The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Arabic and English abstracts in bilingual language science journals: Same or different?
Abstract
Although Arabic is a language with a long scholarly tradition, relatively little is known about the rhetorical and linguistic features of contemporary Arabic prose. In this paper, we examine 28 Arabic and English paired abstracts dealing with the language sciences drawn from three journals. The analysis shows in both sub-corpora little use of first person pronouns or promotional elements, and the move structures tended to be simple, often only background→ findings. Differences between the two languages included greater use of rhetorical and metaphorical flourishes in some Arabic texts and increased attention to background knowledge in some of the English ones. These findings may be related to certain scholastic traditions in the Arab World and to the fact that Arab humanities journals have only recently required articles to be accompanied by abstracts.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The study was implemented among Arab EFL learners, a population that has thus far been underrepresented in the instructional pragmatic literature and which is known to apply different rhetorical and argumentation traditions than the Western/Anglo-Saxon norms that typify English writing (e.g., Alharbi & Swales, 2011;El-Dakhs, 2020).”
From Investigating the impact of explicit and implicit instruction on the use of interactional metadiscourse markers (2022) · cites this paper as Alharbi & Swales, 2011
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
El-Dakhs, D. A. S., Yahya, N., & Pawlak, M. (2022) · Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education · doi:10.1186/s40862-022-00175-0 · Cited by 13
Zhang, M., & Zhang, J. (2026) · Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1093/applin/amaf032 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Alharbi, L. M., & Swales, J. M.
- Venue
- Languages in Contrast
- Publisher
- John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Published
- 2011-03-22
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 70-86
- ISSN
- 1387-6759
- 1569-9897
- Cited by
- 28
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Arabic and English abstracts in bilingual language science journals: Same or different? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1075/lic.11.1.06alh
- The paper
- Alharbi, L. M., & Swales, J. M. (2011). Arabic and English abstracts in bilingual language science journals: Same or different? Languages in Contrast. https://doi.org/10.1075/lic.11.1.06alh
