1. Basturkmen, H. 2012. A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in Dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11: 134-144.
2. Biber, D., and S. Johansson, G. Leech, S. Conrad, E. Finegan 1999. Long­man Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
3. Bruce, I. 2008. Cognitive genre structures in methods sections of research articles: A corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 7: 38-54.
4. Bruce, I. 2009. Results sections in sociology and organic chemistry articles: A genre analysis. English for Specific Purposes 28: 105-124.
5. Casal, J.E., and X. Lu, X. Qiu, Y. Wang, G. Zhang 2021. Syntactic complexity across academic research article part genres: A cross-disciplinary perspective. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 52: 1-12.
6. Charles, M. 2000. The role of an introductory it pattern in constructing an appropriate academic persona. In P. Thompson (ed.), Patterns and perspectives: Insights into EAP writing practice, 45-59. CALS: The University of Reading.
7. Charles, M. 2004. The Construction of Stance: A Corpus-Based Investigation of Two Contrasting Disciplines. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Birmingham.
8. Collins, P. 1994. Extraposition in English. Functions of Language 1(1): 7-24.
9. Cotos, E., and S. Huffman, S. Link 2017. A move/step model for methods sections: Demonstrating rigour and credibility. English for Specific Purposes 46: 90-106.
10. Del Saz Rubio, M.M. 2011. A pragmatic approach to the macro-structure and metadiscoursal features of research article introductions in the field of Agricultural Sciences. English for Specific Purposes 30: 258-271.
11. Donner, P., and P-S. Chi, V. Aman 2014. Bibliometric study for German National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina in the disciplines Public Health and Epidemiology. Berlin: iFQ.
12. Fetzer, A. 2011. “I think this is I mean perhaps this is too erm too tough a view of the world but I often think...”. Redundancy as a contextualization device. Language Sciences 33(2): 255-267.
13. Fišerová, H. 2016. The vagaries of subject it: can it serve as a style marker? Linguistica Pragensia 1: 35-47.
14. Francis, G., and S. Hunston, E. Manning 1996. Grammar Patterns I: Verbs. London: HarperCollins.
15. Francis, G., and S. Hunston, E. Manning 1998. Grammar Patterns II: Nouns and Adjectives. London: HarperCollins.
16. Groom, N. 2005. Pattern and meaning across genres and disciplines: An exploratory study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 4: 257-277.
17. Herriman, J. 2000a. Extraposition in English: A study of the interaction between the matrix predicate and the type of extraposed clause. English Studies 81(6): 582-599.
18. Herriman, J. 2000b. The functions of extraposition in English texts. Functions of Language 7(2): 203-230.
19. Hewings, M., and A. Hewings 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.
20. Huddleston, R., and G.K. Pullum 2016. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. 9^th edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
21. Hunston, S., and G. Francis 2000. Pattern Grammar: A corpus-driven approach to the lexical grammar of English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
22. Hunston, S. 2011. Corpus Approaches to Evaluation: Phraseology and Evaluative Language. London and New York: Routledge.
23. Hyland, K. 2019. Metadiscourse: Exploring writing in interaction (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Publishing.
24. Kanoksilapatham, B. 2005. Rhetorical structure of biochemistry research articles. In: English for Specific Purposes 24(3): 269-292.
25. Larsson, T. 2016. The introductory it pattern: Variability explored in learner and expert writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 22: 64-79.
26. Larsson, T. 2017. A functional classification of the introductory it pattern: Investigating academic writing by non-native-speaker and native-speaker students. English for Specific Purposes 48: 57-70.
27. Larsson, T. 2019. A syntactic analysis of the introductory it pattern in non-native-speaker and native-speaker student writing. In V. Wiegand and M. Mahlberg (eds.), Corpus Linguistics, Context and Culture, 307-338. Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
28. Martínez, I.A. 2005. Native and non-native writers’ use of first person pronouns in the different sections of biology research articles in English. Journal of Second Language Writing 14(3): 174-190.
29. Moghaddam, R., and S.F. Ebrahimi 2019. Subject it-extraposition in applied linguistics research articles: Semantic and syntactic analysis. Discourse and Interaction 12(1): 29-46.
30. Mur-Dueñas, P. 2018. Exploring ELF manuscripts An analysis of the anticipatory it pattern with an interpersonal function. In P. Mur-Dueñas and J. Šinkūnienė (eds.), Intercultural Perspectives on Research Writing, 277-297. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
31. Parkinson, J. 2011. The Discussion section as argument: The language used to prove knowledge claims. English for Specific Purposes 30: 164-175.
32. Peacock, M. 2011. A comparative study of introductory it in research articles across eight disciplines. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16(1): 72-100.
33. Quirk, R., and S. Greenbaum, G. Leech, J. Svartvik 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.
34. Rodman, L. 1991. Anticipatory it in scientific discourse. Journal of Technical Writing and Communication 21(1): 17-27.
35. Rowley-Jolivet, E., and S. Carter-Thomas 2005. Genre awareness and rhetorical appropriacy: Manipulation of information structure by NS and NNS scientists in the international conference setting. English for Specific Purposes 24: 41-64.
36. Samraj, B. 2005. An exploration of a genre set: Research article introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes 24(2): 141-156.
37. Scott, M. 2012. WordSmith Tools (version 6.0). Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.
38. Swales, J., and C.B. Feak 2012. Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. 3^rd ed. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
39. Thompson, D.K. 1993. Arguing for experimental “facts” in science: A study of research article results sections in Biochemistry. Written Communication 10(1): 106-128.
40. Yang, A., and S. Zheng, G. Ge 2015. Epistemic modality in English-medium medical research articles: a systemic functional perspective. English for Specific Purposes 38: 1-10.
41. Zhang, G. 2015. It is suggested that… or it is better to…? Forms and meanings of subject it-extraposition in academic and popular writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20: 1-13.
42. Zhang, G. 2022. The citational practice of social science research articles: An analysis by part-genres. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 55: 1-14.

EDITORIAL BOARD

• Paola Attolino - University of Salerno, Italy
• Wiesław Banyś - University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
• Bogusław Bierwiaczonek - Jan Dlugosz University, Częstochowa, Poland
• Michael Bilynsky - University of Lviv, Ukraine
• Krzysztof Bogacki - University of Warsaw, Poland
• Jan Čermák - Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
• Bożena Cetnarowska - University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
• Magdalena Charzyńska-Wójcik - John Paul II Catholic University, Lublin, Poland
• Danuta Gabryś-Barker - University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
• Piotr Kakietek - University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
• Marcin Krygier - Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
• Andrzej Łyda - University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
• Elżbieta Mańczak-Wohlfeld - Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
• John G. Newman - University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA
• Jerzy Nykiel - University of Bergen, Norway
• Marc van Oostendorp - Radbound University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
• Tadeusz Piotrowski - University of Wrocław, Poland
• Czesława Schatte - Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
• Piotr Stalmaszczyk - University of Lodz, Poland