A Corpus-Based Comparative Analysis of Vocabulary and Paratext in Design and Engineering Design Articles

Authors

  • Murat Bengisu

    Department of Industrial Design, İzmir University of Economics, İzmir 35330, Turkey

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/jler.v8i1.12746
Received: 4 May 2025 | Revised: 16 June 2025 | Accepted: 21 June 2025 | Published Online: 29 June 2025

Abstract

This study is an attempt to understand some of the differences between Design and Engineering Design disciplines. Linguistic studies in the field of design are rare and there are no studies in the literature that compare vocabularies in different design disciplines. A Design corpus of 112 research articles with 995,318 words and an Engineering Design corpus of 95 articles with 1,262,264 words were used to compare differences in vocabulary and paratextual features. The work is based on discourse communities proposed by Swales. The findings demonstrate that a comparative quantitative vocabulary analysis is a reliable tool to compare and contrast keywords and terms specific to each discipline. Results indicate that each discipline has developed its own specific vocabulary, which can be statistically identified using lexical analysis software and comparison with a reference corpus. Words including human, user, and experience were determined to be keywords in Design, while model, problem, and number are keywords in Engineering Design. The most prominent differences in terms of paratext are the use of equations and tables in Engineering Design articles and the frequent use of photographs in Design articles. It is argued that these marked differences, especially in paratext, are due to different epistemologies, academic traditions, and historical origins in each field.

Keywords:

Vocabulary; Keyword; Paratext; Engineering Design; Design; Corpus Linguistics

References

[1] Buchanan, R., 1990. Myth and maturity: Toward a new order in the decade of design. Design Issues. 6(2), 70–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1511439

[2] ABET, 2023. Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs. ABET: Baltimore, MD, USA. Available from: https://www.abet.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/2024-2025_EAC_Criteria.pdf

[3] Biber, D., Conrad, S., 2009. Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511814358

[4] Biber, D., 2006. University Language: A Corpus Based Study of Spoken and Written Registers. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.23

[5] Trosborg, A., 1997. Text Typology and Translation. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands. pp. 3–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.26

[6] Elharraki, B., 2022. Translation between register analysis and critical discourse analysis. Indian Journal of Language and Linguistics. 3(2), 15–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54392/ijll2222

[7] Schmitt, N. (Ed.), 2010. An Introduction to Applied Linguistics. Hodder Education: London, UK.

[8] Cronin, B., Franks, S., 2006. Trading cultures: Resource mobilization and service rendering in the life sciences as revealed in the journal article's paratext. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 57(14), 1909–1918. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20407

[9] Salager‐Meyer, F., Ariza, M.A., Berbesí, M.P., 2009. “Backstage solidarity” in Spanish‐ and English‐written medical research papers: Publication context and the acknowledgment paratext. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. 60(2), 307–317. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20981

[10] Balcıoğlu, T., 2024. Guide to the World of Design. TMMOB Mimarlar Odası: Ankara, Turkey. (in Turkish)

[11] Gibson, Z.V., Clarke, P., Murphy, M., 2023. An historical review of state of the art architectural education: Teaching beyond the curriculum: A focus on pedagogy 2023. In Proceedings of the Architecture Media Politics Society 'Teaching Beyond the Curriculum' Conference, Online, 15–17 November 2023; pp. 365–377.

[12] Cross, N., 1993. Science and design methodology: A review. Research in Engineering Design. 5(2), 63–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02032575

[13] Swales, J., 2014. The concept of discourse community. In: Wardle, E., Downs, D. (Eds.). Writing about Writing. Bedford/St. Martin's: Boston, MA, USA. pp. 466–479.

[14] Swales, J.M., 1998. Other Floors, Other Voices: A Textography of a Small University Building. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, USA.

[15] Borg, E., 2003. Discourse community. ELT Journal. 57(4), 398–400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/57.4.398

[16] Hyland, K., 2015. Genre, discipline and identity. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. 19, 32–43. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.02.005

[17] Paltridge, B., 2008. Textographies and the researching and teaching of writing. Ibérica. 15, 9–24.

[18] Cross, N., 2001. Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues. 17(3), 49–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/074793601750357196

[19] Osgood, L., Johnston, C.R., 2022. Design and engineering: A classification and commentary. Education Sciences. 12(4), 232. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12040232

[20] Burleson, G., Ostrowski, A.K., Brubaker, E.R., et al., 2025. Advancing engineering design research through the use of qualitative and participatory methodologies. In Proceedings of the International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Anaheim, CA, USA, 17–20 August 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1115/DETC2025-169173

[21] Khakzand, M., Samir, A., 2024. Overlapping of the semiotics in the fields of linguistics and architecture: A relational analysis approach. A|Z ITU Journal of the Faculty of Architecture. 21, 79–98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.58278/0.2024.34

[22] Goubran, S., 2021. Sustainability in architectural design projects—A semiotic understanding. Social Semiotics. 31(4), 625–651. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2019.1681062

[23] Swales, J.M., Barks, D., Ostermann, A.C., et al., 2001. Between critique and accommodation: Reflections on an EAP course for Masters of Architecture students. English for Specific Purposes. 20, 439–458. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(01)00020-5

[24] Dannels, D.P., 2005. Performing tribal rituals: A genre analysis of “crits” in design studios. Communication Education. 54(2), 136–160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/03634520500213165

[25] Morton, J., 2009. Genre and disciplinary competence: A case study of contextualisation in an academic speech genre. English for Specific Purposes. 28(4), 217–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.04.005

[26] Caballero Rodríguez, M.d.R., 2003. Talking about space: Image metaphor in architectural discourse. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics. 1(1), 87–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/arcl.1.05cab

[27] Caballero, R., 2014. Language, space and body: Sensing and construing built space through metaphor. In: Bamford, J., Poppi, F., Mazzi, D. (Eds.). Space, Place and the Discursive Construction of Identity. Peter Lang: Bern, Switzerland. pp. 107–134.

[28] Lloyd, P., 2000. Storytelling and the development of discourse in the engineering design process. Design Studies. 21(4), 357–373. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00007-7

[29] Atcheson, H., 2025. Lexical bundles in academic articles from arts disciplines. Discourse and Interaction. 18(2), 57–79. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/DI2025-2-57

[30] Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G.N., et al., 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. John Benjamins Publishing Company: Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

[31] Hyland, K., 2008. As can be seen: Lexical bundles and disciplinary variation. English for Specific Purposes. 27(1), 4–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2007.06.001

[32] Nation, I.S.P., 2001. Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759

[33] Gong, T., Liu, L., 2025. A BERT-based method to develop discipline-specific academic vocabulary lists in large corpora. English for Specific Purposes. 82, 1–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2025.11.002

[34] Fainman, I., Tokar, Y., 2018. Subject-specific vocabulary and its stratification: The case of aviation English. Advanced Education. 9, 240–245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.114135

[35] Baker, M., 1988. Sub-technical vocabulary and the ESP teacher: An analysis of some rhetorical items in medical journal articles. Reading in a Foreign Language. 4(2), 91–105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.64152/10125/67005

[36] Yitzhaki, M., 1994. Relation of title length of journal articles to number of authors. Scientometrics. 30(1), 321–332. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02017231

[37] Yitzhaki, M., 1997. Variation in informativity of titles of research papers in selected humanities journals: A comparative study. Scientometrics. 38(2), 219–229. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457410

[38] Yitzhaki, M., 2002. Relation of the title length of a journal article to the length of the article. Scientometrics. 54(3), 435–447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1016038617639

[39] Scott, M.R., 1997. The right word in the right place: Key word associates in two languages. AAA: Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik. 22(2), 239–252.

[40] Seale, C., Ziebland, S., Charteris-Black, J., 2006. Gender, cancer experience and internet use: A comparative keyword analysis of interviews and online cancer support groups. Social Science & Medicine. 62(10), 2577–2590. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.016

[41] Lien, H.Y., 2021. Revisiting keyword analysis in a specialized corpus: Religious terminology extraction. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics. 29(3), 1–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2020.1865668

[42] Nusir, M., Louati, A., Louati, H., et al., 2022. Design research insights on text mining analysis: Establishing the most used and trends in keywords of design research journals. Electronics. 11(23), 3930. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics11233930

[43] Huang, J., Tao, Y., Shi, M., et al., 2022. Empirical study on design trend of Taiwan (1960s–2020): The evolution of theme, diversity and sustainability. Sustainability. 14(19), 12578. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su141912578

[44] Genette, G., Maclean, M., 1991. Introduction to the paratext. New Literary History. 22(2), 261–272. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/469037

[45] Pellatt, V. (Ed.), 2014. Text, Extratext, Metatext and Paratext in Translation. Cambridge Scholars Publishing: Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

[46] Voyant Consortium, 2022. VOYANT: See through your text. Available from: https://voyant-tools.org/ (cited 1 November 2025).

[47] Textalyser, 2024. Analyze your site's content + improve your keyword performance using SEO Scout's analysis tools. Available from: https://seoscout.com/ (cited 6 September 2024).

[48] Lexical Analysis Software Ltd, 2015. WordSmith 6.0. Available from: https://lexically.net/wordsmith/version6/ (cited 3 October 2025).

[49] Gardner, D., Davies, M., 2014. A new academic vocabulary list. Applied Linguistics. 35(3), 305–327. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amt015

[50] Onelook Online Dictionary, n.d. Formula. Available from: https://www.onelook.com/?w=formula (cited 8 June 2025).

[51] Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, n.d. Equation. Available from: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equation (cited 8 June 2025).

[52] Sönning, L., 2024. Evaluation of keyness metrics: Performance and reliability. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory. 20(2), 263–288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2022-0116

[53] Schützler, O., 2023. Frequencies in corpus linguistics: Issues of scaling and visualisation. In: Schützler, O., Sönning, L. (Eds.). Data Visualization in Corpus Linguistics: Critical Reflections and Future Directions. VARIENG: Helsinki, Finland.

[54] Trott, P., 2005. Innovation Management and New Product Development. Financial Times Prentice Hall: Harlow, UK.

[55] Pugh, S., 1991. Total Design: Integrated Methods for Successful Product Engineering. Addison-Wesley: Wokingham, UK.

[56] Orlov, P., 1976. Fundamentals of Machine Design. Mir Publishers: Moscow, Russia.

[57] French, M.J., 1971. Engineering Design: The Conceptual Stage. Heinemann Educational Books: London, UK.

[58] Norman, D.A., 2002. The Design of Everyday Things. Basic Books: New York, NY, USA.

[59] Papanek, V., 1971. Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. Pantheon Books: New York, NY, USA.

[60] Herriott, R., 2021. The Aesthetics of Industrial Design: Seeing, Designing and Making. Routledge: London, UK. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003183303

Downloads

How to Cite

Bengisu, M. (2025). A Corpus-Based Comparative Analysis of Vocabulary and Paratext in Design and Engineering Design Articles. Journal of Linguistics and Education Research, 8(1), 44–60. https://doi.org/10.30564/jler.v8i1.12746

Issue

Vol. 8 , Iss. 1 (June 2025)

Article Type

Articles

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

License

Copyright © 2025 Murat Bengisu

Creative Commons License

This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) License.