Metadiscourse Markers in Abstracts of Linguistics and Literature Research Articles from Scopus-Indexed Journals

IF 0.2 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature Pub Date : 2023-07-31 DOI:10.22452/jml.vol33no1.3
Hui Geng, Han Wei
{"title":"Metadiscourse Markers in Abstracts of Linguistics and Literature Research Articles from Scopus-Indexed Journals","authors":"Hui Geng, Han Wei","doi":"10.22452/jml.vol33no1.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An abstract is generally a condensed version of a much lengthier research article (RA). It plays a crucial role in academic writing by initially grabbing the readers’ attention. A well-crafted abstract can greatly increase an RA’s chances of being published. Metadiscourse markers, which extend beyond the actual information being presented, provide significant assistance in textual organisation and interaction. However, less attention has been paid to the use of these markers in the abstracts of RAs within the field of linguistics and literature from Scopus-indexed journals. Therefore, this paper first investigated how authors presented their arguments in the abstracts by deploying interactive and interactional markers, and then it delved into the occurrence frequency of both types of markers in linguistics and literature corpora. A total of 100 English RA abstracts were selected for this study. The linguistics and literature corpus each contained 50 RA abstracts taken from three open-access Scopus-indexed journals. Based on Hyland’s (2005) interpersonal model of metadiscourse, an analysis of the identification and frequency of metadiscourse markers was conducted. A comparison was also drawn between the linguistics and literature RA abstracts. The findings showed that the abstracts from both corpora employed more interactive markers than interactional markers. Regarding the interactive markers, a similar tendency of using transitions was detected. However, the difference lay in the frequency of the other four types of markers between the two corpora. In the interactional category, boosters emerged as the most prominent markers while engagement markers were the least frequent in both corpora. The difference was mainly in the occurrence of self-mentions. The results of this study highlight the disciplinary awareness of metadiscourse markers in RA abstracts and offer a practical guide for scholars to utilise these cues and indicators in academic writing.","PeriodicalId":53718,"journal":{"name":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jordan Journal of Modern Languages & Literature","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/jml.vol33no1.3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An abstract is generally a condensed version of a much lengthier research article (RA). It plays a crucial role in academic writing by initially grabbing the readers’ attention. A well-crafted abstract can greatly increase an RA’s chances of being published. Metadiscourse markers, which extend beyond the actual information being presented, provide significant assistance in textual organisation and interaction. However, less attention has been paid to the use of these markers in the abstracts of RAs within the field of linguistics and literature from Scopus-indexed journals. Therefore, this paper first investigated how authors presented their arguments in the abstracts by deploying interactive and interactional markers, and then it delved into the occurrence frequency of both types of markers in linguistics and literature corpora. A total of 100 English RA abstracts were selected for this study. The linguistics and literature corpus each contained 50 RA abstracts taken from three open-access Scopus-indexed journals. Based on Hyland’s (2005) interpersonal model of metadiscourse, an analysis of the identification and frequency of metadiscourse markers was conducted. A comparison was also drawn between the linguistics and literature RA abstracts. The findings showed that the abstracts from both corpora employed more interactive markers than interactional markers. Regarding the interactive markers, a similar tendency of using transitions was detected. However, the difference lay in the frequency of the other four types of markers between the two corpora. In the interactional category, boosters emerged as the most prominent markers while engagement markers were the least frequent in both corpora. The difference was mainly in the occurrence of self-mentions. The results of this study highlight the disciplinary awareness of metadiscourse markers in RA abstracts and offer a practical guide for scholars to utilise these cues and indicators in academic writing.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
scopus检索期刊中语言学和文学研究论文摘要中的元话语标记
摘要通常是一篇更长的研究文章(RA)的浓缩版。它在学术写作中起着至关重要的作用,首先抓住读者的注意力。精心设计的摘要可以大大增加RA被发表的机会。元话语标记超越了所呈现的实际信息,在语篇组织和互动中提供了重要的帮助。然而,在scopus索引期刊的语言学和文学领域的RAs摘要中使用这些标记的关注较少。因此,本文首先考察了作者如何在摘要中运用互动标记和互动标记来表达论点,然后深入研究了这两种标记在语言学和文学语料库中的出现频率。本研究共选取100篇英文RA摘要。语言学和文学语料库各包含50篇RA摘要,摘自三个开放获取的scopus索引期刊。基于Hyland(2005)的元话语人际模型,对元话语标记的识别和频率进行了分析。并对语言学文摘和文学文摘进行了比较。结果表明,两种语料库的摘要均使用了更多的互动性标记。在交互标记方面,也发现了使用过渡的类似趋势。然而,两种语料库之间的差异在于其他四种标记的频率。在互动类别中,助推器是最突出的标记,而参与标记在两个语料库中都是最不常见的。差异主要体现在自我提及的出现上。本研究的结果突出了RA摘要中元话语标记的学科意识,并为学者在学术写作中利用这些线索和指标提供了实践指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
50.00%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
Metadiscourse Markers in Abstracts of Linguistics and Literature Research Articles from Scopus-Indexed Journals An Exploratory Analysis of Linking Adverbials Used by Filipino, Pakistani, and Thai Writers of English Privacy Policy Pop-up: A Genre Analysis of Journal Websites’ HTTP Cookies Female Circumcision in Malaysia: Challenges and Lessons Learned in Using Focus Groups through an NGO-Academia Collaboration Prosodic Marking of New and Given Information in English and Mandarin by Chinese Speakers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1