Engagement Markers in Humanities and Science Journal Articles

 

Content                                                                                                                   Page

 

CHAPTER ONE………………………………………………………………………………………. 1

INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………… 2

1.0 Introduction                                                                                                   2

1.1 Preliminaries……………………………………………………………………………………. 2

1.2 Writer-reader Interaction…………………………………………………………………… 3

1.3 Metadicourse…………………………………………………………………………………… 7

1.4 Metadiscourse Classification……………………………………………………………….. 8

1.5 Engagement Markers………………………………………………………………………… 9

1.6 Objectives of the Study…………………………………………………………………….. 13

1.7 Research Questions…………………………………………………………………………. 13

1.8 Significance of the Study…………………………………………………………………… 14

CHAPTER TWO……………………………………………………………………………………. 15

LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………………………………………………… 16

2.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 16

2.1 Theoretical bases…………………………………………………………………………….. 16

2.2 Experimental researches…………………………………………………………………… 19

2.2.1 Metadiscourse and EMs across cultures and languages……………………… 19

2.2.2 Metadiscourse and EMs across disciplines………………………………………. 24

CHAPTER THREE……………………………………………………………………………….. 34

METHOD……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 35

3.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 35

3.1 Corpus…………………………………………………………………………………………… 35

3.2 Data collection………………………………………………………………………………… 36

3.3 Data analysis…………………………………………………………………………………… 37

CHAPTER FOUR………………………………………………………………………………….. 39

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS………………………………………………………………………. 40

4.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 40

4.1. Are there any significant differences in the type and frequency of EMs used in Humanities and Science journals’ RAs?……………………………………………………………………………………… 41

4.2. Which types of EMs are more frequent in Humanities and Science journals’ articles?    44

4.2.1. Humanities RAS………………………………………………………………………… 44

4.2.2. Science RAS……………………………………………………………………………… 45

4.2.3. Reader pronouns……………………………………………………………………… 45

4.2.4. Directives:……………………………………………………………………………….. 47

4.2.5. Questions……………………………………………………………………………….. 49

4.2.6. Appeals to shared knowledge……………………………………………………… 51

4.2.7. Personal Asides………………………………………………………………………… 52

4.3. Is their any difference in using EMs in 1990 to 1999 and 2000 to 2010 in Humanities and Science RAs?    53

4.3.1. Humanities RAs………………………………………………………………………… 53

4.3.2. Science RAs……………………………………………………………………………… 54

CHAPTER FIVE……………………………………………………………………………………. 56

CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………………. 57

5.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………… 57

5.1 Summary……………………………………………………………………………………….. 57

5.2. Conclusions…………………………………………………………………………………… 58

5.3 Implications of the study…………………………………………………………………… 60

5.4 Limitations of the study…………………………………………………………………….. 61

5.5 Suggestions for further research………………………………………………………… 62

References…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64

Appendices……………………………………………………………………………………………… 72

Appendix A…………………………………………………………………………………………. 73

English Engagement Markers………………………………………………………………….. 73

Appendix B…………………………………………………………………………………………. 74

List of Journals…………………………………………………………………………………….. 74

                                                                                            

 

List of Tables

 

Table                                                                                                                     Page

 

 

Table 3.1. Text Corpora………………………………………………………………………………. 37

Table 3.2.  Engagement markers of Hyland’s (2005a, p. 49) Interpersonal Model of Discourse       39

Table 4.1. EMs in Humanity and Science journal articles…………………………………. 42

Table 4.2. Chi- square test for the use of EM in Humanities and Sciences RAs….. 43

Table 4.3. Distribution of EMs in Humanities articles……………………………………… 45

Table 4.4. Distribution of EMs in Science articles…………………………………………… 46

Table 4.5. Chi-square test for reader pronouns in Humanities and Science RAs … 46

Table 4.6. Chi-square test for the use of directives across Humanities and Science RAs      48

Table 4.7. Chi-square test for the use of questions across humanities and Science RAs       50

Table 4.8. Chi-square test for the use of appeals to shared knowledge across Humanities and Science RAs………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 52

Table 4.9. Chi-square test for the use of personal asides across Humanities and Science RAs         53

Table 4.10. EMs in Humanities RAs in two decades of 1990 and 2000…………….. 54

Table 4.11. Chi-square test for the comparison of EMs in Humanities RAs in 1990 to 2000 and 2000 to 2010………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 55

Table 4.12. EMs in science RAs in two decades of 1990 and 2000…………………… 55

Table 4.13. Chi-square test for the comparison of EMs in Science RAs in 1990 to 2000 and 2000 to 2010 56

List of Figures

 

Figure                                                                                                                Page

 

 

Figure 1.1. Key resources of academic interaction…………………………………………… 6