The seminal article of Swales (2011), \u201cAspects of Article Introductions\u201d and his books on genre analysis further perpetuated the importance of genre analysis and rhetorical moves in ESP research. Another significant contributor to ESP development in the 1980s, was the growing influence of two new twin key concepts, that of \u201cgenre analysis\u201d and \u201crhetorical moves\u201d which became the bedrock of substantial ESP research (Johns, 2012). The on-going argument about learning approaches also led to the questioning of the inclusion of an ESP subject specialist, who can give the necessary disciplinary content knowledge and applied language use input to the teaching environment. To illustrate, Jacobson (1986) focused on the strategic language learning goals of students working in a physics lab, while Tarantino (1988) provided face-to-face questionnaire interview data from 53 EST researchers and students to reveal how macro-and micro-level language requirements were assessed.<\/p>\n
Within and across academic discourses, the contributors to this issue explored critically what evaluative language is and its purposes (Johns, 2012). The modern period of ESP development was characterized by another research innovation that uses corpus research, notably in studies of written academic genres. Thus, outcomes of genre analysis may not be very useful when applied to fundamental learning of the English language. While genre analysis gained traction, it was a source of concern for other scholars as they felt that the most intractable academic difficulties are still found in novice undergraduate language education (Benesch, 1996; Johns, 2012).<\/p>\n
The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher. Learning English without understanding its cultural context is a definite risk (Alharbi, 2022), and as a future vista, this concern should continue to pervade in the application of an ESP pedagogical framework. Indeed, the intercultural rhetoric framework has made valuable pedagogical contributions to the teaching of EAP\/ESP with a recognition given to societal and student needs, teacher preparation, and curriculum design in particular contexts (Xu et al., 2016; McIntosh et al., 2017). An ESP-oriented course especially in an intercultural context, could also call upon such needs to design suitable materials for vocational activities to enhance ESP linguistic and cultural competency, pertinently determined for workplace demands (Hazrati, 2014).<\/p>\n
These changes created new and dynamic roles in the use of the English language leading to its consolidation as a significant international language. According to their landmark work, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) identified three factors that had a bearing on driving ESP development in the early years. Following the LR methodological procedure, the first theme that emerged was the historical overview of ESP development which traces the origin and history of ESP. As a result of the LR process, the final outline for the literature review report evolved and it then served as a guide for the drafting of the report and the finalizing of the selected bibliographic entries. In addition, the review also considered the currency of the writings, which is important as a benchmark for updated literature on a research issue.<\/p>\n
Since its appearance in the 1970s, needs analysis has evolved as a framework that has attracted and garnered much attention of many ESP and ESL researchers and practitioners. In \u201cOther Floors, Other Voices,\u201d Swales (1998) brought photography into the ESP lexicon, as he studied the interactions of texts and contexts in three distinct discourse communities using written work, interviews, and observations. Some other specialists (Johns et al., 2006; Swales, 2009; Flowerdew, 2011; Johns, 2012) worked on theory, research, and pedagogical convergences to address some of the theoretical and pedagogical discrepancies, which was projected as extremely helpful for future ESP research. Interest in expository genres also enhanced research both within the ESP community and among genre theorists and practitioners from various theoretical schools (Bawarshi and Reiff, 2011). Leki and Silva (1992) launched the Journal of Second Language Writing (JSLW), while Hamp-Lyons and Lumley (2001) founded the Journal of English for Academic Purposes (JEAP) in response to the overwhelming number of ESP related papers submitted for publication in the ESPJ. During this period, more interesting and vibrant developments took place in the ESP arena.<\/p>\n