Move Analysis
Move analysis is a method for describing the rhetorical structure of a genre by segmenting texts into communicative moves — functional units that perform recognisable work for the writer-reader relationship — and, within moves, into steps that realise the move in alternative ways. The approach was consolidated by John Swales in Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings (1990), which proposed the CARS model for research-article introductions and gave the genre-analytic tradition in English for Academic Purposes and English for Specific Purposes its dominant analytic instrument.
Genre as communicative purpose
Swales defined a genre as a class of communicative events that share a set of communicative purposes recognised by members of a discourse community. The definition matters because moves are functional, not formal: a move is identified by what it does for the genre, not by a fixed set of grammatical or lexical features. A move may be a paragraph, a sentence, or a clause; what counts is that it accomplishes a piece of the genre's overall purpose. Steps are the recurring options for realising a move, and not every step appears in every instance.
The CARS model
Swales analysed introductions to research articles across the natural and social sciences and proposed a three-move pattern for how writers carve out space for their contribution.
| Move | Purpose | Typical steps |
|---|---|---|
| Move 1 — Establishing a territory | Locate the study in a recognised area | Claiming centrality; making topic generalisations; reviewing previous research |
| Move 2 — Establishing a niche | Show that the territory has a gap, problem, or unresolved question | Counter-claiming; indicating a gap; question-raising; continuing a tradition |
| Move 3 — Occupying the niche | Stake the writer's contribution within that gap | Outlining purposes; announcing principal findings; indicating structure |
The CARS metaphor (Create A Research Space) captures the rhetorical logic: the writer first establishes a defensible patch of territory, then shows that the patch is incomplete, then claims the right to fill the gap. The model has been replicated, refined, and contested across thousands of studies and is the most widely taught template in research-writing pedagogy.
Methodology
Move analysis proceeds by close reading of a corpus of authentic texts within a single genre. Analysts identify candidate moves by asking, of each segment, what is this doing for the writer's purpose at this point in the text. Inter-rater reliability is checked by having multiple coders annotate the same sample. Frequency counts then track which moves are obligatory (appear in all or nearly all instances), conventional (appear in most), or optional, and which steps tend to realise each move. Cross-disciplinary studies show systematic variation: hard-science introductions move briskly through Move 1 and dwell on Move 3, whereas humanities introductions extend Move 1 substantially. Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural studies have shown that move structures vary by writing tradition, with implications for novice writers educated in non-Anglophone academic cultures.
Extensions and refinements
Bhatia (1993) generalised the approach in Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings, applying move analysis to legal cases, business letters, sales-promotion letters, and job applications, and arguing that any professional genre yields to the same procedure. Swales (2004) revisited the CARS model in Research Genres: Explorations and Applications, modifying it to account for shorter and longer introductions, recursivity (writers cycling back through Move 1 and Move 2), and disciplinary variation, and embedding it in a wider treatment of genre chains, networks, and sets across the research world. Subsequent move analyses have produced templates for abstracts, methods sections, results, discussions, conclusions, literature reviews, and PhD theses, generating a library of pedagogically usable structures.
Use in EAP and ESP teaching
Move analysis underpins much of contemporary research-writing pedagogy. Apprentice writers — graduate students and early-career researchers — work with annotated model texts in their own discipline, identify the moves and steps the experts use, and then practise writing each section to the same template. The pedagogy is genre-driven and explicit: writers are not asked to imitate texts holistically but to internalise the rhetorical functions and the linguistic resources that realise each function. The approach connects directly to the genre-based approach in language teaching: model texts are deconstructed for their rhetorical structure before students attempt joint and then independent construction. Move analysis also supports the development of corpus-informed teaching materials, where concordance lines illustrate how each step is typically lexicalised (e.g. recently, several studies have shown signals Move 1; however, little is known about signals Move 2 niche-establishment).
Critiques and limits
Three lines of criticism recur in the literature. First, move identification is inherently interpretive, and inter-coder agreement on fine-grained move-step distinctions is often only moderate; reproducible move analysis requires careful operational definitions and pilot rounds. Second, the CARS model and its descendants risk being treated as templates to be filled in, rather than as descriptions of frequent patterns; novice writers who follow them mechanically can produce introductions that hit every move yet read as formulaic. Third, move analysis as practised has tended to privilege the published research article in English, and the curriculum that follows from it can normalise Anglophone disciplinary conventions for writers working in other languages and traditions. Genre researchers have responded by developing comparative corpora, attending to disciplinary and L1 variation, and treating the moves as resources for rhetorical choice rather than as a checklist of obligations.
References
- Bhatia, V. K. (1993). Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. Longman. https://www.routledge.com/Analysing-Genre-Language-Use-in-Professional-Settings/Bhatia/p/book/9780582085244
- Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.
- Swales, J. M. (2004). Research Genres: Explorations and Applications. Cambridge University Press. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/research-genres/957CEE46BB758DA7EC55BBDC31010748