‘The study has clear limitations’: Presentation of limitations in conclusion sections of PhD dissertations and research articles in applied linguistics

How limitations are acknowledged and discussed has a profound impact on the extent the research is evaluated and accepted by its intended readers. However, little attention has been drawn to the presentation of limitations in the EAP literature. This study seeks to remedy the oversight by exploring how this discursive practice is mediated by metadiscourse, how limitations are rhetorically contextualized and how much these rhetorical investments differ between PhD dissertations and research articles in applied linguistics. A corpus-based analysis of 100 PhD dissertations and 200 published articles in applied linguistics shows that PhD dissertation writers make more use of frame markers but less use of code glosses, evidentials, and hedges in the acknowledgment of limitations than published writers do in limitations steps. It is also found that limitations pertaining to the overall quality of research and writers’ competence are far more often self-reported in PhD dissertations than in research articles, and PhD dissertation writers tend to attribute the limitations to situational constraints in research context and unmanageable complexity of research subjects. The results support the two-genre perspective (El-Dakhs, 2018; Kawase, 2015) and demonstrate that discussing limitations is a strategically self-critical but promotional effort in conclusion sections.