Reflexive Metadiscourse and Reading Linguistics, Economics and Chemistry Research Articles by Tunisian Doctoral Students
Keywords:
metadiscourse, reading comprehension, academic writing, research articles, academic communityAbstract
The present study sets out to address a critical academic feature necessary to understand research articles (RAs) through investigating foreign language (FL) Tunisian doctoral students’ awareness of the kind of relationship between text, writer, and readership in English research articles across three distinct disciplines: Linguistics, Economics, and Chemistry. The study focuses on how this awareness is shown in lexico-grammatical choices and analyzed through Ädel’s (2006) model of metadiscourse. The study investigates the relationship between the participants’ awareness of the reflexive metadiscursive units and subject-matter knowledge, reading strategies, and language proficiency. These three elements constitute the basics of learning foreign languages; analyzing their connections to metadiscourse can lead to developing a deeper grasp of the pre-requisite conditions for comprehension. Their analysis would yield useful insights on the most appropriate ways of teaching academic reading/writing to university students, raise their motivation for learning and help them acquire the required skills that allow them to be members in full standing of their respective academic communities.
References
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. John Benjamins.
Backlund, I. (1998). To begin with, this is the problem, for example on some reader-oriented structural markers in English expository text. Linguistic Studies, 42, 60-68
Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics-schema-laden purposes and purpose laden schema. Written Communication, 2(1), 3-23.
Bazerman, C. (2012). The Routledge handbook of discourse analysis. In J. P. Gee & M. Handford (Eds.), Genre as social action (pp. 226–238).
Bhatia, V. (2004). Worlds of written discourse: A genre-based view. Continuum.
Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Longman.
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in PhD theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18(1), 41–56.
Camiciottoli, B. (2003). Metadiscourse and ESP reading comprehension: An exploratory study. Reading in a Foreign Language, 15(1), 1–16.
Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1988). Interactive approaches to second language reading. In P. L. Carrell, J. Devinne, & D. F. Eskey (Eds.), Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy (pp. 72–89).
Crismore, A., & Farnsworth, R. (1989). Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension of ethos. Rhetoric Review, 8(1), 91–112.
Crismore, A., & Vande Kopple, W. J. (1997). Hedges and readers: effects on attitudes and learning. In S. Markkanen and H. Schroeder (Eds.), Hedging and discourse: Approaches to the analysis of a pragmatic phenomenon in academic texts (pp. 83-114).
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: A marker of national culture or of academic discipline? Journal of Pragmatics, 36, 1807–1825
Daoud, M. (1991). The Processing of EST discourse: Arabic and French native speakers’ recognition of rhetorical relationships in engineering texts. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of California.
Dhieb-Henia, N. (2003). Evaluating the effectiveness of metacognitive strategy training for reading research articles in an ESP context. English for Specific Purposes, 22, 387–417.
Dudley-Evans, T. (1994). Genre analysis: An approach to text analysis in ESP. In M. Coulthard (Ed.), Advances in written text analysis (pp. 219- 228).
Eskey, D. E., & Grabe, W. (1988). Interactive approaches to second language reading. In P. L. Carrel, J. Devinne, & D. F. Eskey (Eds.), Interactive models for second language reading: Perspectives on instruction (pp. 222–237).
Flowerdew, J., & Peacock, M. (Eds.). (2001). Research perspectives on English for academic purposes. Cambridge University Press.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 25(3), 375-406
Haas, C., & Flower, L. (1986). Rhetorical reading strategies and the construction of meaning. College Composition and Communication, 39(2), 167–180.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed.). Edward Arnold.
Harris, Z. S. (1959). Computable syntactic analysis: Transformations and discourse analysis papers. University of Pennsylvania Press.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13, 133–151
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse. Continuum.
Hyland, K., & Lyons, H. (2002). EAP: Issues and directions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 1–12.
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25, 156-177.
Jafarinejad, R., & Tavakoli, M. (2011). Investigating the relationship between discourse markers, language proficiency and reading comprehension: A case of some Iranian university students. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 1526–1530.
Jakobson, R. (1980). The Framework of Language. Michigan: Michigan Studies in the Humanities.
Jalilifar, A., & Alipour, M. (2007). How explicit instruction makes a difference: metadiscourse markers and EFL learners’ reading comprehension skill. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 38(1), pp. 35-52.
Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge University Press.
Labassi, T. (2009). Reading titles of empirical research papers. The Reading Matrix, 9(2), 166-174.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 3-22.
Salas, M. (2015). Reflexive metadiscourse in research articles in Spanish: Variation across three disciplines (linguistics, economics and medicine). Journal of Pragmatics, 77, 20–40.
Silver, M. (2003). The stance of stance: A critical look at ways stance is expressed and modeled in academic discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 359–374.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2019). Using multivariate statistics. Pearson.
Toumi, N. (2012). A comparative study of reflexive metadiscourse in research articles: An EAP perspective, with implications for teaching writing to EAP learners at tertiary level in Tunisia (Doctoral dissertation, University of Reading). Retrieved from http://ethos.bl.uk/orderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.577979
Ulijn, J., & Salager, F. (1998). The professional reader and the text: Insights from L2 research, Journal of Research on Reading, 21(2), 79-95.
Valero-Garcés, C. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, 15, 279–294.
Van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. Academic Press.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36, 82-93.
Wichka, M. S. (2021). Reflexive metadiscourse awareness and reading research articles in English by Tunisian doctoral students of chemistry, economics, and linguistics in their disciplines (Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Manouba).
Williams, J. M. (1981). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace. Scott, Foresman.
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
By submitting to AJAL, authors agree to the following terms:
- Authors grant the journal right of first publication, with the work for an indefinite period of time after publication.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
