Writing Abstracts Through the Lenses of Rhetorical Moves

Writing Abstracts Through the Lenses of Rhetorical Moves

By Janpha Thadphoothon

Alright, let's get into this. You know, I've been thinking a lot about abstracts lately, and I'd like to entertain you with the idea that they're not just summaries, are they? They're like, little persuasive essays. And that's what I want to talk about today. "Writing Abstracts Through the Lenses of Rhetorical Moves," that's the title, and I think it's spot on.

Now, as we know, an article abstract is often the first thing readers and reviewers see. I am sure you would agree with me that setting the right tone up front can impact whether your readers continue reading, influence the way the rest of your text is received, and, in terms of reviewers, it may determine whether your article is accepted to be published. What makes for a strong article abstract? What goes in and what stays out? I mean, these are the questions, right?

As far as I know, the topic on rhetorical moves falls squarely within the use of metadiscourse, as discussed extensively by Ken Hyland. His research elucidates how writers employ linguistic resources not merely to convey content, but to actively guide readers through the text and establish a clear authorial stance. Specifically, Hyland's exploration of interactive and interactional metadiscourse provides a framework for understanding how writers signal their rhetorical moves. For instance, the strategic use of transition markers, hedges, and boosters enables writers to delineate the progression of their arguments and manage reader expectations, effectively shaping the reader's interpretation of the text. This perspective, as detailed in his seminal work, Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing (Hyland, 2005), is highly relevant in understanding how writers navigate the complexities of academic discourse and successfully achieve their communicative goals.

I must admit that I was intrigued when I came across Mark Pedretti, Director of the Center for Writing and Rhetoric at Claremont Graduate University. He says there's something very commonsensical about writing an abstract. I like the idea of that. In his webinar, “How to Structure & Write an Article Abstract,” Pedretti recommends thinking of an abstract as a cognitive roadmap for your readers; it generates the expectations that are going to inform how the reader approaches the text. I guess it is like giving them a preview of the journey.

I am not an expert, but I have read somewhere that a closely constrained genre, abstract writing is governed by a number of fairly predictable conventions. I guess this is true for most academic writing, isn't it?

Pedretti, you see, he explained, “A good abstract is like writing a haiku. It is very tightly constrained and you have to accomplish a lot in a very small amount a space. Simplicity is a key watchword.” I somehow think he's right about that. No one knows everything, but I would like to emphasize that simplicity is key.

Fundamentally, I would argue that a good abstract should serve to summarize the text, preview the text to give cues to readers, advertise the text, and assist in classifying the text for professional indexers and database abstract writers. To that end, rather than using a strict structure format as your writing model, Pedretti suggests using the following five key rhetorical moves. I think this is where it gets interesting.

Let me introduce you to the notion of these moves:

1. Introduce the situation or problem: This is the argument for the centrality, importance, or other relevance of your topic. For theoretical articles this often starts with a question. You know, like, "Why should we care about this?"

2. Explain the purpose of the research: This move is usually demarcated by signaling words. There are very predicable lead-ins that should be used to signal this move to your readers, such as: “This research investigates…” or “We analyze…” It's like saying, "Here's what I'm trying to do."

3. Describe the methods, materials, and/or procedures: This is the most flexible of the moves. It can be compressed or even omitted if you need to cut length. My gut tells me that this part is often the first to go when you're fighting for word count.

4. Present the findings: Due to the length restrictions of abstracts, you can only include your major finding(s) or the key takeaway(s). These are signaled by statements such as: “The data indicates…” or “We found…” This is the "Here's what I discovered" part.

5. Discuss implications or recommendations: Gesturing toward the broader horizon of your research, this is your “so what” question—why your research matters. Examples of common phrases include: for additional applications, use “…can be applied…”; for policy recommendations, use “… need to do…”; for further research, use “Additional studies are needed.” This is the "Here's why you should care" bit.

Thinking of your abstract in terms of these rhetorical moves can provide more flexibility and ease in the writing process. “I like this option much more than thinking of an abstract as a structure, which is more of a static entity,” said Pedretti. “You have a number of objectives you are trying to accomplish, most likely in a relatively predictable order, but there are many different strategies that you can use to meet those goals. Your tasks are the same, but the rhetorical moves provide leeway to accomplish your goals.” I somehow think it is a great way to put it.

Nevertheless, it is my long-held belief that (though I could be wrong) there are other variations to consider when writing an abstract, the most important being word count. A short abstract can be limited to just 50 words, which provides enough room to cover purpose of research, your key finding(s), and why it matters. I guess it is like an elevator pitch, right?

The typical length of an abstract ranges from 100 to 250 words. They say that's the sweet spot.

Now, let's look at an example:

Attitudes towards English Language learning Among DPU Business English Students

Previous studies show that attitudes and behavior are linked. Attitudes are important in foreign language learning. Students with positive attitudes are often those with higher language proficiency. In this study, we investigated 35 university students. Likert’s type questionnaires were used to collect data. Results showed that the majority of the students had positive attitudes towards English language learning. This suggests a potentially favorable foundation for future pedagogical strategies aimed at further enhancing English proficiency within this student cohort. Further research is needed to explore the specific motivational factors contributing to these positive attitudes and how they can be effectively leveraged to optimize learning outcomes, particularly in light of the evolving demands of the globalized business landscape.

I know you would agree with me that this abstract, while concise, still manages to hit those key rhetorical moves.

However challenging, I determine to make it clear that understanding these moves can really change the way you approach abstract writing. It's not just about summarizing; it's about persuading, informing, and, well, making your research shine.

Those were the days when everything was simple, but now, with academic writing, we must be precise. Nevertheless, it is my belief that by understanding these rhetorical moves, we can make the abstract writing process a little less daunting.

In my opinion, mastering the abstract is a crucial skill for any academic. And I am sure you would agree with me that by using these rhetorical moves, we can craft abstracts that are not only informative but also engaging.

Having said that, I realize that everyone has their own style, but I hope these insights have been helpful.

References:

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum

Forester, M. (August 24, 2018). 5 Rhetorical moves for writing abstracts. Retrieved from https://blog.taaonline.net/2018/08/5-rhetorical-moves-for-writing-abstracts/