An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish

Mur-Dueñas, Pilar

doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002

Cited by 167 publications

(105 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As we have seen, both the quantitative and the textual analysis revealed a marked cross-cultural contrast between American and Turkish academic writers in that AWs used a lot more hedges and boosters than TWs. This finding is consistent with those of some other studies (i.e., Salager-Meyer et al, 2003;Martin-Martin and Burgess, 2004;Flottum et al, 2006;Kong, 2006;Vold, 2006b;Martin-Martin, 2008;Perez-Llantada, 2010;Hu and Cao, 2011;Mur-Duenas, 2011;Loi and Lim, 2013;Ghadyani andTahririan, 2014: Lee andCasal, 2014;Yagiz and Demir, 2014), which, on the whole, have shown that scholars coming from the Anglo-American rhetorical tradition seem to adopt a more tentative stance than do their counterparts publishing in some other languages.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Volume 5, Issue 3, September 2017 compiled, the present researcher and a coder with a PhD in linguistics, working independently, analyzed and coded all of the articles in both corpora independently of each other, with a specific focus on hedges and boosters identified by Hyland (1998) andMur Duenas (2011). Over 140 hedging devices and 80 boosters were coded.…”

Section: International Journal Of Languages' Education and Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Intercultural Investigation of Meta-Discourse Features in Research Articles by American and Turkish Academic Writers

Kafes¹

2017

ijlet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This corpus-based study compares the use of hedges and boosters in English academic research articles by Turkish and American academic writers. The data come from 40 research articles collected from well-known international journals of Applied Linguistics. Quantitative and textual analyses reveal that the American academic writers preferred to be visible in their texts by employing a lot more hedges and boosters, while Turkish academic writers opted to be invisible, preferring their studies to speak for themselves. Our results indicate, among other things, the influence of rhetorical practices, and epistemological beliefs, and the cultural, linguistic, and educational backgrounds of academic writers on their use of hedges and boosters. The findings of the study are discussed in relation to these aspects.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: International Journal Of Languages' Education and Teachingmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Intercultural Investigation of Meta-Discourse Features in Research Articles by American and Turkish Academic Writers

Kafes¹

2017

ijlet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has also been investigated cross-culturally between English and Finnish [12], English and Spanish [13][14][15] and English and Chinese [16][17] and so on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Intercultural Analysis of Meta-discourse Markers as Persuasive Power in Chinese and American Political Speeches

Mai¹

2016

IJLL

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Meta-discourse markers play a vital role in organizing the text, showing the presence of the speaker, and engaging the audience, thus they become an important aspect of persuasive power in public speeches. Based on a corpus of 60 political speeches collected from the internet, this study exams (a) how meta-discourse markers help to realize persuasive function, (b) what is the general preference in the use of meta-discourse markers in American and Chinese political speeches respectively, and (c) how cultural factors influence the choice of persuasive strategy. Quantitative analysis indicates that American speeches feature markedly more meta-discourse than Chinese speeches. Textual analysis further reveals that the difference of the two sub-corpora in the achievement of logical appeal, credible appeal, and affective appeal. These results are then discussed in terms of linguistic difference and culturally preferred rhetorical strategy.

show abstract

“…) by Salager-Meyer (1992). Some even devote to the study of metadiscourse features in RA abstracts (Hyland, 1998;Gillaerts & Velde, 2010;Mur-Dueñas, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparative Analysis of the Generic Structure of RA English Abstracts in Chinese-Medium and English-Medium Linguistics Journals

Wei¹,

Liu²,

Liu³

2015

ELLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to analyze the generic structure of English abstracts in both Chinese-medium and English-medium linguistics journals. A total of 40 abstracts published in the year of 2011-2013 are collected randomly, with 20 written by native English speakers from Applied Linguistics and Language and the other 20 by Chinese scholars from Journal of Foreign Languages and Foreign Language Teaching and Research. The BIMRD/C model is adopted in this study as distinct differences can be found in the two corpora in terms of the Background move. Three major differences are revealed. Firstly, the abstracts written by native English speakers are more complete in structure than those by Chinese writers as they tend to omit the Background move and the Discussion/Conclusion move. Secondly, most Chinese writers prefer to combine the Method move with the Introduction move and put it at the very beginning of the abstract, while native writers tend to use the independent and the integrated Method nearly equally. Thirdly, in the Results move, Chinese scholars tend to objectively report their study results in detail by "Results indicate that…", sometimes listing them, while native English writers sometimes choose to highlight their research results by patterns of "we find (show, propose) that" and "I propose" although most of them also use such objective patterns to present their research results. This study is especially helpful for those Chinese writers who hope to publish their paper in international journals.

show abstract

An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish

Cited by 167 publications

References 24 publications

An Intercultural Investigation of Meta-Discourse Features in Research Articles by American and Turkish Academic Writers

An Intercultural Investigation of Meta-Discourse Features in Research Articles by American and Turkish Academic Writers

An Intercultural Analysis of Meta-discourse Markers as Persuasive Power in Chinese and American Political Speeches

A Comparative Analysis of the Generic Structure of RA English Abstracts in Chinese-Medium and English-Medium Linguistics Journals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About