Scientific writing exhibits distinctive linguistic characteristics. One such feature is the prevalent use of inanimate subjects paired with active verbs, a common strategy in academic writing to convey impersonality and objectivity (Hyland, 1996; Johns, 2001; Master, 1991, 2001; Mauranen, 2001; Šeškauskiené, 2009). This study focuses on examining the lexico-grammatical patterns in research article abstracts, particularly the usage of active verbs combined with inanimate subjects (e.g., "The present study attempts to"). The dataset for this analysis comprises 720 abstracts randomly selected from fields including biology, engineering, chemistry, physics, economics, linguistics, psychology and sociology. Recognizing the cultural and disciplinary variations in scientific language, the research evaluates Turkish-written abstracts (n=240), their English translations (n=240), and abstracts written originally in English (n=240). This research seeks to examine how frequently academic writers in Turkish and English employ inanimate subjects paired with active verbs to convey their stance within abstract sections. The findings reveal both similarities and differences across languages and disciplines. The study indicates that abstracts in Turkish and English commonly use inanimate subjects to maintain an objective tone. However, abstracts originally written in English demonstrate a stronger focus on authority and competition within the scientific discourse community, marked by more frequent use of the active voice. Additionally, a comparison across disciplines reveals that social science abstracts frequently make use of inanimate subjects, while those in the natural sciences tend to favor the passive voice. These findings suggest that the choice of lexico-grammatical structures for expressing stance is shaped by both cultural norms and disciplinary conventions in academic writing.

Scientific discourse, inanimate subjects, active verbs, research article abstracts, writer’s stance