Unveiling Rhetorical Patterns in Book Reviews: A Comprehensive Investigation and Proposal of a Novel Review Model


  • Shafaq Shakeel Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad
  • Umaima Kamran Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad
  • Rida Shakeel Independent Researcher


This study aims to demonstrate different rhetorical moves used by book review authors. Although the book review genre has been the subject of numerous researchers and authors such as Basturkmen (2014), Montazeran (2014), and Bhatia (2006). It has yet to receive the attention of scholars in Pakistan. To fill this gap, the researcher randomly selected twenty book reviews from various websites that had not been previously analyzed. The results were analyzed using the Motta Roth (1995) model, which revealed that M2 (outlining the book) was the most commonly used rhetorical move in the book reviews, while M4 (commentary on the content and recommendations) was used less frequently. With these findings, the researcher presented a new, more flexible, comprehensive, and reliable model for writing book reviews which will help authors to write a comprehensive review of a book by covering multiple aspects. This model allows reviewers to not only observe the book from a variety of perspectives but also express their honest and unbiased views. By adopting this model, book reviewers can enhance the quality of their reviews and provide their readers with a more comprehensive understanding of the book in question.



Azirah, H. (2001). So what's new? The discussions in medical research articles. Pan- Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 127-152.

Bhatia, V. (1993). Analyzing genre: Language use in professional settings. New York: Longman.

Bhatia, V. (2004). Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. London: Continuum.

Basturkmen, H. (2014). Replication research in comparative genre analysis in English for

Academic Purposes. Language Teaching, 47(3), 377-386.

Babaii, E., & Ansary, H. (2005). On the effect of disciplinary variation on transitivity: The

case of academic book reviews. Asian EFL Journal, 7(3), 113-126.

Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis in ESP. In M.

Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 219-228). London: Routledge.

Dudley-Evans, T. (2000). Genre analysis: A key to the theory ESP. URL:

www.aelfe.org/documents/text2 Dudley.pdf.

Dudley-Evans, T., & St. John, A. M. J. (1998). Developing English for specific purposes: A

multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ding, H. (2007). Genre analysis of personal statements: Analysis of moves in application essays to medical and dental schools. English for Specific Purposes, 26(3), 368-392.

Hewings, M., & Hewings, A. (2002). “It is interesting to note that”: A comparative study of anticipatory ‘it’ in student and published writing. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 367-383.

Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis and the social sciences: An investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321–337. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00038-5

Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 239-256.

Hyland, K. (1996). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics, 17, 433-454.

Hyon, S. (1996). Genre in three traditions: Implications for ESL. TESOL Quarterly, 30,


Loi, K. C. (2010). Research Article Introductions in Chinese and English: A Comparative Genre-Based Study. Journal of English for Academic Purpose, 9 (4), 297-279.

Motta Roth, D. (1995). Book reviews and disciplinary discourses: Defining a genre.

Proceedings of the TESOL 29th Annual Convention & Exposition (pp.385-86).

Long Beach, CA, USA.

Motta Roth, D. (1996). Investigating connections between text and discourse communities: A cross-disciplinary study of evaluative discourse practices in academic book reviews. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Applied Linguistics (18th, Chicago, IL, March).

Nwogu, K. N. (1997). The medical research paper: Structure and functions. English for

Specific Purposes, 16, 119-138.

Ozturk, I. (2007). The textual Organisation of Research Article Introduction in Applied

Linguistics: Variability Within a Single Discipline. English for Specific Purposes,

(1), 25‐38

Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. M. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2003). English in today's research world: A writing guide.

Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Samraj, B. (2002). Introductions in research articles: Variations across disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 21(1), 1–17.

Samraj, B. (2008). A Discourse Analysis of Master's theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 55–67

Yakhontova, T. (2006). Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5(2), 153–167.



How to Cite

Shafaq Shakeel, Umaima Kamran, & Rida Shakeel. (2024). Unveiling Rhetorical Patterns in Book Reviews: A Comprehensive Investigation and Proposal of a Novel Review Model. Erevna: Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 7(2), 56-67. Retrieved from https://journals.au.edu.pk/ojserevna/index.php/erevna/article/view/311