Abstract:
This research discussed the study of linguistics in comparing the use of English
nominalization in writing abstracts for international and national journals. The
method research applied in this research was qualitative method. The research
objectives were; to find out how to overcome challenges in choosing words in
abstract writing and to elaborate the comparison of nominalization of abstract writing
in international and national articles. The source of data was taken from five abstract
international journal articles and the other five abstracts from national journal
articles. In accordance with Mack's theory, this finding showed there were four ways
to overcome the challenges in choosing words in abstract writing, namely avoid
abbreviations and acronyms, use descriptive words to explain research information,
put emphasis words to highlight keywords, and notice the limitation of words used
in abstract writing. The next finding discusses about the differences in the use of
nominalisation for each journal. The data results show that international journals are
more dominant in the use of nominalisation words, namely 96 words and 69 words
for national journals. Based on the linguistics functions of the use of nominalization
words, the results show that the use of nominalization words used in international
journals is appropriate than national journals. This finding concludes that the use of
English nominalization in international journals makes the abstract be informative,
systematic and scientific.
