The use of metadiscourse for knowledge construction in Chinese and English research articles

Mu, Congjun; Zhang, Lawrence Jun; Ehrich, John; Hong, Hyun-Ki

doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2015.09.003

Cited by 103 publications

(100 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In another study, Mu, Zhang, Ehrich, and Hong (2015) have argued that Chinese scholars also apply more code glosses when writing text compared to English scholars. It shows that the similarity exists between Chinese and Indonesian scholars as parts of the Asian scholars.…”

Section: Code Glossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison of the Interactive Metadiscourse in the Abstracts of Articles Written by Indonesian and Nes Scholars

Mazidah

2019

ETNO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An abstract plays an important role in an article because it becomes the face of the whole paper. Besides, voluntarily or involuntarily when writing an abstract, a writer also applies metadiscourse markers to communicate effectively by organizing, interacting, and showing the stance. Thus, the application of metadiscourse in an abstract becomes an interesting object to examine. This study is aimed at examining interactive and interactional metadiscourse suggested by Hyland (2005) in 50 abstracts written by Indonesian scholars and 50 abstracts written by NES scholars, 100-250 word range, taken from TEFLIN journal and ELT journal. The results show that NES scholars apply more metadiscourse markers than Indonesian scholars (83.14 versus 76.37). NES, in details, apply more code glosses, and transition markers, while Indonesian scholars apply more frame markers and evidentials, and the similar result is found in endophoric markers (8.9 for both groups of scholars). But, from overall cases and variants, metadiscourse markers by Indonesian scholars are more varied than those of NES scholars (618 versus 559 cases, 66 versus 48 variants). Differences are mostly influenced by cultural interferences (Friedlander, 1987; Hyland, 2005; Abdi, 2009; Sanjaya et al., 2015; Mu et al., 2015). Apart from what causes the differences, the result of T-test shows that the difference in metadiscourse markers applied by both scholars is not significant. It means that metadiscourse markers applied by both groups of scholars are similar.

show abstract

Section: Code Glossesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Chinese shows a different result of usage. Mu et al (2015) has found Chinese to have fewer transition markers than English. It means that for transition, Chinese and Indonesian scholars have different views in usage.…”

Section: Transtition Markersmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison of the Interactive Metadiscourse in the Abstracts of Articles Written by Indonesian and Nes Scholars

Mazidah

2019

ETNO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Due to their importance, hedges and boosters have attracted a widely remarkable interest in the literature such as the use of hedges and boosters across cultures (Mu et al 2015;Mur-Dueñas 2011), academic disciplines (Hyland 1998a;Youssef 2016), undergraduate students' essays (Ho and Li 2018;Lee and Deakin 2016), post-graduate writing (Hyland 2004;Risda,Asfina, A. Effendi Kadarisman 2018;Hyland 2010), non-native writing (Abdollahzadeh 2011;Loi, Lim, and Wharton 2016;Vassileva 2001;Yagız and Demir 2014). These studies do not only underscore the significance of hedges and boosters but have established that these strategies are essential conventions in academic writingbeing important rhetorical means for attending to readers' needs and assessing their reactions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Interactional strategies in L2 writing: An exploration of Hedging and Boosting Strategies in Applied Linguistics research articles

Al-Mudhaffari¹

2020

IJAES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Academic writing has been established as a persuasive endeavor which involves various interactional strategies including hedging and boosting. Nevertheless, there exists variation of hedging and boosting preferences across cultures. The purpose of this study is to explore the use of hedges and boosters, as interactional metadiscourse (MD) strategies, in Yemeni L2 academic writing. Using Hyland (2005), the study was conducted on a text of 34 applied linguistics research articles (RAs) produced by L2 writers. Based on Hyland’s model, a textual software tool was employed to search the instances of hedges and boosters in the corpus. The findings demonstrate that interactional MD strategies were utilized in relatively small proportions. Contrary to the assumption in the literature, hedges were used more than booster especially in the conclusion section of RAs. However, the findings suggest that Yemeni L2 writers tend to present argument like an established fact i.e. making assertive and unqualified statements. Given the limited use of hedging and boosting and the tendency to make unhedged statements, limited rhetorical functions were detected. The study has useful implications for academic writing instruction especially in EFL context.

show abstract

“…To date, metadiscourse has been widely applied to variety of genres in casual conversation (Aerts & Yan, 2017;Schiffrin, 1980), school textbooks (Crismore, 1989;Hyland, 2000), science popularisations (Crismore & Farnsworth, 1990), company annual reports (Hyland, 1998), business e-mails (Carrio &Calderon, 2015), postgraduate dissertations (Bunton, 1999), and research articles (Dahl, 2004;Hyland & Jiang, 2016;Kan, 2016;Mu, et al, 2015). A small amount of comparative research has been done.…”

Section: The Previous Studies Of the Rhetorical Use Of Metadiscoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Rhetorical Use of Interactional Metadiscourse: A Comparison of Letters to Shareholders of American and Chinese Financial Companies

Liu¹

2017

ELT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By taking Hyland and Tse's (2004) interactional metadiscourse model, this study attempts to compare the incidence of the interactional metadiscourse markers in letters to shareholders of American and Chinese companies in the financial industry and their rhetorical functions. This study makes American corpus of 41 letters and Chinese corpus of 37 letters both of which are written in English. WordSmith is adopted to find out the differences in incidence of these markers. Chi-square test further confirms these differences are significant. It is consequently found that five types of interactional metadiscourse markers are all deployed in both American and Chinese corpus but the incidence of each marker is much more in American corpus than that in Chinese corpus. Besides, this study identifies that self-mentions and engagement markers are the most frequently employed in both corpora. However, it is noticeable that self-mentions and engagement markers collaborate with another three types of markers more tactically and flexibly in American corpus than in Chinese. In particular, self-mentions markers are found to use with not only boosters, but hedges and engagement markers in American corpus, while self-mentions markers in Chinese corpus only collaborate with hedges. In addition, the engagement markers of model verbs and personal pronouns are more active in American corpus than these in Chinese. This study finds out American companies integrate these markers into building a positive personal or corporate image and closing writer-reader relationship, thereby accomplishing the promotional and persuasive purposes. It may suggest that Chinese companies employ the integration of interactional metadiscourse markers as strategically as American.

show abstract

The use of metadiscourse for knowledge construction in Chinese and English research articles

Cited by 103 publications

References 35 publications

A Comparison of the Interactive Metadiscourse in the Abstracts of Articles Written by Indonesian and Nes Scholars

A Comparison of the Interactive Metadiscourse in the Abstracts of Articles Written by Indonesian and Nes Scholars

Interactional strategies in L2 writing: An exploration of Hedging and Boosting Strategies in Applied Linguistics research articles

Exploring the Rhetorical Use of Interactional Metadiscourse: A Comparison of Letters to Shareholders of American and Chinese Financial Companies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About