An Investigation of Metadiscourse Features in Applied Linguistics Academic Research Articles and Master’s Dissertations

Sultan H. Alharbi

Abstract


The current study comparatively investigated the employment of metadiscourse items in 40 post-method sections/chapters of research articles (RAs) and master’s dissertations (MAs) in the field of applied linguistics. Utilizing Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse in analysing metadiscourse elements detected in both sets of texts, the findings indicated that interactive metadiscourse features were more frequent in both sets of texts than interactional metadiscourse items, and that the master’s dissertation subcorpus included significantly higher occurrences of most metadiscourse devices. Results indicated that transitions are the most used category of metadiscourse in research articles and master’s dissertations, while hedges are the most frequent interactional metadiscourse category used in both subcorpora. Results also showed that the master’s dissertation subcorpus consists of significantly higher occurrences of some metadiscourse devices, which might be due to the nature of both genres. The findings have important implications, particularly for L2 student writers, by facilitating their understanding of metadiscourse use in this field. The study concludes with the limitations, as well as recommendations for future research.


Keywords


Metadiscourse, Genre, Applied Linguistics, RAs, MAs

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Agustinos, P., & Arsyad, S. (2018). Metadiscourse markers in the undergraduate thesis introduction written by English department students in university of Bengkulu. Journal of English Education and Teaching, 2, 50-61.

Bitchener, J., & Basturkmen, H. (2006). Perceptions of the difficulties of postgraduate L2 thesis students writing the discussion section. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 4-18. 10.1016/j.jeap.2005.10.002

Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistics: A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in PhD theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18, S41-S56.

Bunton, D. (2002). Generic moves in PhD thesis introductions. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic Discourse (pp. 57-75). Harlow, UK: Longman.

Can, C., & Yuvayapan, F. (2018). Stance-Taking through Metadiscourse in Doctoral Dissertations. Online Submission, 6, 128-142.

Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007

Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written communication, 10, 39-71.

Djahimo, H. R. (2018). An Analysis of Transition Signals in Discussion Texts Written by the Sixth Semester Students of the English Study Program of UNDANA in Academic Year 2016/2017. International Journal of Research-Granthaalayah, 6, 137-149.

Duke, C. R. (1983). Writing through sequence: A process approach: Scott, Foresman and Company.

Guo, J. (2019). A Contrastive study of evidentiality in English and Chinese MA thesis abstracts. Paper presented at the 6th International Conference on Education, Language, Art and Inter-cultural Communication (ICELAIC 2019).

Hinds, J. (1987). Reader versus writer responsibility: A new typology. In U. Connor & R. Kaplan (Eds.), Writing across Languages: Analysis of L2 text (pp. 141-152). Reading, UK: Addison-Wesley.

Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2015). Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 12-25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.002

Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text-Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse, 18, 349-382.

Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to students: Metadiscourse in introductory coursebooks. English for specific purposes, 18, 3-26.

Hyland, K. (2004a). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.

Hyland, K. (2004b). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 133-151.

Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London, UK: Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2005b). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7, 173-192. doi:10.1177/1461445605050365

Hyland, K. (2010). Metadiscourse: Mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9, 125-143.

Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25, 156-177. 10.1093/applin/25.2.156

Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 114-124. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006

Khedri, M., Heng, C. S., & Ebrahimi, S. F. (2013). An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines. Discourse Studies, 15, 319-331.

Kim, L. C., & Lim, J. M.-H. (2013). Metadiscourse in English and Chinese research article introductions. Discourse Studies, 15, 129-146. 10.1177/1461445612471476

Lafuente-Millán, E. (2014). Reader engagement across cultures, languages and contexts of publication in business research articles. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 24, 201-223. 10.1111/ijal.12019

Lee, J. J., & Casal, J. E. (2014). Metadiscourse in results and discussion chapters: A cross-linguistic analysis of English and Spanish thesis writers in engineering. System, 46, 39-54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.009

Liu, Y., & Buckingham, L. (2018). The schematic structure of discussion sections in applied linguistics and the distribution of metadiscourse markers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 34, 97-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.04.002

Mu, C., Zhang, L. J., Ehrich, J., & Hong, H. (2015). The use of metadiscourse for knowledge construction in Chinese and English research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 135-148. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.09.003

Mur-Dueñas, P. (2011). An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3068-3079. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002

Nausa Triana, R. A. (2019). Modality and code glosses to transition from academic written to oral discourses: An exploratory study. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 24, 51-67.

Paltridge, B. (2002). Thesis and dissertation writing: An examination of published advice and actual practice. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 125-143.

Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2007). Thesis and dissertation writing in a second language: A handbook for supervisors. London, UK: Routledge.

Pérez-Llantada, C. (2010). The discourse functions of metadiscourse in published academic writing: Issues of culture and language. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9, 41-68.

Petric´, B. (2012). Legitimate textual borrowing: Direct quotation in L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 21, 102-117. 10.1016/j.jslw.2012.03.005

Samraj, B. (2008). A discourse analysis of master’s theses across disciplines with a focus on introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7, 55-67. https://doi-org.sdl.idm.oclc.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.02.005

Samraj, B. (2013). Form and function of citations in discussion sections of master's theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12, 299-310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2013.09.001

Scott, M. (2020). WordSmith Tools version 8, Stroud: Lexical Analysis Software.

Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential skills and tasks (2nd ed.). Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Thompson, P. (2013). Thesis and dissertation writing. In B. Paltridge & S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes (pp. 283-300). West Essex: UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College composition and communication, 36, 63-94.

Yang, R., & Allison, D. (2003). Research articles in applied linguistics: Moving from results to conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365-385.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.1.p.46

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2010-2021 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.