Functions of Meta-discursive Nouns: A Corpus-based Comparison of Post-graduate Genres in L1 and L2 English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.11649/cs.2827Keywords:
academic writing, post-graduate genres, meta-discursive nounsAbstract
Academic discourse is characterized by various linguistic features that academic writers utilize to maintain cohesion, reader–writer communication, and authorial stance. Recently, meta-discourse (MD) has received considerable attention as one of the most prominent linguistic and pragmatic features of academic writing. Despite the abundance of nouns in academic genres, there has been little attention paid to their meta-discursive functions. In this study, we intend to address this gap by exploring the usage of nouns, specifically in two important post-graduate genres: MA and Ph.D. theses written by both native and non-native academic writers of English. The analysis draws on a corpus of 1,148,992 words of MA and Ph.D. theses, and the concordance software, AntConc version 3.5.8, was utilized to calculate the frequency counts of MD nouns. Log-likelihood statistics were performed to determine whether there was a statistical difference among four corpora regarding the use of MD nouns. We observed cultural variations in the MD noun usage between native and non-native academic writers of English. The analysis also reflected the same rhetorical decisions by both groups of academic writers regarding the deployment of MD nouns in MA and Ph.D. theses. Hence, it may be suggested that a genre-based approach in academic writing courses may raise students’ awareness of socially and disciplinary-based norms of academic genres.
References
Abdi, R. (2009). Projecting cultural identity through metadiscourse marking: A comparison of Persian and English research articles. Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning, 1(212), 1–15.
Abdi, R., Rizi, M. T., & Tavakoli, M. (2010). The cooperative principle in discourse communities and genres: A framework for the use of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(6), 1669–1679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.11.001
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. John Benjamin Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you a kind of a map of where we are going: A taxonomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69–97. http://doi.org/10.35360/njes.218 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.218
Anthony, L. (2019). AntConc (Version 3.5.8) [Computer software]. Waseda University. https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Baker, P., Hardie, A., & McEnery, T. (2006). A glossary of corpus linguistics. Edinburgh University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748626908 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780748626908
Blagojević, S. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic prose: A contrastive study of academic articles written in English by English and Norwegian native speakers. Kalbų Studijos / Studies about Languages, 2004(5), 60–67.
Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Ablex Publishing Corporation.
Bondi, M. (2010). Metadiscursive practices in introductions: Phraseology and semantic sequences across genres. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 99–123. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.219 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.219
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in Ph.D. theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18(Suppl. 1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00022-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00022-2
Burneikaitė, N. (2008). Metadiscourse in linguistics master’s theses in English L1 and L2. Kalbotyra, 59(3), 38–47. https://doi.org/10.15388/Klbt.2008.7591 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Klbt.2008.7591
Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007
Charles, M. (2003). “This mystery…”: A corpus-based study of the use of nouns to construct stance in theses from two contrasting disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(4), 313–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00048-1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1475-1585(03)00048-1
Charles, M. (2007). Argument or evidence? Disciplinary variation in the use of the noun that pattern in stance construction. English for Specific Purposes, 26(2), 203–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2006.08.004
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: A marker of national culture or of academic discipline. Journal of Pragmatics, 36(10), 1807–1825. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004
Derewianka, B. (2003). Trends and issues in genre-based approaches. RELC Journal, 34(2), 133–154. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820303400202 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820303400202
Dontcheva-Navrátilová, O. (2013). Authorial presence in academic discourse functions of author-reference pronouns. Linguistica Pragensia, 23(1), 9–30.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., Johnson, K. E., Henry, A., & Roseberry, R. L. (1998). An evaluation of a genre‐based approach to the teaching of EAP/ESP writing. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 147–156. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587913 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3587913
Flowerdew, J. (2003). Signalling nouns in discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 22(4), 329–346. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00017-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(02)00017-0
Flowerdew, J. (2015). Revisiting metadiscourse: Conceptual and methodological issues concerning signaling nouns. Iberica, 2015(29), 15–34.
Granger, S. (1996). From CA to CIA and back: An integrated contrastive approach to computerized bilingual and learner corpora. In K. Aijmer, B. Altenberg, & M. Johansson (Eds.), Languages in contrast: Text-based cross-linguistic studies (Vol. 88, pp. 37–51). Lund University Press.
Halabisaz, B., Pazhakh, A., & Shakibafar, M. (2014). Hedging in thesis abstracts on applied linguistics across Persian and English. International Review of Social Sciences and Humanities, 7(1), 211–218.
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 437–455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 post-graduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2010). Metadiscourse: Mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.220 DOI: https://doi.org/10.35360/njes.220
Hyland, K. (2019). Second language writing (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108635547
Ifantidou, E. (2005). The semantics and pragmatics of metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 37(9), 1325–1353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.11.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.11.006
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2015). “The fact that”: Stance nouns in disciplinary writing. Discourse Studies, 17(5), 529–550. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615590719 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445615590719
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscursive nouns: Interaction and cohesion in abstract moves. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2016.11.001
Jiang, F. K., & Hyland, K. (2018). Nouns and academic interactions: A neglected feature of metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics, 39(4), 508–531. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw023 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amw023
Kondowe, W. (2014). Hedging and boosting as interactional metadiscourse in literature doctoral dissertation abstracts. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5(3), 214–221.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural differences in academic discourse: Problems of a linguistic and cultural minority. AFinLA, 51, 157–174.
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2011). An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(12), 3068–3079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002
Onder Ozdemir, N., & Longo, B. (2014). Metadiscourse use in thesis abstracts: A cross-cultural study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 141, 59–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.011
Prados, M. D. (2018). Abstract nouns as metadiscursive shells in academic discourse. Caplletra, 2018(64), 153–178. https://doi.org/10.7203/caplletra.64.11372 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7203/caplletra.64.11372
Rezaei Zadeh, Z., Baharlooei, R., & Simin, S. (2015). Interactive and interactional meta-discourse markers in conclusion sections of English master theses. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 4(4), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2015.1081 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2015.1081
Romero-Trillo, J. (2002). The pragmatic fossilization of discourse markers in non-native speakers of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(6), 769–784. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00022-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00022-X
Salas, M. D. (2015). Reflexive metadiscourse in research articles in Spanish: Variation across three disciplines (Linguistics, Economics and Medicine). Journal of Pragmatics, 77, 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.12.006
Schmid, H.-J. (2000). English abstract nouns as conceptual shells: From corpus to cognition. Walter de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110808704 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110808704
Vande Kopple, W. J. V. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93. https://doi.org/10.2307/357609 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/357609
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Fatma Yuvayapan, Ilyas Yakut
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.
