Abstract:
This study was motivated by three factors, which also
contribute to its significance for today’s academic writing. First,
research articles are the significant means of communication
between the writers all over the world. Second, persuasion and
organization are crucial notions in academic writing where the
authors have to consider the academic audiences and their needs.
Third, some writers are not the native speakers of English and
write their research articles in English. Despite their importance
in academic writing, we know little about how textual
metadiscourse resources (TMRs) are used in different disciplines
and genres. This study examines the use of TMRs in research
articles of three disciplines of Mechanical Engineering (ME),
Medicine (MED), and Applied Linguistics (AL). It also explores
distribution of TMRs by native and non-native writers of English
in the research articles of three disciplines. Based on a corpus of
thirty research articles, the frequency of TMRs was calculated per
1,000 words. The findings of the study indicate a significant
difference in the distribution of TMRs in three disciplines and
also between the writings of native and non-native writers. In
addition, these findings may have some implications for teaching
disciplinary communication especially to foreign language
learners of English.
Machine summary:
"3. What are the differences between native and non-native writers of English in the use of TMRs in three rhetorical sections of Abstract, Introduction, and Result & Discussion in MED research articles?
4. What are the differences between native and non-native writers of English in the use of TMRs in three rhetorical sections of Abstract, Introduction, and Result & Discussion in AL research articles?
Distribution of Different Categories of TMRs in AL Research Articles (View the image of this page)Note: F = Frequency, TMRs = Textual Metadiscourse Resources, W = Words In terms of categorical distribution, the result showed a broad agreement in the use of transitions, code glosses, and evidentials as the main categories of TMRs in three disciplines, demonstrating that the principal concern of writers is to present information clearly, explicitly and persuasively.
Distribution of Different Categories of TMRs in Articles of Native and Non-Native Writers in ME ME Research Articles (View the image of this page) Note: F = Frequency, TMRs = Textual Metadiscourse Resources, W = Words In the case of categorical distribution of TMRs in ME articles of native and non-native writers, the result showed that both groups most widely used transitions, code glosses, and evidentials.
Distribution of Different Categories of TMRs in Articles of Native and Non-Native Writers in MED (View the image of this page) Note: F = Frequency, TMRs = textual metadiscourse resources, W = Words In terms of categorical distribution, the result showed three common categories in terms of frequency in articles of MED discipline, that is, transitions, code glosses, and evidentials."