3.png){kind=logo}
Teaching English for Academic Purposes: Exploring Rhetorical Strategies of Interactive Metadiscourse in the Introduction of Scopus-Indexed Research Articles
Abstract
This study aims to investigate rhetorical strategies for employing interactive meta-discourse aspects in the introductions of highly cited Scopus-indexed research publications from two separate academic fields: applied linguistics and electrical engineering. The study analyzed thirty Scopus-indexed journal articles from each of the two fields. To achieve the research purpose, the researchers employ a descriptive quantitative design with comparative corpus analysis. This research used Hyland's (2005) taxonomy, which consists of five subtypes of interactive metadiscourse: transition markers, frame markers, endophoric markers, evidentials, and code glosses, as the theoretical analysis. The findings indicate that both disciplines employ these features to establish coherence and cohesion; notable disparities arise in their distribution and rhetorical roles. Applied linguistics articles demonstrate a greater utilization of evidential and coding glosses, indicative of their narrative and intertextual focus. In contrast, articles on electrical engineering prominently utilize transition and endophoric markers, which signify a procedural and experimental methodology. This study illustrates the importance of genre awareness and epistemic tradition in academic writing instruction across several fields.
Abstrak
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk meneliti strategi retoris dalam menggunakan meta-wacana interaktif pada bagian pendahuluan artikel jurnal yang terindeks Scopus yang bersitasi tinggi di bidang linguistik terapan dan teknik elektro. Studi ini menganalisis tiga puluh artikel jurnal terindeks Scopus dari setiap bidang. Untuk mencapai tujuan penelitian, peneliti menggunakan desain kuantitatif deskriptif dengan menganalisis korpus secara komparatif. Penelitian ini menggunakan taksonomi Hyland (2005), yang terdiri dari lima subtipe metawacana interaktif: pemarkah transisi, pemarkah bingkai, pemarkah endoforik, pembuktian, dan gloss kode, sebagai pisau analisis. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa kedua disiplin ilmu tersebut menggunakan fitur ini untuk membangun koherensi dan kohesi secara bervariasi. Temuan perbedaan yang paling penting muncul dalam distribusi dan peran retoris mereka. Artikel linguistik terapan menunjukkan pemanfaatan yang lebih besar dari pemarkah pembuktian dan gloses kode, yang menunjukkan keduanya fokus terhadap naratif dan intertekstual mereka. Sementara itu, artikel teknik elektro secara mencolok menggunakan penanda transisi dan endoforik, yang menandakan metodologi prosedural dan eksperimental. Studi ini menggambarkan pentingnya kesadaran genre dan tradisi epistemik dalam pengajaran penulisan akademik di beberapa bidang.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Ahmed, A. A., & Hussein, J. Q. (2023). The Role of Metadiscourse Devices in Q1 Scopus-Indexed Linguistics Research Articles. Journal of AlMaarif University College, 34(1), 393–405. https://doi.org/10.51345/.v34i1.574.g348
Akoto, O. Y., & Afful, J. B. A. (2020). Variations in Metadiscourse Use in English Language Introduction and Literature Review Thesis Chapter. Language Literacy: Journal of Linguistics, Literature, and Language Teaching, 4(2), 390–408. https://doi.org/10.30743/ll.v4i2.2601
Al-Mudhaffari, M., Hussin, S., & Abdullah, I. H. (2024). Comparative Analysis of Interactional Metadiscursive Resources in Academic Writing by L2 and L1 English Writers. Studies in English Language and Education, 11(2), 1013–1029. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v11i2.35456
Azar, A. S., Hassaram, P., Farook, F. I. M., & Romli, N. H. (2022). A Comparative Analysis of Stance Features in Research Article Introductions: Malaysian and English Authors. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 22(2), 261–287. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2022-2202-14
Biber, D., & Gray, B. (2010). Challenging stereotypes about academic writing: Complexity, elaboration, explicitness. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(1), 2–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.01.001
Booth Olson, C., Maamuujav, U., Steiss, J., & Chung, H. (2023). Examining the Impact of a Cognitive Strategies Approach on the Argument Writing of Mainstreamed English Learners in Secondary School. Written Communication, 40(2), 373–416. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883221148724
Chen, C., & Zhang, L. J. (2017). An intercultural analysis of the use of hedging by Chinese and Anglophone academic English writers. Applied Linguistics Review, 8(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2016-2009
Crismore, A. (1990). Metadiscourse and Discourse Processes: Interactions and Issues. Discourse Processes, 13(2), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539009544753
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(1), 39–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002
Gil, F. A., & Bondi, M. (2021). Introduction to the monographic section: Metadiscourse devices in academic discourse. Revista Signos, Estudios de Linguistica, 54(106), 518–528.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing (K. Hyland, Ed.; 1st ed.). Continuum.
Kashiha, H., & Marandi, S. (2019). Rhetoric-specific features of interactive metadiscourse in introduction moves: A case of discipline awareness. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 37(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2018.1548294
Kawase, T. (2015). Metadiscourse in the introductions of PhD theses and research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 114–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006
Khany, R., Aliakbari, M., & Mohammadi, S. (2019). A model of rhetorical markers competence in writing academic research articles: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-018-0064-0
Kim, L. C., & Lim, J. M. H. (2013). Metadiscourse in English and Chinese research article introductions. Discourse Studies, 15(2), 129–146. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612471476
Nawawi, N. A., & Ting, S. H. (2022). An Analysis of Interactional Metadiscourse Markers in Political Science Research Articles. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 22(1), 203–217. https://doi.org/10.17576/gema-2022-2201-12
Obeagu, E. I., Obeagu, G. U., Igwe, C. M., Alum, E. U., Ugwu, O. P.-C., Eze, V. H. U., Ogenyi, F. C., Ugwu, J. N., Ugwu, C. N., Okon, Micheal. B., Eze, C. E. E., & Aleke, J. U. (2023). Academic Journal Writing and Types of Journals. INOSR Experimental Sciences, 12(2), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.59298/INOSRES/2023/2.16.1000
Pearson, W. S., & Abdollahzadeh, E. (2023). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A systematic review. Lingua, 293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2023.103561
Prasetyanti, D. C., Tongpoon-Patanasorn, A., & Sahan, A. (2022). Analyzing Metadiscourse Markers in Introduction Chapters of Dissertation in Various Disciplines. ASSEHR, 386–398. https://doi.org/10.2991/978-2-38476-078-7_40
Raitskaya, L., & Tikhonova, E. (2022). An In-Depth Glimpse into Research on Academic Writing. In Journal of Language and Education (Vol. 8, Issue 2, pp. 5–18). National Research University, Higher School of Econoimics. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2022.14586
Sorahi, M., & Shabani, M. (2016). Metadiscourse in Persian and English Research Article Introductions. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(6), 1175. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.0606.06
Swales, J. M. (2004). Research Genres: Exploration and Applications (M. H. Long & J. C. Richards, Eds.). Cambridge University Press.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93.
Wongsa, J., Chuenchaichon, Y., & Suwannasom, T. (2024a). A Comparison of Metadiscourse Markers Used in English Research Article Introduction and Literature Review Sections Across Two Disciplines. In Journal of Community Development Research (Humanities and Social Sciences) (Vol. 17, Issue 1).
Wongsa, J., Chuenchaichon, Y., & Suwannasom, T. (2024b). A Comparison of Metadiscourse Markers Used in English Research Article Introduction and Literature Review Sections Across Two Disciplines. In Journal of Community Development Research (Humanities and Social Sciences) (Vol. 17, Issue 1).
Yavari, M., & Kashani, A. F. (2013). Gender-based study of metadiscourse in research articles’ rhetorical sections. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 2(2), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.2p.77
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
