Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr © 2025 HortHerb Publisher, registered at the publishing platform that is operated by Sophia Publishing Group, founded in British Columbia of Canada. All Rights Reserved.
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr © 2025 HortHerb Publisher, registered at the publishing platform that is operated by Sophia Publishing Group, founded in British Columbia of Canada. All Rights Reserved. Publisher HortHerb Publisher Editedby Editorial Team of Medicinal Plant Research Email: edit@mpr.hortherbpublisher.com Website: http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr Address: 11388 Stevenston Hwy, PO Box 96016, Richmond, V7A 5J5, British Columbia Canada Medicinal Plant Research (ISSN 1927-6508) is an open access, peer reviewed journal published online by HortHerb Publisher. The journal publishes all the latest and outstanding research articles, letters and reviews in all aspects of medicinal plant research, including plant growth and development, plant biology, plant nutrition, medicinal properties, phytochemical constituents, fitoterapia, pharmacognosy, essential oils, ethno- pharmacology agronomic management, and phytomedicine, as well as chemistry, pharmacology and use of medicinal plants and their derivatives. HortHerb Publisher is an international Open Access publisher specializing in horticulture, herbal sciences, and tea-related research registered at the publishing platform that is operated by Sophia Publishing Group (SPG), founded in British Columbia of Canada. All the articles published in Medicinal Plant Research are Open Access, and are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. HortHerb Publisher uses CrossCheck service to identify academic plagiarism through the world’s leading plagiarism prevention tool, iParadigms, and to protect the original authors’ copyrights.
Medicinal Plant Research (online), 2025, Vol. 15, No.6 ISSN 1927-6508 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr © 2025 HortHerb Publisher, registered at the publishing platform that is operated by Sophia Publishing Group, founded in British Columbia of Canada. All Rights Reserved. Latest Content Lexical and Rhetorical Patterns of Scientific Discourse in Ginseng Studies Yuanyuan An, Mingyue Yu, Xiuying Jin Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol. 15, No. 6, 244-253 Curcuma longa and Its Bioactive Curcuminoids: Molecular Mechanisms in Anti-inflammatory and Immunomodulation Guangman Xu, Jiayi Wu Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol. 15, No. 6, 254-263 Advances in Biosynthetic Pathways of Phenylpropanoids inAngelica sinensis Yudie Wang, Haomin Chen Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol. 15, No. 6, 264-273 Agronomic Practices and Secondary Metabolite Accumulation in Salvia miltiorrhiza Yali Deng, Meifang Li Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol. 15, No. 6, 274-282 Systematic Review of Anti-Inflammatory and Antiviral Properties of Glycyrrhiza Chunyu Li, Jiayao Zhou Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol. 15, No. 6, 283-290
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 244 Research Article Open Access Lexical and Rhetorical Patterns of Scientific Discourse in Ginseng Studies Yuanyuan An , Mingyue Yu, Xiuying Jin Faculty of Linguistic and Cultural Studies, Changchun Sci-Tech University, Changchun, 130600, China Corresponding author: 15904310496@163.com Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol.15, No.6 doi: 10.5376/mpr.2025.15.0026 Received: 05 Sep., 2025 Accepted: 10 Oct., 2025 Published: 18 Nov., 2025 Copyright © 2025 An et al., This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Preferred citation for this article: An Y.Y., Yu M.Y., and Jin X.Y., 2025, Lexical and rhetorical patterns of scientific discourse in ginseng studies, Medicinal Plant Research, 15(6): 244-253 (doi: 10.5376/mpr.2025.15.0026) Abstract This study takes English-language scientific literature in the field of ginseng research as its corpus to explore the lexical features and rhetorical structures of scientific discourse. By integrating Systemic Functional Linguistics and Swales’ genre analysis theory, and employing corpus-based methods, the research identifies high-frequency terminology, semantic collocations, and rhetorical strategies—such as the extensive use of ginsenoside-related terms, evaluative vocabulary, and frequent hedging expressions. The findings reveal that ginseng research articles commonly follow the IMRaD structure, with rigorous argumentation and clearly defined rhetorical moves. Moreover, strategies such as self-mention and citation are widely used in constructing academic identity. Cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural linguistic variations are also evident, particularly in non-native English writing, where stylistic transfer and register adjustment frequently occur. This study aims to fill the gap in discourse analysis within ginseng research, enrich the theoretical and practical dimensions of academic linguistics, and provide empirical references for non-native English writers composing international scientific articles, thereby promoting the global dissemination and academic exchange of traditional Chinese medicine. Keywords Ginseng research; Scientific discourse; Rhetorical structure; Corpus linguistics; Cross-cultural communication 1 Introduction Scientific discourse analysis provides an important perspective for understanding how knowledge is constructed, communicated, and legitimized within academic communities. By examining vocabulary and rhetorical patterns, researchers can reveal the conventions and strategies of scientific writing across different disciplines and cultural contexts, deepening the understanding of academic communication and its role in knowledge dissemination (Liu and Lu, 2020; Ruskan et al., 2023). This kind of analysis also helps develop teaching tools and frameworks to improve the quality of academic writing and promote academic exchange across disciplines and cultures. Ginseng (Panax ginseng) is a medicinal plant of global importance. Research on it covers many fields, including pharmacology, plant science, and integrative medicine. The international and multidisciplinary nature of ginseng studies shows the importance of effective academic communication. This helps promote scientific progress, ensures accurate sharing of knowledge, and supports collaboration among scientists from different languages and cultures (Xu et al., 2017; Shin et al., 2021; Ito and Ito, 2024). As ginseng research continues to expand, understanding the academic discourse patterns in this field is very important for improving the clarity, accessibility, and impact of scientific work (Xu et al., 2017; Shin et al., 2021). In recent years, studies on vocabulary and rhetorical structures in scientific texts have made some progress. For example, researchers have identified discipline-specific patterns, metadiscourse markers, and rhetorical moves such as presenting research gaps and stating research significance (Liu and Lu, 2020; Ruskan et al., 2023). Corpus-based and computational methods allow researchers to quantitatively evaluate text cohesion, phrase combinations, and rhetorical strategies. These methods help build methodological frameworks that can be applied to different scientific fields (Liu and Lu, 2020; Bhatnagar et al., 2022; Ruskan et al., 2023). Although there are many studies about ginseng, few have analyzed the language used in ginseng research. Most studies focus on biology, pharmacology, or research methods, but they pay little attention to how words and
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 245 writing styles are used in ginseng papers (Shin et al., 2021; Ito and Ito, 2024). This lack of research limits our understanding of how scientific ideas are expressed and shared, especially in different languages and cultures. This study aims to explore the scientific vocabulary and rhetorical patterns used in ginseng research, focusing on their linguistic features and expressions in scientific communication. It uses a linguistic analysis framework and corpus-based methods to identify typical word choices and rhetorical strategies in scientific writing about ginseng. The study also compares language differences across disciplines and linguistic systems, analyzing how these differences affect academic communication and knowledge dissemination. The findings are expected to provide insights for linguistic studies and offer guidance for scientific writing in the field of ginseng, promoting clearer and more effective international academic exchange. 2 Theoretical Framework and Methodology 2.1 Theoretical basis Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), founded by Halliday and later developed by other scholars, provides a comprehensive framework for analyzing scientific discourse. This theory views language as a resource for constructing meaning in specific social contexts and highlights three main functions of language: ideational, interpersonal, and textual. Through these three functions, we can analyze how scientific texts build knowledge, create relationships, and organize information. This approach is useful for studying textual patterns, grammatical resources, and disciplinary conventions in scientific writing (Hao, 2020). Therefore, it is very suitable for exploring the lexical and rhetorical patterns in ginseng research papers. Swales’ (2014) genre analysis theory, especially his influential “Create a Research Space” (CARS) model, provides theoretical support for academic discourse studies. This model identifies the communicative purposes and rhetorical steps in research papers, showing how authors use rhetorical strategies to establish a research field, point out research gaps, and occupy a research niche. Swales’ framework has become an important foundation in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) and discourse analysis, offering a systematic approach to studying the structure and function of scientific texts (Swales, 2014; Fonseca et al., 2022). Applying genre analysis to ginseng research helps identify the shared academic conventions in scientific communication and the unique disciplinary features of this field. 2.2 Corpus and data sources The corpus of this study mainly consists of academic texts about ginseng research, including English peer-reviewed journal articles, theses, and international conference papers. All the materials focus on topics such as pharmacology, botany, and clinical studies of ginseng. During selection, the academic influence, research depth, and linguistic representativeness of each text were considered to ensure that the corpus reflects the main issues in modern ginseng studies and shows diversity in research traditions and writing styles (Larsen et al., 2019). The corpus was built through systematic collection, organization, and annotation of selected papers. The text preprocessing steps included removing formatting, tokenization, normalization, and handling multi-word expressions to prepare for later analysis. These steps are important for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of linguistic analysis, as they directly affect the quality of keyword extraction, part-of-speech tagging, and structural annotation (Lutskiv and Popovych, 2019; Dai, 2022; Chai, 2023). In addition, the preprocessing methods were adjusted according to the characteristics of scientific texts in the ginseng field (Chai, 2023). 2.3 Analytical approaches and techniques At the lexical level, tools such as AntConc and Sketch Engine can be used for quantitative analysis. These tools identify high-frequency words, keywords, collocations, and lexical bundles, helping to reveal the thematic focus and stylistic features of ginseng research papers. The choice of tool depends on the required functions, data format, and depth of analysis. Both provide strong support for corpus-based linguistic research (Zhang and Pan, 2020). In terms of rhetorical analysis, the study labels sections such as introduction, methods, results, and discussion to identify rhetorical moves and communicative functions. Based on Swales’ genre analysis framework, an annotation system is built. Structured annotation helps examine how scientific arguments are constructed and how
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 246 rhetorical strategies are used. To support both qualitative and quantitative studies of text structure and discourse organization, XML-based or tree-structured annotation methods can be used for coding (Devitt, 2015; Hao, 2020; Fonseca et al., 2022). 3 Lexical Features of Scientific Discourse in Ginseng Studies 3.1 Use of academic vocabulary and technical terms The research discourse on ginseng has highly specialized vocabulary. Common terms include “ginsenoside,” “biosynthesis,” “pharmacology,” “polysaccharides,” and “genetic diversity.” These frequent words form an interconnected network of concepts, showing the multidisciplinary nature of this field. Among them, “ginsenoside” often serves as the central node because of its importance in pharmacological and molecular studies (Figure 1) (Shi et al., 2019; Ito and Ito, 2024). Bibliometric and topic modeling analyses indicate that keywords mainly cluster around key research themes such as pharmacological activity, structural analysis, and bioactive compounds (Chen et al., 2017; Shin et al., 2021). In various studies on ginseng, pharmacology and molecular biology terms appear widely. Many papers focus on pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and molecular mechanisms of action (Shi et al., 2019; Ito and Ito, 2024). Terms like “antioxidant”, “immunomodulation”, “biosynthesis”, and “gene expression” appear frequently, showing the close connection between molecular biology and pharmacology in modern ginseng research (Chen et al., 2017; Shi et al., 2019). Figure 1 Co-occurrence network of high-frequency academic terms in ginseng research discourse Image caption: 'Ginsenoside' acts as central node connecting pharmacological, molecular, and biochemical domains 3.2 Dynamic and interdisciplinary lexical features The vocabulary system in ginseng research shows clear dynamism and interdisciplinarity. It reflects the broad borrowing of terms from metabolomics and pharmacology. For example, terms such as “metabolite analysis”, “UPLC-Q-TOF-MS”, “multi-omics”, and “network pharmacology” have appeared frequently in recent literature (Wu et al., 2018; Shin et al., 2021; Li et al., 2022). These changes reflect both technological progress in research methods and deeper integration across disciplines (Wu et al., 2018; Li et al., 2022). Keyword evolution analysis shows that research on ginseng has shifted from early studies on cultivation and basic pharmacology to emerging topics such as gut microbiota, oxidative stress, and omics-based research. Burst keywords and trending topics further reveal that the research focus is moving toward functional mechanisms, clinical applications, and a systems biology perspective (Chen et al., 2017; Yu et al., 2024). 3.3 Semantic patterns and collocational tendencies The collocation analysis shows that in ginseng studies, common high-frequency word combinations include “ginsenoside + effect”, “ginsenoside + activity”, and “ginsenoside + mechanism”. These combinations highlight
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 247 the central role of ginsenosides in research on pharmacological effects and molecular pathways (Shi et al., 2019; Ito and Ito, 2024; Jiang et al., 2025). They reflect the strong academic focus on ginsenosides and the ongoing interest in their specific mechanisms in health and disease regulation (Ito and Ito, 2024). In academic writing on ginseng, adjectives like “pharmacological”, “bioactive”, “antioxidant”, and “therapeutic” are often used, along with verbs like “regulate”, “modulate”, “inhibit”, and “enhance”. These word choices show the evaluative and explanatory features of scientific discourse and emphasize both the mechanisms and outcomes of ginseng’s effects (Shi et al., 2019; Jiang et al., 2025). 4 Rhetorical Structure of Ginseng Scientific Discourse 4.1 Organizational patterns in research articles Research papers on ginseng usually follow the IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) to make the presentation of research findings clear and organized. However, as research topics become more interdisciplinary and complex, some papers show structural variations. For example, they may add extra sections or combine the “Methods” and “Results” parts to better explain complicated research processes (Wang, 2025; Yang et al., 2025). In some studies, the “Methods” section is placed at the end or mixed with the “Results” section, creating a unique rhetorical structure that strengthens logical flow and scientific rigor (Wang, 2025). These changes reflect both differences in academic conventions and the researchers’ need to deal with multi-level research problems. In ginseng research papers, the “Results” and “Discussion” sections often include several rhetorical steps, such as highlighting key findings, explaining specific results, and summarizing conclusions. The way authors organize these parts is influenced by their familiarity with other scholars’ work, their writing confidence, and their understanding of both micro and macro structures (Irawati, 2022). According to the models by Nwogu and Kanoksilapatham, research papers often use rhetorical moves like “highlighting results”, “providing explanations”, and “drawing conclusions”. These patterns can change depending on the expectations of the academic community and the background of the authors (Irawati, 2022). 4.2 Argumentation and persuasive expression The argumentation in ginseng scientific discourse is built on the logical presentation of research hypotheses and the systematic development of evidence. The structure of argumentation usually includes clearly stating the research hypothesis, presenting evidence and reasoning step by step, and finally drawing a reasonable conclusion. This process depends on several rhetorical moves, such as “claim”, “explain”, and “argue”, to make the research conclusions more convincing (Erduran et al., 2015; Governor et al., 2021). Effective scientific argumentation relies on integrating evidence through precise language markers and citation practices. In ginseng research papers, authors often use “reporting verbs”, “hedging”, and “evaluative language” to present their findings and respond to previous studies. Strategic citation not only supports the arguments but also places the research within a broader academic context, thereby enhancing the credibility and academic impact of the paper (Erduran et al., 2015). 4.3 Rhetorical markers and cohesion mechanisms The cohesion in scientific discourse about ginseng is mainly achieved through logical connectors such as “therefore”, “however”, and “furthermore”, as well as transitional phrases. These markers help readers understand complex arguments and create logical links between sections. They are often found at the boundaries of rhetorical moves or between major sections to ensure coherence and logical flow (Irawati, 2022; Wang, 2025). Writers also use emphasis words like “notably” and “significantly”, and concessive structures such as “although” and “despite” to highlight findings, acknowledge limitations, and present balanced arguments. These pragmatic strategies strengthen the persuasiveness and subtlety of scientific writing, allowing authors to emphasize key results while showing critical thinking and academic caution (Wang, 2025).
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 248 5 Stance and Authorial Voice in Ginseng Research Articles 5.1 Authorial stance and interaction In scientific discourse, authorial stance is often shown through modal verbs such as “can”, “may”, and “must”, as well as stance adverbs like “possibly”, “certainly”, and “likely”. These grammatical features express the author’s degree of certainty, obligation, and evaluation toward research results or claims (Huang and Li, 2023). In research papers, authors use hedges to express caution and boosters to show confidence, balancing between presenting conclusions and acknowledging limitations (Huang and Li, 2023; Wu, 2025). The use and frequency of these pragmatic devices vary across disciplines and cultures, reflecting both academic conventions and personal rhetorical strategies (Hamdan and Ahmad, 2023). Self-mention, such as using “we” and “our”, is an important rhetorical strategy in scientific writing that shows the author’s presence and emphasizes originality. Although some disciplines or cultural traditions prefer impersonal expressions, explicit self-mention is increasingly seen as an effective way to build credibility, clarify responsibility, and strengthen reader engagement (Khedri, 2016; Zhang and Pan, 2023). The frequency and rhetorical role of self-mention differ among disciplines and levels of writing experience. Experienced writers often combine self-mention with emphatic expressions to present findings while using hedges to extend arguments and show modesty (Wang and Zeng, 2021; Zhang and Pan, 2023). 5.2 Academic politeness and hedging devices Hedging is a key part of academic politeness and an important strategy for maintaining scientific credibility. Writers often use modal verbs, adverbs, and vague expressions such as “suggests”, “may indicate”, and “possibly” to show caution and uncertainty. This makes their conclusions appear tentative or open to discussion (Schmauss and Kilian, 2023; Deng et al., 2025). The use of hedging is influenced by disciplinary norms, cultural background, and the author’s need to avoid exaggeration or direct confrontation (Chen and Zhang, 2017; Yu and Wen, 2022). Hedging also has important pragmatic functions. It softens absolute statements, shows openness to different opinions, and promotes cooperative dialogue between writers and readers. Such expressions help authors manage interpersonal relationships in academic communication, reduce the risk of conflict, and maintain a polite and objective tone—especially when discussing controversial or uncertain findings (Viktorova, 2024). 5.3 Academic identity and authority construction Citation practices play a central role in building academic identity and following disciplinary norms. By using citations, authors place their research in the context of the academic community and show their understanding of existing studies. This strengthens the objectivity and credibility of their arguments (Khedri, 2016; Zhang and Pan, 2023). The strategic use of citations, such as attribution shields and reporting verbs, helps authors find a balance between presenting their own voice and showing respect for disciplinary authority (Yu and Wen, 2022). Effective scientific writing needs to balance an objective tone with the author’s presence. Some academic traditions suggest reducing self-reference to highlight objectivity, while others encourage a clear author voice to show contribution and engagement (Khedri, 2016; Zhang and Pan, 2023). The use and combination of stance markers, self-references, and hedging expressions reflect both the writing habits of the author’s academic community and their personal rhetorical style. Together, these elements shape the author’s authority and credibility in academic texts (Wang and Zeng, 2021; Zhang and Pan, 2023; Wu, 2025). 6 Register and Genre Variation in Ginseng Studies 6.1 Register differences across disciplines Ginseng research covers many scientific fields, with pharmacology and molecular biology being the most representative. In pharmacology, ginseng studies often focus on clinical effects, therapeutic outcomes, and pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Terms like “pharmacological effects,” “adaptogenic effects,” and “immune-modulatory” are often used to describe research topics (Ito and Ito, 2024; Yang et al., 2025). These studies usually emphasize ginseng’s impact on human health, citing clinical trial data, safety evaluations, and therapeutic applications (Ito and Ito, 2024; Zhou et al., 2024; Yang et al., 2025). In contrast, molecular biology
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 249 papers focus more on genetic, biochemical, and cellular mechanisms, using terms related to gene expression, biosynthetic pathways, and molecular markers (Grazina et al., 2021). The language in molecular biology is denser, with complex noun phrases and frequent technical terms, reflecting the field’s emphasis on detailed mechanisms and experimental procedures (Ito and Ito, 2024). In applied ginseng studies, authors usually follow the IMRaD structure—Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion—and focus on experimental design, data presentation, and practical significance (Ito and Ito, 2024; Yang et al., 2025). These papers center on hypothesis testing, stressing methodological rigor and reproducibility of results. Review papers, on the other hand, adopt a more discursive and evaluative tone. They integrate multiple research findings to reveal trends, gaps, and future directions in the field (Yang et al., 2025). Reviews often use summaries, meta-analyses, and explicit research suggestions, while applied research tends to be data-driven and centered on specific experimental results (Ito and Ito, 2024). 6.2 Stylistic features of academic journals Core journals on ginseng research, such as the Journal of Ginseng Research, usually follow writing norms that emphasize objectivity, formality, and high information density (Ito and Ito, 2024). International journals are generally more interactive and context-independent. They prefer clear section divisions, structured abstracts, and standardized terminology (Yang et al., 2025). In contrast, local journals, especially those published in countries where English is a second language, often have a more assertive tone, rely more on context, and use more first-person pronouns and passive sentences because of translation and international writing needs (Nakagawa and Lagisz, 2024). Top journals emphasize clarity in language, coherence in structure, and adherence to academic conventions. Structured abstracts, clear section divisions, and standardized terms help improve readability (Oermann et al., 2018). However, differences still exist among journals: some focus more on technical precision than readability, which makes highly specialized papers harder to understand (Nakagawa and Lagisz, 2024; Yang et al., 2025). Peer review and editorial guidelines usually require authors to follow specific standards in manuscript structure, citation style, and reporting format. These rules together help ensure the overall quality and consistency of academic publications (Song et al., 2021). 6.3 Cross-linguistic and cross-cultural comparison Comparative studies show that papers on ginseng published in international English journals are usually more interactive and less dependent on context than those in Chinese local journals. Papers in Chinese local English journals often use more first-person pronouns and passive voice. This is related to translation practices and adaptation to English academic conventions (Yang et al., 2025). During translation, pre-modifiers and emphatic expressions from Chinese are often carried over into English texts, creating a unique rhetorical style. Researchers who use English as a second language (ESL), especially those from China, often use passive voice and first-person pronouns in their English papers to meet international academic writing norms (Nakagawa and Lagisz, 2024; Yang et al., 2025). However, when these features combine with rhetorical patterns transferred from Chinese, they often form a writing style different from that of native English scholars. In addition, non-native researchers face challenges with language complexity, clarity, and adherence to editorial standards, showing the ongoing negotiation of language and cultural norms in global scientific communication (Zimba and Gasparyan, 2021; Johnson and Tabari, 2025). 7 Case Studies 7.1 Thematic and rhetorical evolution of ginseng research discourse Chen et al. (2017) used 5 384 ginseng-related research articles published between 1975 and 2017 in the PubMed database as the corpus to construct a Biological Dynamic Topic Model (Bio-DTM), which revealed the thematic evolution and linguistic features of ginseng studies across different periods. By integrating medical dictionaries, biological lexicons, and gene databases, the model established a multidimensional biomedical vocabulary system to analyze the structural and semantic relationships of scientific language, providing a quantitative foundation for understanding its lexical and rhetorical patterns.
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 250 According to the results of topic evolution, early publications mainly focused on the biochemical characteristics and genetic studies of ginseng (with frequent occurrences of terms, like biosynthesis and genome), reflecting an objective, experiment-oriented rhetorical style. After entering the 21st century, research priorities gradually shifted toward pharmacological functions and clinical applications (e.g., anti-cancer, cardioprotective, neuroprotective), accompanied by a stronger emphasis on argumentative and outcome-oriented expressions, indicating a transition of scientific language toward applied and practice-oriented rhetoric (Chen et al., 2017; Arring et al., 2018). Besides, the rise of topics such as “dietary supplements and alternative medicine” signifies an increasing presence of health-related and lifestyle vocabulary in academic discourse, illustrating the expansion of scientific expression toward interdisciplinarity and popularization. 7.2 Rhetorical patterns in highly cited ginseng papers Highly cited ginseng research papers, especially those published in leading journals such as Journal of Ginseng Research and Journal of Natural Medicines, show careful rhetorical organization and strategic citation practices. For example, recent trend analyses and systematic reviews in these journals classify hundreds of studies by research type—such as pharmacology, molecular biology, clinical trials, and reviews—and by research focus, such as ginsenoside biosynthesis or pharmacological mechanisms (Park et al., 2021; Ito and Ito, 2024). These papers usually start with a comprehensive literature review, then divide the research field into systematic sections, and end with integrated insights and future directions. Common writing features include structured abstracts, clear section divisions, and summary tables, which improve clarity and readability. In highly cited ginseng papers, citation density serves multiple rhetorical purposes: establishing authority, providing context for findings, and showing engagement with the academic community. Dense clusters of citations often appear in the background and discussion sections, where authors synthesize previous studies and place their findings within ongoing scholarly debates (Ito and Ito, 2024). Paragraphs are usually organized to move from broad background information to specific discoveries, using smooth transitions to guide readers through complex arguments. This organization keeps the logic clear and strengthens persuasiveness, as seen in systematic reviews and meta-analyses that integrate evidence from multiple sources. 7.3 Linguistic features of clinical research papers Clinical research papers on ginseng, such as systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, usually use precise reporting language and clear narrative structures to highlight study design, participant characteristics, and outcome measures (Arring et al., 2018). These papers use standardized terms such as “randomized”, “placebo-controlled”, and “outcome measures”, along with structured abstracts to improve clarity and allow comparisons between studies. The narrative structure often follows a logical flow from hypothesis to results, emphasizing transparency and reproducibility in methodology (Arring et al., 2018; Park et al., 2021). Descriptive language plays an important role in data presentation and figure descriptions. Clinical studies often use detailed tables and graphs to show variables, statistical results, and sample characteristics, with explanatory titles summarizing key findings (Arring et al., 2018; Park et al., 2021). For example, a table may list the types of ginseng products tested, dosages, participant demographics, and outcome measures, while figure captions explain the meaning of visualized data and highlight important results (Grazina et al., 2021). 8 Concluding Remarks Research papers on ginseng show clear features in vocabulary and rhetoric. These features are strongly influenced by the norms of scientific writing. The language often includes technical terms, complex noun phrases, and specific sentence structures. These are used to serve rhetorical purposes such as establishing research space, presenting results, and engaging with previous studies. This kind of academic discourse shows high precision, objectivity, and argumentation. The choice of words reflects the focus of the discipline and its way of understanding knowledge. In ginseng research, the language shows systematic patterns, such as using complex syntax to achieve rhetorical goals, organizing the text with clear thematic structures, and building knowledge and authority through citation practices. These linguistic and rhetorical patterns are consistent across scientific fields, though they may vary depending on the research focus and the target audience.
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 251 The main limitation of this study lies in the size and scope of the corpus. Many advanced linguistic and AI models for Traditional Chinese Medicine and ginseng research are limited by the lack of large, annotated corpora, which affects the generalizability and robustness of the results. The diversity of text types and inconsistent definitions of entities in TCM literature also add complexity to systematic analysis. Rhetorical annotation, especially in identifying discourse steps and functions, involves a certain level of subjectivity. Differences in annotation standards and the interpretive nature of rhetorical analysis may lead to inconsistencies, affecting the reliability of cross-study comparisons. Future research should focus on combining corpus linguistics with AI-assisted text analysis. Large language models and advanced natural language processing can help improve human ability in entity recognition, knowledge extraction, and discourse analysis in traditional Chinese medicine studies. Building domain-specific corpora and evaluation benchmarks will be key to improving model performance and interpretability. In the effort to internationalize and enhance the influence of traditional Chinese medicine and ginseng research, it is also important to standardize terminology, improve translation quality, and promote cross-cultural academic exchange. By strengthening digital resource development, promoting open-access corpora, and adopting multilingual publishing strategies, the communication gap between Chinese and foreign research communities can be reduced, helping the global spread and wider recognition of traditional Chinese medicine scholarship. Author’s contributions AYY conceived and conducted the research, completed the literature review and data analysis, and drafted the initial version of the manuscript. YMY participated in the writing and critical revision of the manuscript and contributed to the refinement of the research framework. JXY assisted in the collection and organization of literature materials and participated in revising and improving the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. Acknowledgements This study was supported by the Higher Education Teaching Project of Jilin Province:“Research and Practice on Innovative Digital Teaching Paths for Traditional Chinese Culture in Translation Education of Applied Undergraduate Colleges” (Project No. JGJX25D1126), the Social Science Project of the Jilin Provincial Department of Education: “A Study on the Translation Ethics and Cross-cultural Comparison of Jilin’s Ginseng and Deer Antler Culture”, and the Jilin Provincial Department of Science and Technology Project: “Research on Translation and Dissemination Paths of Jilin Ginseng Culture from the Perspective of Cultural and Tourism Integration”. References Arring N.M., Millstine D., Marks L.A., and Nail L.M., 2018, Ginseng as a treatment for fatigue: A systematic review, The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 24(7): 624-633. https://doi.org/10.1089/acm.2017.0361 Bhatnagar V., Duari S., and Gupta S.K., 2022, Quantitative discourse cohesion analysis of scientific scholarly texts using multilayer networks, IEEE Access, 10: 88538-88557. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2022.3198952 Chai C.P., 2023, Comparison of text preprocessing methods, Natural Language Engineering, 29(3): 509-553. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324922000213 Chen C., and Zhang L.J., 2017, An intercultural analysis of the use of hedging by Chinese and Anglophone academic English writers, Applied Linguistics Review, 8(1): 1-34. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-2009 Chen Q., Ai N., Liao J., Shao X., Liu Y., and Fan X., 2017, Revealing topics and their evolution in biomedical literature using Bio-DTM: A case study of ginseng, Chinese Medicine, 12(1): 27. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13020-017-0148-7 Dai Q., 2022, Construction of English and American literature corpus based on machine learning algorithm, Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience, 2022: 9773452. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9773452 Deng Z., Ali A.M., and Zin Z.B.M., 2025, Investigating methodological trends of hedging strategies in academic discourse: A systematic literature review, World Journal of English Language, 15(5): 322-340. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v15n5p322
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 252 Devitt A.J., 2015, Genre performances: John Swales’ Genre Analysis and rhetorical-linguistic genre studies, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 19: 44-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.05.008 Erduran S., Ozdem Y., and Park J.Y., 2015, Research trends on argumentation in science education: A journal content analysis from 1998-2014, International Journal of STEM Education, 2(1): 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40594-015-0020-1 Fonseca C.A., Guelpeli M.V.C., and Souza Netto R.S.D., 2022, Representation of structured data of the text genre as a technique for automatic text processing, Texto Livre, 15: e35445. https://doi.org/10.35699/1983-3652.2022.35445 Governor D., Lombardi D., and Duffield C., 2021, Negotiations in scientific argumentation: An interpersonal analysis, Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 58(9): 1389-1424. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21713 Grazina L., Amaral J.S., Costa J., and Mafra I., 2021, Towards authentication of Korean ginseng-containing foods: Differentiation of five Panax species by a novel diagnostic tool, LWT, 151: 112211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2021.112211 Hamdan N.N., and Ahmad U.K., 2023, Asserting authorial identity through stance and voice: Expert vs. novice scientific writers, Arab World English Journal, 14(2): 360-377. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4497941 Hao J., 2020, Analysing scientific discourse from a systemic functional linguistic perspective: A framework for exploring knowledge building in biology, Routledge, pp.286. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351241052 Huang Y., and Li D., 2023, Translatorial voice through modal stance: A corpus-based study of modality shifts in Chinese-to-English translation of research article abstracts, Lingua, 295: 103610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2023.103610 Irawati L., 2022, Potential factors influencing the rhetorical patterns of research article discussion sections, Studies in English Language and Education, 9(1): 115-131. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v9i1.21267 Ito H., and Ito M., 2024, Recent trends in ginseng research, Journal of Natural Medicines, 78(3): 455-466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11418-024-01792-4 Jiang M., Chi J., Qiao Y., Wang J., Zhang Z., Liu J., Sheng X., and Yuan L., 2025, Ginsenosides Rg1, Rb1 and rare ginsenosides: Promising candidate agents for Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease and network pharmacology analysis, Pharmacological Research, 212: 107578. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phrs.2025.107578 Johnson M.D., and Tabari M.A., 2025, Linguistic complexity in second language writing: Insight from studies on task planning, Language Teaching, 58(1): 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444824000284 Khedri M., 2016, Are we visible? An interdisciplinary data-based study of self-mention in research articles, Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 52(3): 403-430. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0017 Larsen K.R., Hovorka D., Dennis A., and West J.D., 2019, Understanding the elephant: The discourse approach to boundary identification and corpus construction for theory review articles, Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 20(7): 15. https://doi.org/10.17705/1jais.00556 Li X., Liu J., Zuo T., Hu Y., Li Z., Wang H., Xu X., Yang W., and Guo D., 2022, Advances and challenges in ginseng research from 2011 to 2020: The phytochemistry, quality control, metabolism, and biosynthesis, Natural Product Reports. https://doi.org/10.1039/d1np00071c Liu Y., and Lu X., 2020, N1 of N2 constructions in academic written discourse: A pattern grammar analysis, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 47: 100893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100893 Lutskiv A., and Popovych N., 2019, Adaptable text corpus development for specific linguistic research, 2019 IEEE International Scientific-Practical Conference Problems of Infocommunications, Science and Technology (PIC S&T): 217-223. https://doi.org/10.1109/picst47496.2019.9061453 Nakagawa S., and Lagisz M., 2024, The ABC of academic writing: Non-native speakers’ perspective, Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 39(4): 307-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2024.01.008 Oermann M., Nicoll L., Chinn P., Conklin J., McCarty M., and Amarasekara S., 2018, Quality of author guidelines in nursing journals, Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 50: 333-340. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnu.12383 Park S.H., Chung S., Chung M.Y., Choi H.K., Hwang J.T., and Park J.H., 2022, Effects of Panax ginseng on hyperglycemia, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia: A systematic review and meta-analysis, Journal of Ginseng Research, 46(2): 188-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgr.2021.10.002
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 244-253 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 253 Ruskan A., Hint H., Leijen D.A.J., and Šinkūnienė J., 2023, Lithuanian academic discourse revisited: Features and patterns of scientific communication, Open Linguistics, 9(1): 231. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-0231 Schmauss L.S., and Kilian K., 2023, Hedging with modal auxiliary verbs in scientific discourse and women’s language, Open Linguistics, 9(1): 229. https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2022-0229 Shi Z.Y., Zeng J.Z., and Wong A.S.T., 2019, Chemical structures and pharmacological profiles of ginseng saponins, Molecules, 24(13): 2443. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules24132443 Shin S., Park M.S., Lee H., Lee S., Lee H., Kim T.H., and Kim H.J., 2021, Global trends in research on wild-simulated ginseng: Quo vadis?, Forests, 12(6): 664. https://doi.org/10.3390/f12060664 Song E., Ang L., Park J., Jun E., Kim K., Jun J., Park S., and Lee M., 2021, A scoping review on biomedical journal peer review guides for reviewers, PloS One, 16(5): e0251440. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251440 Swales J., 2014, Create a research space (CARS) model of research introductions, Writing about Writing: A College Reader: 12-15. Viktorova E.Yu., 2024, Transdisciplinary study of hedging strategy in evaluative academic discourse, Vestnik Volgogradskogo Gosudarstvennogo Universiteta. Seriya 2. Yazykoznanie: 5-17. https://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2024.1.1 Wang J., and Zeng L., 2021, Disciplinary recognized self-presence: Self-mention used with hedges and boosters in PhD students’ research writing, Sage Open, 11(2): 21582440211005454. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211005454 Wang Y., 2025, When methods and results intertwine: An exploration from congruent and metaphorical construal, English for Specific Purposes, 78: 109-124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.12.001 Wu W., Jiao C., Li H., Ma Y., Jiao L., and Liu S., 2018, LC‐MS based metabolic and metabonomic studies of Panax ginseng, Phytochemical Analysis, 29(4): 331-340. https://doi.org/10.1002/pca.2752 Wu Y., 2025, Authorial identity construction through implicit stance-taking in the introduction of research articles, English for Specific Purposes, 78: 88-108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2024.12.003 Xu W., Choi H., and Huang L., 2017, State of Panax ginseng research: A global analysis, Molecules : A Journal of Synthetic Chemistry and Natural Product Chemistry, 22. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules22091518 Yang X., Ding L., Wang W., and Yang J., 2025, Identification of interdisciplinary research patterns based on the functional structures of IMRaD, Information Processing & Management, 62(3): 104063. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2025.104063 Yu Q., and Wen R., 2022, A corpus-based quantitative study on the interpersonal functions of hedges in Chinese and German academic discourse, Heliyon, 8(9). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10698 Yu W., Cai S., Zhao J., Hu S., Zang C., Xu J., and Hu L., 2024, Beyond genome: Advanced omics progress of Panax ginseng, Plant Science, 341: 112022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plantsci.2024.112022 Zhang P., and Pan Y., 2020, A comparative study of keywords and sentiments of abstracts by Python programs, Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 10(6): 722-739. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojml.2020.106044 Zhang P., and Pan Y., 2023, An intercultural comparison of authors' self-mention and identity construction in English agricultural abstracts by Chinese and international writers, Journal of Contemporary Language Research, 2(2): 72-83. https://doi.org/10.58803/jclr.v2i2.69 Zhou Z., Li M., Zhang Z., Song Z., Xu J., Zhang M., and Gong M., 2024, Overview of Panax ginseng and its active ingredients protective mechanism on cardiovascular diseases, Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 334: 118506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2024.118506 Zimba O., and Gasparyan A., 2021, Peer review guidance: A primer for researchers, Reumatologia/Rheumatology, 59(1): 3-8. https://doi.org/10.5114/reum.2021.102709
Medicinal Plant Research 2025, Vol.15, No.6, 254-263 http://hortherbpublisher.com/index.php/mpr 254 Feature Review Open Access Curcuma longa and Its Bioactive Curcuminoids: Molecular Mechanisms in Anti-inflammatory and Immunomodulation Guangman Xu , Jiayi Wu Traditional Chinese Medicine Research Center, Cuixi Academy of Biotechnology, Zhuji, 311800, Zhejiang, China Corresponding author: guangman.xu@cuixi.org Medicinal Plant Research, 2025, Vol.15, No.6 doi: 10.5376/mpr.2025.15.0027 Received: 08 Sep., 2025 Accepted: 15 Oct., 2025 Published: 21 Nov., 2025 Copyright © 2025 Xu and Wu, This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Preferred citation for this article: Xu G.M., and Wu J.Y., 2025, Curcuma longa and its bioactive curcuminoids: molecular mechanisms in anti-inflammatory and immunomodulation, Medicinal Plant Research, 15(6): 254-263 (doi: 10.5376/mpr.2025.15.0027) Abstract Curcuma longa and its major bioactive compound, curcumin, have been used widely in traditional medicine and have attracted wide research attention worldwide for their prominent anti-inflammation and immunomodulatory effects in recent years. This study summarizes the chemical properties of C. longa and curcumin, their major bioactive constituents, and the mechanism of their synergistic actions, focusing on inhibiting inflammatory responses through the modulation of the NF-κB, MAPK, JAK/STAT, and PI3K/Akt/mTOR signaling pathways to regulate innate and adaptive immunity, inflammasomes, and the activity of immune-related cells. It integrates the progress in the in vitro, animal, and clinical research, discussing bioavailability, metabolism, and gut microbiota interactions on their physiological activities. Safety, dosage, possible risks, and challenges in translation into pharmaceutical applications are analyzed. Being natural products, C. longa and curcumin possess huge potential in the prevention and treatment of chronic inflammation-related diseases. More studies in mechanistic elucidation and clinical validation would be required to promote the clinical application of C. longa and curcumin. In addition, this study has helped gain further insight into the molecular mechanisms of the therapeutic properties of C. longa and curcumin, which provides the scientific basis necessary for developing and applying C. longa and curcumin as natural anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory agents in the management of chronic diseases. Keywords Curcuma longa; Curcumin; Anti-inflammatory; Immunomodulation; Molecular mechanisms 1 Introduction Turmeric is a rhizomatous perennial herb belonging to the family Zingiberaceae and has been widely cultivated throughout South and Southeast Asia. Historical documents evidenced that turmeric has conventionally been used for more than 4 000 years, with its medicinal properties standing out in Ayurveda, Unani, and traditional Chinese medicine. Conventionally, turmeric rhizomes have been used traditionally for the treatment of wounds, digestive disorders, respiratory ailments, and various inflammatory diseases. In addition to its cultural and traditional importance, turmeric has received increasing global scientific interest because of its pharmacological activities with broad spectra: antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, antimicrobial, anti-cancer, and metabolic regulatory effects. Recent development in phytochemistry and molecular biology has catapulted turmeric into an exciting natural therapeutic agent against chronic diseases associated with inflammation and immune dysfunction (Zhang et al., 2024). Curcumin, first isolated in the early 19th century, is the most studied polyphenolic compound obtained fromC. longa. It belongs to a class of diarylheptanoids known as curcuminoids, including demethoxycurcumin (DMC) and bisdemethoxycurcumin (BDMC). The structural entity of curcumin consists of two feruloyl moieties linked by a conjugated heptadiene chain, giving it high electron-donating and radical-scavenging activity. This is the structure behind its interaction with multiple molecular targets, modulation of cascading, and consequent pleiotropic biological effects. Despite this multifunctional activity, curcumin is poorly soluble in aqueous media and hence shows low bioavailability. Hence, much effort has been made toward developing its improved formulations and delivery systems. The fast-growing understanding of the chemistry of curcuminoids has thus awakened interest in their possible therapeutic efficacy and mechanistic diversity (Kocaadam and Sanli̇er, 2017).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==