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.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNA==