Abstract:
Metadiscourse involves the self-reflective linguistic expressions that refer to the evolving text, the writer, and the imagined readers of that text. This study utilized an interpersonal model of metadiscourse to examine the authors' use of metadiscourse in the Abstract sections of Applied Linguistics Research Articles (RAs). It investigated the distributions of interactive and interactional metadiscourse markers at a corpus of 110 RAs published by celebrity and non-celebrity authors to determine the ways academic writers deploy these resources at a hight-stake research genre to persuade readers in their discourse community. The findings revealed that frame markers with a relative frequency of 112 were the most frequent strategy category for the non-celebrity authors. Moreover, evidentials with a relative frequency of 3 were the least frequently used strategy for the celebrity authors. There were no significant differences in the use of interactive and interactional metadiscourse markers between celebrity and non-celebrity authors. These findings might have implications for the teaching of academic writing and scholarly publishing and for novice writers who aim to publish their studies in academic journals.
Machine summary:
This study utilized an interpersonal model of metadiscourse to examine the authors' use of metadiscourse in the Abstract sections of Applied Linguistics Research Articles (RAs).
It investigated the distributions of interactive and interactional metadiscourse markers at a corpus of 110 RAs published by celebrity and non- celebrity authors to determine the ways academic writers deploy these resources at a hight-stake research genre to persuade readers in their discourse community.
Keywords: Celebrity Authors, Interactional Metadiscourse Markers, Interactive Metadiscourse Markers, Non-Celebrity Authors, Research Articles Introduction A significant number of studies have concentrated on academic writing (Hyland & Hamp- Lyons, 2002).
Is there a significant difference between the use of metadiscourse markers by celebrity and non-celebrity authors in the abstract section of applied linguistics research articles?
3. Is there a significant difference in the use of interactional metadiscourse markers by celebrity and non-celebrity authors in the abstract section of applied linguistics research articles?
3. Is there a significant difference in the use of interactional metadiscourse markers by celebrity and non-celebrity authors in the abstract section of applied linguistics research articles?
Consequently, as the results of the data analysis revealed, there were not any significant differences between the use of metadiscourse markers by celebrity and non-celebrity authors in the Abstract section of Applied Linguistics research articles.
In this study, the celebrity and non-celebrity authors were relatively similar in regard to their use of interactive metadiscourse markers.
The present study results revealed that there were not any significant differences in the use of interactive metadiscourse markers by celebrity and non-celebrity authors.