In Britain, writing a project proposal is based on certain requirements centered round the following key aspects: content, use of source material, organization and language.

1. Content – important though it is – is not an aspect to be thoroughly discussed in a language classroom; it needs professional guidance by an authority on the subject. It will suffice to mention here that if a project fails to construct an informed argument – i.e. to inform or to argue – it fails to meet the expectations of an academic community, and British undergraduates are supposed to demonstrate their understanding of the conventions of scholarship.

2. Use of source material serves to show ability to work with literature, which typically has to follow the accepted lines of rationalistic reasoning. The British with their linear logic tend to use a step-by-step procedure of constructing an informed argument

• the first one is summarizing information about the topic,

• then comes its critical evaluating (and it implies a delicate balance between descriptive and evaluative writing),

• the next step presupposes analysing (i.e. closely examining various bits of information relevant to the study),

• and, finally, the step of synthesizing is aimed at establishing connections and interrelations between ideas from several sources supporting key standpoints.

Thus, the project is intended to create an umbrella argument under which several observations and perspectives might stand.

3. Organization. When creating an informed argument you are to rely upon several organizational strategies. Having chosen the topic [x] and formulated its title (probably being guided by the need to simply answer the question: What can be learnt from [x] you are to formulate a thesis (e.g. [x] should serve as a model for [z]). Then you are supposed to structure the proposal along the following lines.

The structure of the project proposal

Introduction	A brief abstract, Background of the study, The problem statement, Professional significance
Main body	Literature review, Methodology, A brief report on the results anticipated
Conclusion	A brief summary

Introduction (which is often preceded by a brief abstract – to outline overall structure and objectives) should accomplish two things: declare your argument and place it within a broader context. Possibly it might contain a general summary of all the features of [x] or a chronological summary of the [x] history. The thesis statement usually forms part of introduction.

Main body includes an outline of the theoretical literature and empirical research and concise justification of the methodological approach you intend to use (with references in support of your case). Since in Britain formal aspects are of paramount importance and at times form prevails over content it is necessary to mention here that to be properly accepted, the project proposal should be structured as indicated and the literature review should have the same “weight” or significance as methodology (and therefore those parts are of equal length).

Conclusion contains evidence of evaluation of the work. It refers back to thesis statement and draws upon the comments made about the features described to provide a summative comment. Possible is reference to further analysis that might be carried out on the topic, or a theory about the future of [x].

4. The language used is often said to reveal author’s relationship to the topic, the perspective it is viewed through. In British literature on the subject recommendations are found with respect to choosing an appropriate (rhetorical) stance on the topic under study which largely depends on the target audience (readers) and the degree of the author’s awareness with the topic. If an informative stance is permissible for an authority on the subject (writing, say, for laymen), similar attitude of a student not too confident about the topic might look authoritative and ridiculous. In this case you have more questions than answers and an inquisitive stance is more acceptable. Anyway, authors can’t avoid taking a position on a subject; it is considered one of their responsibilities.

It should be mentioned in this connection that in Britain it is an author who is entirely responsible for making a text understandable for the audience and everything is to be spelled out and discussed in detail (while in Russia text interpretation is an issue of shared responsibility – between writers and readers). It is also noted that using the pronoun I an author is supposed to be accepting responsibility for interpreting facts and it is often seen in academic writing. On the other hand, overusing I might be considered as the author’s personal opinion and therefore suggest inability to offer proof. As to using you, it can be treated as if authors want to shorten the distance separating them from readers and thus invite a more subjective or intensely critical response – which is against the rules accepted. To be on the safe side, it is preferable (especially for beginners) to use impersonal passive structures (and since it is a proposal – future tenses where appropriate).

The review of the literature: the theoretical part

In conformity with a time-honoured tradition of scientific research, the review of the literature is intended to briefly outline the general state of knowledge about the research problem and to present the knowledge base upon which the study is built, i.e. to show clear linkages between what was known in the past about the topic and what was discovered in the present research. Thus, you are to describe briefly the history of the topic, key landmark studies which indicate the methodologies used and arguments made and show the major issues or practical problems to identify the gap you intend to look at in your research.

The major components (each having its own divisions) to be outlined are a discussion of the theoretical literature and a review of the empirical research. The theoretical part briefly covers the main theories related to the problem and explicates in depth those most useful in the study and should be connected to the part to follow.

Language focus

1. Find Russian equivalents for the following phrases.

To give a broader theoretical basis to the research
To perpetuate and refine the punch line of N’s theory
To accomplish the revision of…
To substitute an altogether different notion for the N’s concept of…
To deepen and push forward the impact of N’s perspective
To undermine traditional ideas about what is ‘natural’
To decrease the discrepancy between theory and reality.
To guide research in the problem area
To fully realize potentially important implications
N’s deviation / defection from the mainstream of science

2. Consider the following clichés – to be further used in writing your project proposal.

2.1

This part of the project proposal	will explain the search process in reviewing the literature and then examine both the theoretical and empirical studies in the field
The basis for the present study	is provided by a large body of literature on [x]
The following review	was developed through systematic way

2.2

An attempt Most/ Numerous attempts	is/are/were made is/are being made has been made	to	link together the study of… and…
			give a broader (empirical and theoretical) basis to the research into
			perpetuate the theory of/ refine/ modify N’s theory of…
			revise the theory since NN/ accomplish the revision of…
			substitute an altogether different notion for the N’s concept of…
			deepen and push forward the impact of (N’s perspective)
			undermine traditional ideas about
			decrease the discrepancy between theory and reality
Several theories	have been advanced		explain the nature of [x]

2.3

It is	impossible /difficult	to	exaggerate / overestimate N’s contribution to [x]
	exceedingly important		emphasise / realize how much (has been done)
	necessary		acknowledge the extraordinary importance of the theory

2.4

The essence / punch line		which follows directly from N’s works in the field of ( ) / of N’s approach/ of specific innovations advanced by N	could be/ is/ are/was/ were	grasped/seen/defined as/ best understood in terms of [x]/ traced to the factor of [x]/ based on [x]/ the focus of a whole series of/ fully realized later by/ undoubtedly that of
The/N’s core/ key/ central/ major/ most/ potentially important / fundamental	idea(s)/assumption/ (conceptual) scheme/ (governing) principle (in the analysis) ranges of problems/ implications
	contribution to	the progress of [x]	manifests itself in… / signifies a shift in significance
	influence upon	(the field of) [x]
	challenge to	the idea of [x]

2.5

Theories as formulated by N/ The new/contemporary trend(s)/ concept(s)/ discipline/ approach advanced by the advocates of the theory /N’s deviation/defection from the mainstream of ()science	has exerted	a major significant/ potentially important	influence on	rationalization/ theoretical thinking about the general field [x] principles underlying the analysis
	has had reflects		effect over drive towards
	was (in itself) a matter of/
		enormous great/decisive/ immediate	consequences/ implications for
	has/have (n)	fundamental well-known
	was	accepted by several generations of (successors)
	became	an important concept in () and researchers adopted [x] to study
	serve as	a theoretically refined basis for [x]

2.6

The theory	guides research in the problem area
	is useful in/ facilitates understanding and analysis of complex phenomena
	provides the basis for predicting what might occur
	aids practitioners in making decisions

Unit 3 The review of the literature: the empirical part

The review of empirical research should be effectively organized, its pattern being made clear in one of the following ways:

• chronological (with a time pattern),

• conceptual (a conceptual analysis in which the major factors or concepts appearing in the literature are identified),

• opposing camps (when reviewing an issue about which researchers have reached different conclusions).

The studies should be described sufficiently for the reader to understand their findings, the key conclusions being brought together, and finally related to the proposed study making a clear connection between what has been learned in the past and what is proposed to do.

1. Find Russian equivalents for the following phrases.

The research on [z] addressed the question of [y]
In this branch of [x] developments of decisive and immediate consequence now occur
The approach often appears in academic arguments…
It has the privilege and status accorded [y] of the past
These problems shade directly over into [z]
The study of [x] bears upon the most elementary fundamentals of
The actual record of [x] studies/ can be paralleled by a history of [z]
The discussion gets more specific and worthwhile by dramatically narrowing the focus
The problem has been subjected to conscious scrutiny
The approach has undergone a root and branch transformation

2. Consider the following clichés to be further used in writing your project proposal.

3.1

In his (numerous) In many of his In this type of

fundamental theoretical empirical

works on [x] pieces studies

N (in collaboration with NN, and a research staff)

3.2

The problems /study of [x]	are/is linked to/tied up with/clearly related to	the issue of/so many other()
	comprise(s) (essentially)	() characteristics
	shade(s) directly over into/bear(s) directly upon	(those of…)/the problem of
	root in	The most elementary fundamentals of

3.3

The actual history of [x]/record of [x] studies	is (tobe)/can be traced to/paralleled by a history of [z]
For a long time/In the history of [x][z]/ research on [z]/ evaluation of z]	was concerned with [y]/ addressed the question of [y]/ has often served as stimulus / object / illustration of () ideas
Previous studies/ most of the doctrines/ Theories/ The findings from a range of	(when elaborated) made clear that…/ concluded that/ emphasized

3.4

Studies on [x]	are a relatively new feature
Recent investigations	developed in part as a …
This is a branch of () in which	developments of decisive and immediate consequence now occur
The approach (to [x])	appears in (academic arguments…)
N’s research	was highly suggestive /promising
[x]	Has the privilege and status accorded [y] of the past

3.5

It (the issue/ article/ subject question)	can be found	in numerous (publications)…/not only in [x] but in [z] as well
	has been	at the heart of numerous discussions/ hotly debated/ discussed time and again	by the leading scholars/ renowned scientists (of the past)/ theoretically inclined (readers)
		under increasing scrutiny incessant attacks	of chief theorists and intellectuals / the authors of…
	inspired/ couched	a great deal/ a lot of (substantive) debate	among… not only in… but… as well

3.6

The list of questions can go on	but the discussion of issues gets more specific and worthwhile by dramatically narrowing the focus and considering [x]
With some notable exceptions few recent works on [x]	have appeared
(Unfortunately) the research on [x]	Has stalled

3.7

The problem [x]	has not	so far	received all the attention it deserves
		yet	been subjected to conscious scrutiny
	has/ needs to be	further	analysed (in terms of)
			investigated (in greater detail)
These types of questions	cannot	be answered on the basis of the () analysis
An extension /a solution	can	be sought in (n) directions
The problem [x]	requires	a lot of further investigation
	needs	joint and complementary efforts of different scholars

3.8

All the above review	indicates…/ tends to have
The proposed study	will further examine
The (traditional) approach to [x]	has undergone a profound shift in / root and branch transformation