (Vol. 9, pp. 108 126),
University of Lancaster, UK.
Gledhill, C. (2000). The discourse function of collocation in research article introductions. English for
Specific Purposes, 19(2), 115–135.
Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. (2001). Using a small corpus to obtain data for teaching a genre. In M.
Ghadessy, et al. (Eds.), Small corpus studies and ELT (pp. 93–133). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hewings, M., & Hewings, A. (2002). ‘‘It is interesting to note that . . .’’: a comparative study of
anticipatory ÔitÕ in student and published writing. English for Specific Purposes, 21(4), 367–383.
Hunston, S. (2002). Corpora in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 studentsÕ writing. Journal of
Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183–205.
Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30(4), 693–722.
Leech, G. (1991). The state of the art in corpus linguistics. In K. Aijmer & B. Altenberg (Eds.), English
corpus linguistics: Studies in honour of Jan Svartik (pp. 8–29). London: Longman.
Lorenz, G. (1998). Overstatement in advanced learnersÕ writing: Stylistic aspects of adjective intensifi-
cation. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 53–66). London: Longman.
Marco, M. J. L. (2000). Collocational frameworks in medical research papers: A genre-based study.
English for Specific Purposes, 19(1), 63–86.
McEnery, T., & Kifle, N. (2002). Epistemic modality in argumentative essays of second-language writers.
In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 182–195). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
McEnery, T., & Wilson, A. (1996). Corpus linguistics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Textbooks in Applied
Linguistics.
Miller, C. (1984). Genre as social action. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 70, 157–178.
Milton, J. (1998). Exploiting L1 and interlanguage corpora in the design of an electronic language learning
and production environment. In S. Granger (Ed.), Learner English on computer (pp. 186–198). London:
Longman.
Nesi, H. (2000). A corpus-based analysis of academic lectures across disciplines. In J. Cotterill & A. Ife
(Eds.), Language across boundaries (pp. 201–218). London and New York: Continuum.
Paltridge, B. (2001). Genre and the language learning classroom. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Powell, C., & Simpson, R. (2001). Collaboration between corpus linguists and digital librarians for the
MICASE web search interface. In R. Simpson & J. Swales (Eds.), Corpus linguistics in North America
(pp. 32–47). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and corpus analysis. Oxford: Blackwell.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Swales, J. M. (2002a). Integrated and fragmented worlds: EAP materials and corpus linguistics. In J.
Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 150–164). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Swales, J. M. (2002b). On models in applied discourse analysis. In C. Candlin (Ed.), Research and practice
in professional discourse (pp. 61–77). University of Macquarie: NCELTR.
Thompson, P. (2000). Citation practices in PhD theses. In L. Burnard & T. McEnery (Eds.), Rethinking
language pedagogy from a corpus perspective (pp. 91–101). Frankfurt am main: Peter Lang Publishers.
Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
332 L. Flowerdew / English for Specific Purposes 24 (2005) 321–332

Tribble, C. (2002). Corpora and corpus analysis: New windows on academic writing. In J. Flowerdew
(Ed.), Academic discourse (pp. 131–149). London: Longman, Pearson Education.
Upton, T. (2002). Understanding direct mail letters as a genre. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics,
7(1), 65–85.
Upton, T., & Connor, U. (2001). Using computerised corpus analysis to investigate the textlinguistic
discourse moves of a genre. English for Specific Purposes, 20(4), 313–329.
Wennerstrom, A. (2003). Discourse analysis in the classroom. Volume 2. Genres of writing. Ann Arbor:
University of Michigan Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4),
705–716.
Widdowson, H.G. (2002). Corpora and language teaching tomorrow. In Keynote lecture delivered at 5th
teaching and language corpora conference, Bertinoro, Italy, 29 July.