Interactive metadiscourse in dentistry research articles: Iranian vs non-Iranian academic writers

Vol.15,No.2(2022)
Discourse and Interaction

Abstract

Linguistically, interactive metadiscourse devices are responsible for creating an unfolding and persuasive piece of writing. They help writers come up with a cohesive and reader-friendly text and highlight how they control the interactive meaning. This corpus-driven study is an attempt to explore the use of interactive metadiscourse markers in English dentistry research articles published in International ISI-indexed and Iranian local research-based journals. The aim was to see if interactive resources, as realized by rhetorical options, such as transitions, code glosses, endophoric markers, evidentials, and frame markers, are predisposed to discipline-specific rhetorical conventions. To this end, fourty dentistry research articles were analyzed using Hyland’s (2005) Interpersonal Model of Metadiscourse. The results disclosed similarities and differences in both the frequency and use of interactive resources between the two sets of research articles. The present results are expected to extend our understanding of authorial preferences for the use of metadiscourse markers in tandem with discourse functions in research articles in the selected discipline. The results of such studies may also improve different features of language pedagogy, such as teaching and learning academic writing, namely research articles.


Keywords:
Research articles; cultural variations; linguistic features; interactive metadiscourse markers; discourse functions
Author biographies

Mohsen Khedri

Sohar University

Mohsen Khedri is Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics at Sohar University, Sohar, Oman. To date, his publications include contributions to Australian Journal of Linguistics, Discourse Studies, Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, and 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies. His research covers a wide field centered on the study of language, ranging from applied linguistics to English for academic purposes, discourse studies, pragmatics and academic writing.

Address: Mohsen Khedri, Faculty of Language Studies, Sohar University, Oman. [e-mail: mkhedri@su.edu.om]

Elham Basirat

University of Malaya

Elham Basirat was awarded a master’s degree in English as a Second Language by the University of Malaya, Malaysia. She is currently doing her PhD in the Teaching of English as a Second Language at the University of Malaya. Her research interests include discourse studies, second language writing and English for academic purposes.

Address: Elham Basirat, Faculty of Education, University of Malaya, Malaysia. [e-mail: elham.basiratesfahani@gmail.com]

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.

Abdollahzadeh, E. (2011). Poring over the findings: Interpersonal authorial engagement in applied linguistics papers. Journalof Pragmatics, 43(1), 288-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.07.019

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

Attaran, A. (2014). Study of metadiscourse in ESP articles: A comparison of English articles written by Iranian and English native speakers. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 5(1), 63-71.

Bahrami, L. (2012). Investigating frequency and distribution of transition markers in English and Persian research articles in applied linguistics: Focusing on their introduction sections. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(10), 21-39.

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

Breivega, K. R., Dahl, T., & Fløttum, K. (2002). Traces of self and others in research articles. A comparative pilot study of English, French and Norwegian research articles in medicine, economics and linguistics. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(2), 218-239. https://doi.org/10.1111/1473-4192.00032

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

D. Salas, M. (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

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

Fløttum, K., Dahl, T., & Kinn, T. (2006). Academic voices: Across languages and disciplines. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Gillaerts, P., & Van de Velde, F. (2010). Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 128-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.004

Gardezi, S. A., & Nesi, H. (2009). Variation in the writing of economics students in Britain and Pakistan: The case of conjunctive ties. In M. Charles, D. Pecorari, & S. Hunston (Eds.), Academic writing: At the interface of corpus and discourse(pp. 236-250). London: Continuum.

Halliday, M. A. K. (1973). Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.

Harwood, N. (2005). “Nowhere has anyone attempted … In this article I aim to do just that”: A corpus-based study of self-promotional I and we in academic writing across four disciplines. Journal of Pragmatics, 37, 1207-1231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.01.012

Hempel, S., & Degand, L. (2008). Sequencers in different text genres: Academic writing, journalese and fiction. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 676-693. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2007.02.001

Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English-and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11), 2795-2809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007

Hyland, K. (2002). Activity and evaluation: Reporting practices in academic writing. In J. Flowerdew (Ed.), Academic discourse(pp. 115-130). Harlow: Longman.

Hyland, K. (2003). Self-citation and self-reference: Credibility and promotion in academic publication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 54(3), 251-259. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.10204

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

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 266-285. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm011

Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156

Intaraprawat, P., & Steffensen, M. S. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays.Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 253-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90012-8

Khedri, M. (2016). Are we visible? An interdisciplinary data-based study of self- mention in research articles. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics,52(3), 403-430. https://doi.org/10.1515/psicl-2016-0017

Khedri, M., Chan, S. H., & Ebrahimi, S. F. (2013). An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines. Discourse Studies, 15(3), 319-331. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1461445613480588

Khedri, M., & Kritsis, K. (2018). Metadiscourse in applied linguistics and chemistry research article introductions. Research in Applied Linguistics,9(2), 47-73. https://dx.doi.org/10.22055/rals.2018.13793

Khedri, M., & Kritsis, K. (2020). How do we make ourselves heard in the writing of a research article? A study of authorial references in four disciplines. Australian Journal of Linguistics, 40(2), 194-217. https://doi.org/10.1080/07268602.2020.1753011

Lautamatti, L. (1987). Observations on the development of the topic in simplified discourse. In V. Kohonen, & N. E. Enkvist (Eds.), Text linguistics, cognitive learning, and language teaching (pp. 71-104). Turku: Turku University Press.

Loi, C. K., & Lim, J. M-H. (2013). Metadiscourse in English and Chinese research article introductions. Discourse Studies, 15(2), 129-146. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1461445612471476

Lorés, R. (2004). On RA abstracts: From rhetorical structure to thematic organisation. English for Specific Purposes, 23(3), 280-302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2003.06.001

Mansoori, S., Najafabadi, M. M., & Boroujeni, S. S. (2016). Metadiscourse in research article abstracts: A cross lingual and disciplinary investigation. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 3(4), 296-307.

Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, 13, 3-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(93)90024-I

McGrath, L. (2016). Self-mentions in anthropology and history research articles: Variation between and within disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 86-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.11.004

Mirhashemi, A., & Allami, H. (2013). Metadiscourse markers in the discussion/conclusion section of Persian and English master's theses. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 5(3), 23-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2013.1706

Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 86-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007

Mur-Dueñas, P. (2007). ‘I/we focus on …’: A cross-cultural analysis of self-mentions in business management research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(2), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.002

Mur-Dueñas, P. (2009). An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 3068-3079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002

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

Murillo, S. (2004). A relevance reassessment of reformulation markers. Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 2059-2068.

Peterlin, A. P. (2005). Text-organizing metatext in research articles: an English-Slovene contrastive analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 307-319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2004.11.001

Scott, M. (2004). WordSmith tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sheldon, E. (2009). From one I to another: Discursive construction of self-representation in English and Castilian Spanish research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 251-267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.05.001

Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics,22(1), 58-78. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58

Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 82-93.

Vassileva, I. (2000). Who is the author? Sankt Augustin: Verlag.

Williams, J. (1981). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace.Boston: Scott Foresman.

Yakhontova, T. (2006). Cultural and disciplinary variation in academic discourse: The issue of influencing factors. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 5, 153-167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2006.03.002

Zarei, G. R., & Mansoori, S. (2007). Metadiscourse in academic prose: A contrastive analysis of English and Persian research articles. The Asian ESP Journal, 3(2), 24-40.

Zarei, G. R., & Mansoori, S. (2011). Are English and Persian distinct in their discursive elements: An analysis of applied linguistics texts?. English for Specific Purposes World, 31(10), 1-8.

Metrics

307

Views

159

PDF views