在學術論文寫作眾多章節中，文獻回顧章節是讀寫過程中困難度較高的一章節，因此研究生普遍視為畏途。文獻回顧的語步分析在過去文獻中尚未受到重視。因此本論文旨在分析臺灣英語教學碩士論文中文獻回顧章節之語步結構。本論文提出兩個研究問題: (1)臺灣英語教學碩士論文文獻回顧章節之語步結構為何？(2)評選高分與評選低分的文獻回顧差異為何？本論文選出三十篇臺灣英語教學碩士論文中文獻回顧章節做為文本分析並將其評選高分群與評選低分群。本研究以四個主要語步來分析文獻回顧章節的語步結構。這四個主要語步分別為：(1)領域知識觀念介紹，(2)用主題方式整合過去之文獻，(3)聯結過去文獻與將進行之研究之關係，及(4)宣布將進行研究。每一主要語步都有數個次要語步。本論文討論語步出現的頻率，語步發展，語步組合結構及語步循環。 本論文顯示第一語步使用的最為廣泛佔56.96%，第二語步佔22.39%，第三語步與第四語步各為11.74%與8.91%。收集之文獻回顧分為四組，分別為(1)表現最差，(2)表現較差，(3)表現稱職，及(4)表現最好。 結果發現表現最差的一組沒有任何主題發展，表現較差的一組有主題發展但是僅限於整合，表現稱職的一組有運用到四個主要語步，而表現最好的一組發現有數個全部語步的循環。本論文呈現臺灣英語教學碩士論文文獻回顧章節的語步結構。這些結果與討論提供英語教學領域研究生更加了解學術論文文獻回顧之寫作架構。 / Reviewing literature for a research study is a highly complicated reading and writing process, which has been assumed a rather formidable task for many graduate students. In the field of English for Specific Purposes, many scholars have devoted their studies into certain types of genre analysis, particularly research genres. However, the concept of “literature review” (LR) as a distinct type of genre has been constantly overlooked and the move structure of literature reviews unexplored. The move structure of LRs in master theses written by Taiwanese TEFL program graduates was studied. This proposed study included two research questions: (1) What are the move structures of the LR chapters in the master theses of TEFL programs? (2) Do the move structures differ between the low-rated and high-rated LRs? In this study, thirty theses were randomly chosen. Thirty theses were rated and grouped into high-rated and low-rated categories. Based on Kwan’s framework (2006) and the results of pilot study, a new move structure with the four major moves was formulated for this study. The statistical results showed that “conceptualizing themes in a field (Move 1)” takes the largest proportion among the total occurrences, followed by “integrating previous works on the themes (Move 2),” “relating previous works to the current study (Move 3)” and “advancing to one’s own study (Move 4).” It is concluded that LRs composed by these graduates fundamentally serves to present relevant field knowledge. Further, no topic expansion is found in the deficient group. Most of the LRs in the poor group halt at the synthesis though there is some topic development. The competent group has a complete occurrence of the four major moves. Multiple cycles are found per LR in the distinctive group. This study provides insights into the move structure of Taiwanese students’ literature review chapters of master theses.