Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse

Yoon, Hyung-Jo

doi:10.1007/s11145-020-10085-7

Cited by 34 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Though endophoric markers are not ample in the Ukrainian corpus, they are still present there (0, 16 per thousand words), while the search for this type of metadiscourse markers did not yield any results in British and American corpora. The category of endophoric markers is commonly identified in the works investigating academic discourse (Ädel, 2017;Zhang & Sheng, 2021) and students' writing (Bax et al, 2019;Yoon, 2021) while the previous research into the use of metadiscourse in newspaper genres also show low frequency of endophoric markers in opinion texts (Dafouz-Milne, 2008). Such low frequency of usage of endophoric markers in opinion articles in comparison to academic writing could be due to the specificity of the meaning that endophoric markers convey.…”

Section: The Use Of Metadiscourse Markersmentioning

confidence: 96%

Reader Engagement in L1 and L2 Speakers of English

Sabov

Verba

2022

SJPU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper explores the use of metadiscourse markers by L1 speakers of English and proficient L2 speakers in opinion articles. The data for the analysis consists of 90 articles from the most popular newspapers in the USA, the UK and Ukraine, each variety represented with 30 articles. The classification of metadiscourse is primarily based on Hyland’s taxonomy with a more detailed approach to identifying metadiscoursive occurrences. In addition to investigating the most common patterns of engagement across three varieties of English, the study looks into how those patterns influence L1 and L2 readers, in particularly how engaged they are in the reading process and they would rate the persuasiveness of the text. Findings suggest that despite all three varieties having approximately the same number of metadiscourse markers, there’s a difference as to what types are prevalent in the variety. There are also differences observed concerning the reader engagement among L1 and L2 readers.

show abstract

Section: The Use Of Metadiscourse Markersmentioning

confidence: 96%

Reader Engagement in L1 and L2 Speakers of English

Sabov

Verba

2022

SJPU

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lee and Deakin (2016) built three corpora to probe into the features of interactional metadiscourse in successful and unsuccessful English argumentative essays written by Chinese English learners, and then compared the discrepancies in the employment of interactional metadiscourse in the second language and first language argumentative essays. Yoon (2021) analyzed the utilization of interactional metadiscourse in papers written by Chinese, Japanese and Korean students from three aspects, including theme, L1 background and L2 proficiency. (2) Comparative studies of interactional metadiscourse among different disciplines.…”

Section: A Interactional Metadiscoursementioning

confidence: 99%

Interactional Metadiscourse and Author Identity Construction in Academic Theses

Liu

Zhang

2022

jltr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Based on Hyland’s (2005) interactional metadiscourse model and the identity construction category proposed by Sun (2015), this study attempts to make a comparative analysis on the characteristics of the frequencies of interactional metadiscourse between Chinese masters’ theses and international journal articles, as well as on the similarities and differences of author identity constructed with interactional metadiscourse. The findings are as follows: (1) from the frequencies of interactional metadiscourse, Chinese masters employ significantly fewer hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions in their academic writing than international journal authors, while utilizing markedly more engagement markers. Regarding the subcategories of attitude markers, the two author groups possess notable differences in judgment markers, appreciation markers and affective markers, in which the significant difference in judgment markers is relatively low. The results suggest that the frequency of interactional metadiscourse utilized by Chinese masters in academic writing is inferior to that by international journal authors. (2) The identity categories constructed with interactional metadiscourse by the two author groups are in the descending order of researcher, interactor, and evaluator. Compared with international journal authors, significant differences are discovered in the identities of self-initiated interactor, other-initiated interactor, self-evaluator, other-evaluator, cautious originator, and confident researcher constructed by Chinese masters, whereas no difference is found in the careful advisor identity constructed by the two author groups. This study enriches the research of interactional metadiscourse from the perspective of identity construction, and the findings could provide references for improving students’ awareness of academic writing.

show abstract

“…Compared to L1 learners, Chinese students are less likely to use self-mentions when writing English texts, (Bloch, 2009;Hyland, 2002b). Yoon (2021) identified how learners of English as a foreign language use interactional metadiscourse markers in argumentative essays. Yoon (2021) further indicated that a large-scale quantitative analysis of interactional metadiscourse by focusing on the topics of writings and the background of L1 and the proficiency of L2 is essentially required.…”

Section: Interactional Metadiscourse In L2 Writing Thesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Yoon (2021) identified how learners of English as a foreign language use interactional metadiscourse markers in argumentative essays. Yoon (2021) further indicated that a large-scale quantitative analysis of interactional metadiscourse by focusing on the topics of writings and the background of L1 and the proficiency of L2 is essentially required. Bal-Gezegin (2016) argues that book review article is viewed as an important academic writing discourse which has many metadiscourse devices which may be employed to express ideas, positions, and arguments.…”

Section: Interactional Metadiscourse In L2 Writing Thesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It goes without saying that diversified and personalized teaching system as well as the compilation of up-to-date textbooks should be intensified to further improve language teaching for contemporary graduate students. Yoon (2021) pointed out that Hyland's (2005) model has attracted great attentions among scholars in various fields, but most of these researches are empirical ones focusing on hedges and boosters and the occurrences of metadiscourse markers.…”

Section: Interactional Metadiscourse In L2 Writing Thesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Metadiscourse in Chinese and American graduate dissertation introductions

Afzaal

Chishti

Liu

et al. 2021

Cogent Arts & Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The current study aims to look at differences in the use of metadiscourse in the introductory sections of English and Chinese university students. The corpus of the study comprises 20 "introductions" of university students' MA theses. This study hinges on Hyland's model of Metadiscourse (interactive and interactional resources) for its methodological framework and aims at analyzing academic writing of native academic and non-native writers. The findings revealed a statistically significant difference in the use of metadiscourse in theses written by Chinese native speakers (CNS) and English native speakers (NS) university students. The study suggests that metadiscourse needs to become a fundamental component for effective reading and writing instruction for students.

show abstract

Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse

Cited by 34 publications

References 47 publications

Reader Engagement in L1 and L2 Speakers of English

Reader Engagement in L1 and L2 Speakers of English

Interactional Metadiscourse and Author Identity Construction in Academic Theses

Metadiscourse in Chinese and American graduate dissertation introductions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About