Journals / Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 4

Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges

Pages
74–92
Publication Date
2018-12-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Yes Author 2 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 3 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 4 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No)

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges Hedging is an important metadiscourse device that should be used for various motives particularly in academic writing because it acts as a face-saving strategy and represents the certainty of the scientists’ knowledge on the study field, but nevertheless it is not an obvious consideration for many non-native writers of English.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Yes Author 2 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 3 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 4 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No)
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler Hedging · academic writing · metadiscourse

Özet

Öz Please fill up the following information accurately. (Please use Times New Roman, 12 pt. Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges Hedging is an important metadiscourse device that should be used for various motives particularly in academic writing because it acts as a face-saving strategy and represents the certainty of the scientists’ knowledge on the study field, but nevertheless it is not an obvious consideration for many non-native writers of English. Although the significance of hedging in academic writing is beyond argument, excessive use of it may create a counter-productive result. In other words while underuse of hedging may lead to overstatement, overuse of it may bring about suspicions on the credibility of the statements, therefore a moderate and balanced used of hedging is a necessary for the true credibility of the author on the reader. In this regard, the present study investigated academic texts of native writers and non-native writers of English with purposes of revealing the differences between them in terms of hedging strategies while composing an academic text; detecting lexical hedges used by native writers and non-native writers of English and diversity of these hedges through some analyses; creating a list of lexical hedges; and offering some suggestions regarding the use of lexical hedges in academic writing. Information about Author(s)* Author 1 Author (Last name, First name) Demir, Cüneyt Affiliated institution (University) Siirt UniversityCountry Turkey Email address [email protected] & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Write only one corresponding author. Yes Author 2 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 3 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No) Author 4 Author (Last name, First name) Affiliated institution (University) Country Email address Department & Rank Corresponding author (Yes/No)

🔖

Cite This Article

DEMİR, C. (2018). Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 4, 74–92. https://ajindex.com/articles/29084

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Adams-Smith, D. E. (1984). Medical discourse: aspects of author's comment. The ESP Journal, 3,25-36.
  2. Akbas, E. (2014). Are They Discussing in the Same Way? Interactional Metadiscourse in Turkish Writers’ Texts. In A. Łyda, & K. Warchał, Occupying Niches: Interculturality, Cross-culturality and Aculturality in Academic Research (pp. 119-133). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. Biook, B., & Mohseni, F. (2014). The Use of Hedginh in Research Articles. Journal of Current Research in Science, 2(4):474-477.
  3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in language usage: Politeness phenomena. In E. Goody, Questions and politeness (pp. 56-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Burrough-Boenisch, J. (2004). Righting English that's gone Dutch. Kemper Conseil Publishing. Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 271-287.
  6. Dafouz-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40, 95-113.
  7. Grabe, W., & Kaplan, R. B. (1997). On the writing of science and the science of writing: Hedging in science text and elsewhere. In R. Markkanen, & H. Schröder, Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts (pp. 151-167). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Hamamcı, Z. (2007). The Use of Hedges in Research Articles by Turkish Interlanguage Speakers of English and Native English Speakers in the Field of Social Sciences (master's thesis). Adana, Turkey: The University of Çukurova. Hinkel, E. (1997). Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 27, 361–386.
  8. Hinkel, E. (2004). Teaching Academic ESL Writing. New York: Routledge. Hyland, K. (1994). Hedging in Academic Writing and EAP. English for Specific Purposes, 3:239-256.
  9. Hyland, K. (1996). Talking to the Academy: Forms of Hedging in Science Research Articles. Written Communication, 13(2), 251-281.
  10. Hyland, K. (1998). Exploring corporate rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the CEO’s letter. The Journal of Business Communication, 35:224-245.
  11. Hyland, K. (1998b). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Hyland, K. (1998c). Boosting, hedging, and the negotiation of academic knowledge.