Metadiscourse in the Academic Writing of Local and International Students at a University in Malaysia

Abstract

Article HistoryKeywords Academic writing Interactive markers Interactional markers Metadiscourse markers Textual analysis Malaysia.This study examines the use of metadiscourse markers among 50 Malaysian and 50 Arab Pre-University students. The findings of this study indicated that there was a significant difference in the use of metadiscourse markers between Malaysian and Arab Pre-University students {χ2 (1, n = 100) = 7.17, p-value is .007} where the use of metadiscourse markers among Malaysian Pre-University students was substantially higher than that of the Arab Pre-University students. In the use of interactive markers, the results showed significant differences between Malaysian and Arab Pre-University students in the use of transitions, evidential and code glosses. Additionally, in the use of interactional markers, Malaysian and Arab students differed in their use of hedges, engagement markers and self-mentions. These variances in the frequency and forms of metadiscourse markers utilized by the students could be attributed to the diverse cultural backgrounds of the two groups of students. It is therefore suggested that English language teachers integrate and incorporate cultural elements in their lessons with regard to metadiscourse markers.Contribution/Originality: This study documents the examination of metadiscourse markers employed by ESL students and this has offered interesting findings and thought-provoking insights. The discoveries would certainly be enlightening for stakeholders such as syllabus designers of academic writing classes and language instructors.Specifically, the utilization of metadiscourse markers is suggested to improve the quality of writing (Shi and Han, 2014; Ho and Li, 2018) increase readability (Zarrati et al., 2014) and build relationship with the readers (Hyland, 2005;Salek, 2014). These features are very important in developing good quality academic writing (Tan and Wong, 2014). Furthermore, Feng and Hyland (2018) have indicated that metadiscourse has attracted significant attention in contemporary writing as an approach to understanding the rhetorical negotiations involved in academic writing. Therefore, this research aims to examine and compare the use of metadiscourse markers among Malaysian university students and Arab students studying in Malaysia. This comparison is deemed necessary as metadiscourse usage has been reported to differ from one writer"s culture to another (Abbas, 2011;Aya, 2013;Mehrnaz et al., 2014). Moreover, Hogue and Oshima (2007) have stated that academic writing in English is perhaps not the same as academic writing in the writer"s first language. As such, the current study will shed more light on the subject as well as help to confirm whether or not metadiscourse use is dependent on one"s culture. This study will also provide information on the ways metadiscourse markers are used by two different groups, namely the Malaysian and Arab students in the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). In keeping with the aims of the study, the followi...

Hedges in English and Arabic Metadiscourse Utility in Academic Writing: A Contrastive Analysis

“…6 In terms of Arabic-English contrastive studies, 7 study is particularly interesting, as it compares the use of validity markers and attitude markers in English and Arabic argumentative writing, comparing the use of these two categories of metadiscourse in native English and native Arabic student's argumentative essays, 8 Despite metadiscourse categories fluctuate in frequency and preferred forms 9 These categories typically emerge in the same situations to engage with texts in both native Arabic and native English, as well as across L1-L2 texts in each language, demonstrating their level of commitment to the text and attitude towards each other. 10 To compare and contrast the signs of interactive and interactional metadiscourse in 60 linguistics research papers (RAs) written in both languages. 11 He found that linguistic RAs in both English and Arabic place a lot of emphasis on metadiscourse markers.…”