Packaging Authority: A Comparative Corpus-Based Study of Passive Voice, Cleft Constructions, and Topicalization in the Conclusions of W-Category and Y-Category Linguistics and Literature Journals

Abstract

Non-canonical structures—passive voice, cleft constructions, and topicalization—allow academic writers to manage information flow and construct disciplinary authority. While prior corpus studies have examined these structures within single genres, none have compared their deployment across institutionally stratified publication tiers, and the conclusion section remains underexamined as a site of information packaging. This study compares how these structures function in the conclusions of Higher Education Commission (HEC) Pakistan-recognized W-category (high-tier) and Y-category (mid-tier) linguistics and literature journals. A purposive corpus of 80 conclusions (N = 29,559 words) was tagged and analyzed in AntConc 3.5.9, with frequencies normalized per 1,000 words and compared via chi-square tests; qualitative analysis drew on Huddleston and Pullum's Information Packaging model, Prince's Given–New taxonomy, and Halliday's Theme–Rheme framework. W-category writers favored epistemically calibrated modal passives (26.9% vs. 18.7%), χ² (1, N = 229) = 5.41, p = .020, while Y-category writers favored unmodalized assertion. No genuine topicalization occurred in either corpus; both relied on thematic fronting, deployed more richly in W-category texts. Tier-based distinction lies in strategic precision rather than structural novelty.