RESULT: MORE OR LESS ACADEMIC

INTRODUCTION
This study investigates text engagement through the analysis of expanding diologistic
and contracting dialogistic features in the journal article (Text A) and essays (Text B)
on the same scientific topics. The main findings from this study are connected to the
academic level of these texts and the target audience of each genre.

EXTENSION
Through the data analysis, it shows that Text A uses more expanding-attribute
language dialogistic (64%) than Text B (7%). While Text B is richer in the use of
expanding-entertain dialogistic (93%). The use of expanding-attribute and expanding-
entertain language features are the criteria of academic text (need citation).
However, the level of the academic engagement between those texts might be
different. The expanding-attribute language features used in Text A shows that the
writer cited from other journals several times to support his own idea (cl.
1,2,5,7,10,12,14). This study suggests that Text A is more accountable and more
academic than Text B since it has a proven theoretical basis. In academic text, the
author's rational opinion needs to be accompanied by reasonable statements and
supporting evidence to convince the reader of their validity (Pratumtong et al., 2021).
This kind of engagement makes the Text A more suitable for the readers who have
specific academic background. The higher usage of expanding-entertain language
features in Text B, in contrast, indicates the text is suitable for more general readers
who have less knowledge on the specific topic. 

In addition, the use of expanding-contracting dialogism also shows that Text A is

significantly more academic than text B. In Text A the contracting proclaim and
disclaim are supported by the evidence rather than the writer self proclaims or
disclaims such as the following example (in bold):

Previous studies on pyrolysis, oxidation and structural characterisation of PE

[40–42] reveal the potential application of waste PE as a reburning fuel.
However, these studies, especially references [40–42] investigated the
reduction of NOx at temperatures below 550 ◦C, mainly in the absence of
oxygen. (cl. 13)

Whereas in the Text B the writers frequently used self-proclaim (11%) in his writing
without showing any evidence such as follow (in bold):

However, this process will result in poorer plastic quality, and thus these
recycled products are not widely used by industries. (cl. 9)

This study inferred that the writer of academic text preferably use expanding-attribute
language feature because it shows that the writer has his/her objectiveness in
describing their ideas

CONCLUSION
From the discussion above, it can be concluded that the journal article (Text A) and
the essay (Text B) have similarities and differences. Both of the texts use the same
academic language features of expanding dialogistic. However, only the journal
article which meets the academic text criteria because of the higher use of
expanding-attribute dialogistic features and proclaim with evidence. This kind of text
is suitable for academic people who have specific knowledge of the topic. On the
other hand, The essay shares general ideas without any specific references which
can be read by people with limited knowledge on the specific topic. Examining the
texts academic’s level by using dialogistic expanding and contracting language
features is the limitation of this study. There are more language features that need to
be examined to get a more thorough analysis.The results of this study can be used
by students as a guidance to differentiate academic writing for expert academic
readers and general readers with limited knowledge in specific topics.