Lexical Bundles in Rhetorical Moves of Introductions in High-Impact Chinese and International English Linguistic Journals

Abstract

The research article introduction (RAI) is a critical section that establishes the scope, contextual background, and scholarly significance of a study. As the first encounter between the writer and the reader, the RAI should be strategically constructed to leave a positive first impression on readers and guide them into the research space. Its effectiveness largely depends on two essential discourse elements: rhetorical moves, which provide the organizational framework, and lexical bundles, which serve as recurrent multi-word expressions that help realize those moves. Although rhetorical moves in RAIs have been extensively studied, far less attention has been paid to how lexical bundles shape rhetorical structure, especially in high-impact English language journals. This study fills the gap by examining RAIs from Scopus-indexed Chinese and international journals, focusing on how lexical bundles signal moves and on the structural patterns of bundles associated with different moves and steps. Drawing on the adapted Swales’ (1990) CARS model and Biber et al.’s (1999) classification of lexical bundles, a corpus of 20 introductions was analyzed using a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods. The bundles were extracted using AntConc. The findings reveal that verb phrase bundles constitute the most frequent structural type across both corpora, whereas the auxiliary verb + noun phrase pattern occurs only once in the Chinese corpus and is absent in the international corpus. All three major moves (M1, M2, M3) are present in both datasets, with Move 1 Step 3 emerging as
the most prevalent. However, differences in sequencing are evident: Chinese RAIs generally follow an M1–M2–M3 progression, while international RAIs tend toward an M1–M3 pattern. The findings of this study provide a practical list that fits for choosing lexical bundles to realize each move and step, and have pedagogical implications for academic writers to properly construct the RAIs by considering the rhetorical conventions.