Chan Swee Heng

An exploration of interactive metadiscourse markers in academic research article abstracts in two disciplines

A generic analysis of research article abstracts can cover issues of different types; among them are linguistic features. An integral part of linguistic features of research article abstracts is interactive metadiscourse usage that can assist to make the text persuasive and unfolding to a discourse community. The main principle behind applying interactive metadiscourse is the view of writing as socially engaging; specifically, it indicates the ways writers project themselves into their arguments to declare their attitudes and commitments to the readers. This study aimed to explore how interactive metadiscourse markers are deployed by research article abstract writers belonging to different disciplinary communities within the soft sciences, while trying to reach the audience by creating a well-organized discourse. Hyland’s (2005) interpersonal model of metadiscourse was adopted to analyze 60 research article abstracts written in Applied Linguistics and Economics. Based on the results, there were marked variations found across the two disciplines in terms of interactive metadiscourse markers.

Cross-disciplinary and cross-linguistic perspectives on metadiscourse in academic writing

Abstract The present review article examines a selection of recent academic discourse concerning metadiscourse. Metadiscourse relates to aspects of a text which organise the discourse in an explicit way, engage the addressee, and indicate the writers attitude. It is integral to the contexts in which it happens and is intimately dealt with according to the norms and expectations of specific cultural and professional communities. This review aims to explore the effect of disciplinary conventions and norms as well as language context on the manifestation of metadiscourse markers in academic writing. Since most scholars commonly believe that the application of metadiscourse differs from discipline to discipline and language to language, the accuracy of this belief is investigated. Therefore, results of some earlier studies are reviewed so as to investigate the accuracy of the above assertion. Limitations of existing empirical studies are discussed and some directions for future research regarding the use of metadiscourse in academic settings are suggested as well.