Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English

| University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
HardboundAvailable
ISBN 9789027222978 | EUR 110.00 | USD 165.00
 
e-Book
ISBN 9789027293299 | EUR 110.00 | USD 165.00
 
The pervasive phenomenon of metadiscourse – commentary on the ongoing discourse – is beginning to take its rightful place among the major topics of discourse studies. This book makes simultaneous contributions to the theory of metadiscourse, corpus-based methods of studying such phenomena, and our knowledge of metadiscourse use in written English. After comprehensively reviewing previous research, it introduces a more rigorous and empirical approach to metadiscourse studies. Ädel presents a new model of metadiscourse based on Jakobson’s functions of language, and other conceptual tools, including explicit features for defining metadiscourse, a taxonomy of the functions it serves, and maps of the boundaries between it and related phenomena. A large-scale study of writing by L1 and L2 university students is presented, in which the L2 speakers’ overuse of metadiscourse strongly marks them as lacking in communicative competence. This work is of interest both to linguists and to educators concerned with writing in English.
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 24]  2006.  x, 243 pp.
Publishing status: Available
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
ix–x
Introduction
1–12
A model of metadiscourse
13–45
Personal metadiscourse
47–95
Impersonal metadiscourse
97–123
The textual distribution of metadiscourse
125–139
Possible causes of variation in metadiscourse use
141–155
Theories of metadiscourse
157–180
Conclusions
181–200
Appendices
201–219
Notes
221–229
References
231–237
Author index
239–240
Subject index
241–243
“This is a study which is of high interest to people working in different linguistic fields and to educators working in the area of L2 language and writing instruction. The appropriate use of metadiscourse, as this study clearly demonstrates, plays a key role in achieving the appropriate degree of writer visibility, as well as appropriate modes of interaction with the reader, both of which contribute ot the approximation of native speaker communicative competence in formal written discourse. Those involved in advanced language teaching will gain important insights into what to incorporate into teaching curricula, as well as how to deal with clumsy sounding texts due to overloaded use of metadiscourse. [...] The importance of the book's content and the methods employed, matched by the author's fluid, engaging writing style (displaying a masterful command of metadiscourse herself), makes the book an absorbing, satisfying read.”
“Annelie Ädel has written a scholarly theoretically rigorous account of metadiscourse use based on new perspective and insight. For these reasons and because she applies new computer-assisted methods, her book will surely be seen as a pioneering work with positive impacts on current and future metadiscourse researchers and users. Ädel’s style is clear and accessible, and she offers readers something valuable and interesting. Those interested in L1 and L2 English learner research in reading, writing, speaking, and text structure will find this study of metadiscourse strategies compelling.”
“This book is a significant contribution to the rapidly developing field of learner-corpus research. It yields new insight into an important aspect of learner language and at the same time contributes more generally to the corpus-based study of metadiscourse.”
“A strength of the book lies in its critical approach to the study of metadiscourse. It also offers a breadth of perspective to the topic by providing analyses of the different approaches to the study of metadiscourse in written texts. Another related strength is its thorough discussion of how to define metadiscourse and how to distinguish it from other related linguistic categories that may serve similar functions. This complicated issue has always presented a serious challenge to those studying metadiscourse. To this end, the book offers a classification method that takes into account both the textual and functional properties of metadiscourse, including its reflexivity and its writer- and reader-related functions. Such a perspective is extremely useful, as it highlights not only the metadiscursive but also the contextdependent nature of this element. Other good features are the inclusion of a summary section in each chapter that highlights the main ideas discussed in the chapter, as well as a glossary (appendix 4) that provides definitions for the metadiscourse-related terminology in the book. The study used computer methods in combination with manual methods of text analysis, which can also be considered a strength. However, although the use of the computer in searching items in texts seems straightforward, a more detailed discussion of the manual analysis could have been helpful. This book is a significant contribution to the field of metadiscourse. It presents an excellent theoretical and empirical analysis of this feature of English written discourse. It provides a valuable text for those interested in examining metadiscourse in L1 and L2 writing.”
Cited by

Cited by other publications

No author info given
2016.  In Discourse Reflexivity in Linear Unit Grammar [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 76], Crossref logo
No author info given
2016.  In Discursive Self in Microblogging [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 260], Crossref logo
No author info given
2016.  In The Idiom Principle and L1 Influence [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 77], Crossref logo
Abdi, Reza
2012. Smoothing the rough edges. Pragmatics 22:3  pp. 355 ff. Crossref logo
Amouzadeh, Mohammad & Raha Zareifard
2019. Interactional metadiscourse of gender in Persian. Pragmatics and Society 10:4  pp. 512 ff. Crossref logo
Aull, Laura
2019. Linguistic Markers of Stance and Genre in Upper-Level Student Writing. Written Communication 36:2  pp. 267 ff. Crossref logo
Aull, Laura L. & Zak Lancaster
2014. Linguistic Markers of Stance in Early and Advanced Academic Writing. Written Communication 31:2  pp. 151 ff. Crossref logo
Bagherfard, Forouzan & Shahla Simin
2016. Comparative study of metadiscourse markers in ELT textbooks and Iranian localized high school English textbooks. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning 7:1 Crossref logo
BAL GEZEGİN, Betül & Melike BAS
2020. Metadiscourse in academic writing: A comparison of research articles and book reviews. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics 6:1  pp. 45 ff. Crossref logo
Blagojević, Savka
2012. English and Serbian academic discourses analysed in the light of ‘explicit reflexivity’ parameters. Discourse and Interaction 5:1  pp. 5 ff. Crossref logo
Blagojević, Savka & Biljana Mišić Ilić
2012. Interrogatives in English and Serbian Academic Discourse – A Contrastive Pragmatic Approach. Brno Studies in English 38:2  pp. 17 ff. Crossref logo
Bondi, Marina
2012.  In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Crossref logo
Cacchiani, Silvia
2015.  In Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2015 [Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, 3],  pp. 243 ff. Crossref logo
Cantos, Pascual
2012.  In The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics,  pp. 99 ff. Crossref logo
Carrió-Pastor, María Luisa
2020.  In Corpus Analysis in Different Genres,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Carrió-Pastor, María Luisa
2020.  In Corpus Analysis in Different Genres,  pp. 13 ff. Crossref logo
Crawford Camiciottoli, Belinda
2012.  In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Crossref logo
Dehkordi, Mojdeh Ebrahimi & Hamid Allami
2012. Evidentiality in Academic Writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 2:9 Crossref logo
Dong, Jihua & Louisa Buckingham
2018. The textual colligation of stance phraseology in cross-disciplinary academic discourse. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 23:4  pp. 408 ff. Crossref logo
Fu, Xiaoli & Ken Hyland
2014. Interaction in two journalistic genres: A study of interactional metadiscourse. English Text Construction 7:1  pp. 122 ff. Crossref logo
Gilquin, Gaëtanelle
2018.  In Speaking in a Second Language [AILA Applied Linguistics Series, 17],  pp. 127 ff. Crossref logo
Golmohammadi, Saeedeh, Somayeh Suluki, Forugh Daneshmand & Farzad Salahshoor
2014. Socio – Cognitive Perspective to the Analysis of the Strategic Features of the Discussion Section of Research Articles in Applied Linguistics: Native vs. Non-native Researchers. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 98  pp. 604 ff. Crossref logo
González Arias, Cristian
2014. El metadiscurso en columnas de opinión y en los comentarios de lectores en un ambiente virtual y público. Spanish in Context 11:2  pp. 155 ff. Crossref logo
Granger, Sylviane
2015. Contrastive interlanguage analysis: A reappraisal. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 1:1  pp. 7 ff. Crossref logo
Guziurová, Tereza
2017.  In Contrastive Analysis of Discourse-pragmatic Aspects of Linguistic Genres [Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics, 5],  pp. 211 ff. Crossref logo
Hasselgård, Hilde
2015. Lexicogrammatical features of adverbs in advanced learner English. ITL - International Journal of Applied Linguistics 166:1  pp. 163 ff. Crossref logo
Hong, Huaqing & Feng Cao
2014. Interactional metadiscourse in young EFL learner writing: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19:2  pp. 201 ff. Crossref logo
Huan, Changpeng
2018.  In Journalistic Stance in Chinese and Australian Hard News,  pp. 9 ff. Crossref logo
Hyland, Ken
2015.  In The International Encyclopedia of Language and Social Interaction,  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) & Ken Hyland
2016. Nouns and Academic Interactions: A Neglected Feature of Metadiscourse. Applied Linguistics  pp. amw023 ff. Crossref logo
Jordaan, Adéle
2016. Afrikaanse verbandsmerkers: uitbreiding en herkategorisering van voorbeeldwoorde. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 34:2  pp. 147 ff. Crossref logo
Kashiha, Hadi & Susan Marandi
2019. Rhetoric-specific features of interactive metadiscourse in introduction moves: A case of discipline awareness. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 37:1  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Khany, Reza, Mohammad Aliakbari & Saeedeh Mohammadi
2019. A model of rhetorical markers competence in writing academic research articles: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education 4:1 Crossref logo
Khedri, Mohsen, Chan Swee Heng & Tan Bee Hoon
2013. Cross-disciplinary and cross-linguistic perspectives on metadiscourse in academic writing. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 31:1  pp. 129 ff. Crossref logo
Kibler, Amanda K., April S. Salerno & Natalia Palacios
2014. “But Before I Go to My Next Step”: A Longitudinal Study of Adolescent English Language Learners' Transitional Devices in Oral Presentations. TESOL Quarterly 48:2  pp. 222 ff. Crossref logo
Kuhi, Davud, Hassan Asadollahfam & Khatereh Dabagh Anbarian
2014. The Effect of Metadiscourse Use on Iranian EFL Learners’ Lecture Comprehension. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 98  pp. 1026 ff. Crossref logo
Kuhi, Davud & Biook Behnam
2011. Generic Variations and Metadiscourse Use in the Writing of Applied Linguists: A Comparative Study and Preliminary Framework. Written Communication 28:1  pp. 97 ff. Crossref logo
Kuhi, Davud & Manijheh Mojood
2014. Metadiscourse in Newspaper Genre: A Cross-linguistic Study of English and Persian Editorials. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 98  pp. 1046 ff. Crossref logo
Larsson, Tove
2019. Grammatical stance marking across registers. Register Studies 1:2  pp. 243 ff. Crossref logo
Larsson, Tove & Henrik Kaatari
2019. Extraposition in learner and expert writing. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research 5:1  pp. 33 ff. Crossref logo
Leonardo O., Munalim & Lintao Rachelle B.
2016. Metadiscourse in Book Prefaces of Filipino and English Authors: A Contrastive Rhetoric Study. i-manager’s Journal on English Language Teaching 6:1  pp. 36 ff. Crossref logo
Li, Vincent Yi-Lun & Miao-Hsia Chang
2019.  In Chinese for Specific and Professional Purposes [Chinese Language Learning Sciences, ],  pp. 25 ff. Crossref logo
MacIntyre, Robert
2019. The Use of Personal Pronouns in the Writing of Argumentative Essays by EFL Writers. RELC Journal 50:1  pp. 6 ff. Crossref logo
Massaabi, Amira
2014. Metadiscourse and Reading Research Articles (RA) in English by Tunisian Geography Faculty. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 98  pp. 1110 ff. Crossref logo
Meza, Paulina
2016. El posicionamiento estratégico del autor en artículos de investigación: una propuesta para su estudio. Forma y Función 29:2  pp. 111 ff. Crossref logo
Mirzaeian, Elnaz
2020. An Intra-cultural Analysis of Interpersonal Metadiscourse Markers Used in Obama and Trump’s Speeches on the Iran Nuclear Deal. Corpus Pragmatics 4:2  pp. 191 ff. Crossref logo
Mur-Dueñas, Pilar & Jolanta Šinkūnienė
2016. Self-reference in research articles across Europe and Asia: a review of studies. Brno studies in English :1  pp. [71] ff. Crossref logo
Navarro Gil, Noelia
2018. Reflexive metadiscourse in a corpus of Spanish bachelor dissertations in EFL. Research in Corpus Linguistics  pp. 29 ff. Crossref logo
Núñez-Román, Francisco
2020.  In Corpus Analysis in Different Genres,  pp. 191 ff. Crossref logo
Paquot, Magali
2018.  In The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology,  pp. 359 ff. Crossref logo
Peterlin, Agnes Pisanski
2016. Engagement markers in translated academic texts. English Text Construction 9:2  pp. 268 ff. Crossref logo
Ramoroka, Boitumelo T.
2017. The use of interactional metadiscourse features to present a textual voice: A case study of undergraduate writing in two departments at the University of Botswana. Reading & Writing 8:1 Crossref logo
Rezaei Zadeh, Zahra, Roya Baharlooei & Shahla Simin
2015. Interactive and interactional meta-discourse markers in conclusion sections of English master theses. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning 4:4 Crossref logo
Römer, Ute
2011. Corpus Research Applications in Second Language Teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 31  pp. 205 ff. Crossref logo
Sancho Guinda, Carmen
2019.  In Engagement in Professional Genres [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 301],  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Shokouhi, Hossein, Clodagh Norwood & Sadeq Soltani
2015. Evidential in Persian editorials. Discourse Studies 17:4  pp. 449 ff. Crossref logo
Sidorenko, Tatiana V., Yanah V. Rozanova & Olga B. Shamina
2020.  In English for Specific Purposes Instruction and Research,  pp. 289 ff. Crossref logo
Takač, Višnja Pavičić & Sanja Vakanjac Ivezić
2019. FRAME MARKERS AND COHERENCE IN L2 ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAYS. Discourse and Interaction 12:2  pp. 46 ff. Crossref logo
Tasso, Chiara
2020.  In Corpus Analysis in Different Genres,  pp. 206 ff. Crossref logo
Tono, Yukio & María Belén Díez-Bedmar
2014. Focus on learner writing at the beginning and intermediate stages: The ICCI corpus. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19:2  pp. 163 ff. Crossref logo
Toska, Bledar
2015.  In Persuasive Games in Political and Professional Dialogue [Dialogue Studies, 26],  pp. 55 ff. Crossref logo
Vasheghani Farahani, Mehrdad & Vahid Pahlevansadegh
2019. Teaching metadiscourse features and IELTS writing performance of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 11:3  pp. 538 ff. Crossref logo
Vetchinnikova, Svetlana
2019.  In Phraseology and the Advanced Language Learner, Crossref logo
Werner, Valentin
2017. Adversative Pragmatic Markers in Learner Language: A Cross-Sectional Perspective. Corpus Pragmatics 1:2  pp. 135 ff. Crossref logo
Whitt, Richard J.
2018. “And all this is spoken of the naturall byrth …”. English Text Construction 11:2  pp. 226 ff. Crossref logo
Wu, Shaoqun, Alannah Fitzgerald, Ian H. Witten & Alex Yu
2018.  In Handbook of Research on Integrating Technology Into Contemporary Language Learning and Teaching [Advances in Educational Technologies and Instructional Design, ],  pp. 512 ff. Crossref logo
Wu, Shaoqun, Liang Li, Ian Witten & Alex Yu
2018. A Systematic Review of Using Discipline-Specific Corpora for Lexico-Grammatical Pattern Learning. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching 8:1  pp. 31 ff. Crossref logo
Wulff, Stefanie & Ute Römer
2009. Becoming a proficient academic writer: shifting lexical preferences in the use of the progressive. Corpora 4:2  pp. 115 ff. Crossref logo
Yeganeh, Maryam Tafaroji & Seyedeh Marzieh Ghoreyshi
2015. Exploring Gender Differences in the use of Discourse Markers in Iranian Academic Research Articles. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 192  pp. 684 ff. Crossref logo
Zare, Javad
2020. Awareness of discourse organizers and comprehension of academic lectures: The effect of using concordancers. Current Psychology 39:2  pp. 419 ff. Crossref logo
Zare, Javad & Mansoor Tavakoli
2017. The Use of Personal Metadiscourse over Monologic and Dialogic Modes of Academic Speech. Discourse Processes 54:2  pp. 163 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Man
2016. A multidimensional analysis of metadiscourse markers across written registers. Discourse Studies 18:2  pp. 204 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Man
2019. Exploring Personal Metadiscourse Markers across Speech and Writing Using Cluster Analysis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 26:4  pp. 267 ff. Crossref logo
Ädel, Annelie
2012.  In The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, Crossref logo
Łyda, Andrzej & Krystyna Warchał
2011.  In Aspects of Culture in Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Learning,  pp. 193 ff. Crossref logo
Łyda, Andrzej & Krystyna Warchał
2014.  In Occupying Niches: Interculturality, Cross-culturality and Aculturality in Academic Research [Second Language Learning and Teaching, ],  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
雷, 霄
2019. Comparing Metadiscourse Use in Introductions of English Journal Articles. Modern Linguistics 07:05  pp. 695 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 01 june 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Subjects
BIC Subject: CF – Linguistics
BISAC Subject: LAN009000 – LANGUAGE ARTS & DISCIPLINES / Linguistics / General
U.S. Library of Congress Control Number:  2006045728