Abstract

This dissertation investigated linguistic variation in student writing across Business and Engineering disciplines through Multidimensional Analysis (MDA). Analyzing a corpus of business case studies and engineering proposals, the study identified five dimensions of variation: Informational Density and Elaborated Discourse, Interactive and Situated Discourse, Narrative Focus, Interpersonal and Dialogic Discourse, and Descriptive and Stative Discourse. These dimensions revealed distinct communicative purposes and rhetorical strategies reflecting disciplinary conventions. Business case studies paid attention to clarity and situational relevance by employing interactive language to engage stakeholders and present actionable solutions. In contrast, Engineering proposals emphasized technical precision and informational density, relying on nominalizations, dense noun phrases, and explicit references to describe systems and processes. Both disciplines also demonstrated shared linguistic features that underline the importance of clarity and coherence. The findings have significant implications for writing pedagogy. Discipline-specific instruction should address the unique linguistic demands of each field while fostering foundational skills transferable across contexts. For Business education, this involves enhancing students’ ability to construct persuasive and audience-aware arguments. Engineering writing instruction should give focus to the technical language and precision. The study further raises questions for future research, including the integration of evolving technologies and the exploration of linguistic variation in interdisciplinary genres. By providing a comprehensive framework for analyzing linguistic variation, this research bridges the gap between academic instruction and professional communication, equipping students to meet the demands of their respective fields.