Journals / Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi / 2020 / Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4

The move structure of abstracts in applied linguistics research articles in light of the distribution and functions of metadiscourse markers

Pages
2077–2096
Publication Date
2020-12-30
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)

In addition, the results demonstrated that applied linguistics authors are tentative and use more hedges in their abstracts, possibly to open space for opposite arguments of their claims.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Öz To communicate with other experts in a specific field as well as sharing knowledge in the academic world, researchers might need to publish their research articles (RAs) in high-impact factor journals.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In addition, to increase the possibility of publishing their RAs in these journals, they should improve their writing skills.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In addition, the results demonstrated that applied linguistics authors are tentative and use more hedges in their abstracts, possibly to open space for opposite arguments of their claims.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Anahtar Kelimeler metadiscourse markers · distribution · function

Özet

Öz To communicate with other experts in a specific field as well as sharing knowledge in the academic world, researchers might need to publish their research articles (RAs) in high-impact factor journals. In addition, to increase the possibility of publishing their RAs in these journals, they should improve their writing skills. Many investigations have been conducted so far which have analyzed the move structure or the distribution of metadiscourse markers in different sections of RAs. But, to the best of our knowledge, no study has yet been conducted to investigate the analysis of both move structure and use of metadiscourse markers in RAs abstracts of applied linguistics. To bridge this gap, the present study employed the model of abstract moves in RAs and the model of metadiscourse markers as a framework to analyze 125 RA abstracts, which were extracted from five main journals. Regarding the move organizational features, presenting the research (PTR) and situating the research (STR) were identified as opening moves. Also, discussing the research (DTR), summarizing the findings (STF), and describing the methodology (DTM) were employed as closing moves. Furthermore, in terms of the distribution of metadiscourse markers in the collected abstracts, the findings showed the high frequency of transitions. In addition, the results demonstrated that applied linguistics authors are tentative and use more hedges in their abstracts, possibly to open space for opposite arguments of their claims. Finally, this study suggests pedagogical implications for novice authors in the field of applied linguistics.

🔖

Cite This Article

ASHOFTEH, Z., SHİRVAN, M. E., GOLPARVAR, S. E. (2020). The move structure of abstracts in applied linguistics research articles in light of the distribution and functions of metadiscourse markers. Dil ve Dilbilimi Çalışmaları Dergisi, Cilt: 16 - Sayı: 4, 2077–2096. https://ajindex.com/articles/88362

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Adel, A. (2016). Remember that your reader cannot read your mind: problem/solution-oriented metadiscourse in teacher feedback on student writing. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 45, 54-68.
  2. Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. (2007) Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis todescribed/iscourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Can, S., Karabacak, E., &Qin, J. (2016). Structure of moves in RA abstracts in Applied Linguistics. Publications, 4 (3), 23-39
  3. Chan, T. (2015). A corpus-based study of the expression of stance in dissertation acknowledgements. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 176-191.
  4. Crosthwaite, P., Cheung, L., & Jiang, K. (2017). Writing with attitude: Stance expression in learner and professional dentistry research reports. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 46, 107-123.
  5. Flowerdew, J. (2008). Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: what can Goffman’s “Stigma” tell us? Journal of English for Academic Purposes,7(2),77-86.
  6. Friginal, E., Mustafa, S. (2017). A comparison of U.S.-based and Iraqi English research article abstracts using corpora. Journal of English for Sspecific Purposes, 25, 45-57.
  7. Gillaerts, P. & Van de Velde, F. (2010) “Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts”, Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 128-139.
  8. Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold. Hewings, M., &Hewings. A. (2002).It is interesting to note that…”: a comparative study of anticipatory ‘it’ in student and published writing. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 21(4), 367–383.
  9. Holmes, R. (1997). Genre analysis and the social sciences: an investigation of the structure of research article discussion sections in three disciplines. Journal of English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 321-337.
  10. Ho, V., & Li, C. (2018). The use of metadiscourse and persuasion: An analysis of first year university students’ timed argumentative essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,33, 53-68.
  11. Huckin, T. (2001). Abstracting from abstracts.Academic writing in context: Implications and applications. London: Continuum. Hu, G. & Cao, F. (2011) Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A compar¬ative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2795-2809.
  12. Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20, 207-226.
  13. Hyland, K. (2004). Discpl