Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse Features in Research Article Discussion Sections Authored by English and Arab Native Speakers — Oak Academic Publishing
Research ArticleOpen AccessGoogle Scholar indexed
Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse Features in Research Article Discussion Sections Authored by English and Arab Native Speakers
Department of English, College of Science and Humanities, Shaqra University, Dawadmi, Saudi Arabia
1 Department of English, College of Science and Humanities, Shaqra University, Dawadmi, Saudi Arabia
This study investigates the deployment of metadiscourse resources in the Discussion sections of research articles authored in two languages: English and Arabic. It explores differences in the use of metadiscourse markers and whether these variations stem from linguistic and cultural distinctions between the two languages. A total of 40 Discussion sections from research articles written by English- and Arabic-speaking academics in the fields of Education and Applied Linguistics are analyzed based on Hyland’s (2005) analytical framework. The findings reveal the employment of both Interactive and Interactional metadiscourse markers, with a preference for using more Interactives over Interactionals, assuming that the authors in both groups seek to enhance textual coherence over achieving interpersonal values. The results also show notable differences in the deployment of Interactive and Interactional resources, reflecting the influence of linguistic and cultural factors. For example, while English-language authors prefer using more hedges to express tentativeness, their Arabic-language counterparts tend to employ more boosters, indicating a more assertive authorial position. These implications may enhance awareness among novice authors regarding the significant role of metadiscourse in crafting persuasive arguments in academic writing, particularly for Arab academics seeking to publish and engage with international scholarly communities.
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
Alghazo, S., Al Salem, M. N., & Alrashdan, I. (2021). Stance and Engagement in English and Arabic Research Article Abstracts. System, 103, Article ID: 102681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102681
Alharbi, S. H. (2021). An Investigation of Metadiscourse Features in Applied Linguistics Academic Research Articles and Master’s Dissertations. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12, 46-54. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.1.p.46
Almakrob, A. Y. (2023). How Do Arab Writers Interact with Their Readers? An Analysis of the Use of Metadiscourse Markers. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 13, 1591-1600. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1306.29
Alotaibi, H. S. (2015). Metadiscourse in Arabic and English Research Article Abstracts. World Journal of English Language, 5, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v5n2p1
Alotaibi, H. S. (2016). Comparison of Metadiscourse Markers in Arabic and English Re-search Articles in the Introduction and Conclusion Sections. The Linguistic Journal, 10, 22-48.
Alotaibi, H. S., & Arabi, H. (2020). Taking Authorial Stance in Arabic Research Articles Introductions. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 20, 41-62. https://doi.org/10.33806/ijaes2000.20.2.2
Basturkmen, H. (2012). A Genre-Based Investigation of Discussion Sections of Research Articles in Dentistry and Disciplinary Variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11, 134-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.10.004
Benraiss, A., & Koumachi, M. (2023). Interactional Metadiscourse in Applied Linguistics Research Article Abstracts of Moroccan L2 Writers of English: A Small Corpus Investigation. International Journal of English Language Studies, 5, 23-31. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijels.2023.5.1.3
Bunton, D. (1999). The Use of Higher Level Metatext in Ph.D. Theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18, S41-S56. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(98)00022-2
Crismore, A. (1984). The Rhetoric of Textbooks: Metadiscourse. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16, 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027840160306
Crismore, A. (1989). Talking with Readers: Metadiscourse as Rhetorical Act. Peter Lang Publishers.
Crismore, A., & Farnsworth, R. (1990). Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse. In W. Nash (Ed.), The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse (pp. 119-136). Sage.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002
Fuertes-Olivera, P. A., Velasco-Sacristán, M., Arribas-Baño, A., & Samaniego-Fernández, E. (2001). Persuasion and Advertising English: Metadiscourse in Slogans and Headlines. Journal of Pragmatics, 33, 1291-1307. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(01)80026-6
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold.
Harris, Z. (1959). Computable Syntactic Analysis. In Transformations and Discourse Analysis Papers (Vol. 15). University of Pennsylvania.
Harris, Z. S. (1970). Linguistic Transformations for Information Retrieval. In Z. S. Harris (Ed.), Papers in Structural and Transformational Linguistics (pp. 458-471). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-6059-1_24
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and Context: The Pragmatics of Academic Metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, 437-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-2166(98)00009-5
Hyland, K. (1999). Talking to Students: Metadiscourse in Introductorycoursebooks. Engl ish for Specific Purposes, 18, 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(97)00025-2
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interaction in Academic Writing. Longman.
Hyland, K. (2004). Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal. Applied Linguist ics, 25, 156-177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscourse: What Is It and Where Is It Going? Journal of Pragmatics, 113, 16-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.007
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25, 156-177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
Hyland, K., Wang, W., & (Kevin) Jiang, F. (2022). Metadiscourse across Languages and Genres: An Overview. Lingua, 265, Article ID: 103205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103205
Jakobson, R. (1980). Linguistics and Poetics. Harvard University Press.
Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural Thought Patterns in Inter-Cultural Education. Language Learning, 16, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1966.tb00804.x
Markkanen, R., Steffensen, M. S., & Crismore, A. (1993). Quantitative Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse: Problems in Design and Analysis of Data. Papers and Studies in Cont rastive Linguistics, 23, 69-82.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Peter Lang.
Mohamed, T. H. (2019). An Approach to Metadiscourse Markers: A Contrastive Study of English and Arabic Linguistic Research Articles. International Journal of Linguistics, 11, 232-243.
Myers, G. (1989). The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles. Applied Linguistics, 10, 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/10.1.1
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and Textual Communicative Function in Medical English Written Discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 149-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2
Schiffrin, D. (1980). Meta-Talk: Organizational and Evaluative Brackets in Discourse. Soc iological Inquiry, 50, 199-236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682x.1980.tb00021.x
Sultan, A. H. J. (2011). A Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse in English and Arabic Linguistics Research Articles. Acta Linguistica, 5, 28-41.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre Analysis. Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in Academic Writing: Learning to Argue with the Reader. Applied Linguistics, 22, 58-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58
Valero-Garcés, C. (1996). Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 15, 279-294. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(96)00013-0
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93. https://doi.org/10.2307/357609
Watzlawick, P., Beaven, J. B., & Jackson, D. D. (1968). Pragmatics of Human Communications : A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. W.W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Williams, J. M. (1981). Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. Harper Collins.
Yang, R. Y., & Allison, D. (2003). Research Articles in Applied Linguistics: Moving from Results to Conclusions. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 365-385. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(02)00026-1
Zaki, M. (2022). The Metadiscourse of Arabic Academic Abstracts: A Corpus-Based Study. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 10, 113-146.