Research article | Open Access
Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 2021, Vol. 16(3) 56-66
Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in the Turkish Articles on Science and Social Sciences
pp. 56 - 66 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2021.373.4
Publish Date: September 20, 2021 | Single/Total View: 165/613 | Single/Total Download: 238/896
Abstract
This study aims to identify the interactive metadiscourse markers in the main sections of the articles (introduction, method, findings, results, discussion and conclusion) in the fields of science and social sciences. Designed as a descriptive research, this study employs the survey model. The articles analyzed in this study are a total of 16 articles, 8 science and 8 social sciences articles selected from the science and social sciences journals at DergiPark. The study group of this paper includes 54,253 words, 16,301 of which are in the articles on science and 37,952 are in the articles on social sciences. To achieve, this study draws on Hyland and Tse's framework of metadiscourse model. The data are analyzed through descriptive analysis method. A Mann-Whitney U test is performed to find out whether there is a significant difference in the use of metadiscourse markers identified in the descriptive analysis of the articles on science and social sciences. The analysis indicate that more interactive metadiscourse markers are used in the articles on social sciences compared to the articles on science; yet, this difference is not significant. Furthermore, the use of code glosses is significant for social sciences; nonetheless, there is no significant difference in the use of other interactive metadiscourse markers.
Keywords: Academic Writing, Metadiscourse, Interactive Metadiscourse, Turkish Scientific Texts
APA 7th edition
Kan, M.O. (2021). Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in the Turkish Articles on Science and Social Sciences. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(3), 56-66. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2021.373.4
Harvard
Kan, M. (2021). Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in the Turkish Articles on Science and Social Sciences. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 16(3), pp. 56-66.
Chicago 16th edition
Kan, Mustafa Onur (2021). "Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in the Turkish Articles on Science and Social Sciences". Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research 16 (3):56-66. https://doi.org/10.29329/epasr.2021.373.4
- Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. John Benjamins. [Google Scholar]
- Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in PhD theses. English for Specific Purposes, 18, 41-56. [Google Scholar]
- Cao, F. & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- Crismore, A. (1989). Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetorical act. Peter Lang Publishers. [Google Scholar]
- Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30 (4), 437-455. [Google Scholar]
- Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum. [Google Scholar]
- Hyland, K. & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25 (2), 156-177. [Google Scholar]
- Kan, M. O. (2016). The use of interactional metadiscourse: A comparison of articles on Turkish education and literature. Educational Sciences: Theory Practice, 16 (5), 1639–1648. [Google Scholar]
- Karasar, N. (2012). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi [Scientific research method]. Nobel Yayın Dağıtım. [Google Scholar]
- Lautamatti, L. (1978) Observations on the development of the topic in simplified discourse. In V. Kohonen & N. E. Enkvist (Eds), Text Linguistics, Cognitive Learning, and Language Teaching (pp. 71-104). University of Turku Publications. [Google Scholar]
- Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
- Mirshamsi, A. & Allami, H. (2013). Metadiscourse markers in the discussion/conclusion section of Persian and English master's theses. The Journal of Teaching Language Skills (JTLS). 5 (3), 23-40. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2013.1706 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
- Pooresfahani, A. F., Khajavy, G. H. & Vahidnia, F. (2012). A contrastive study of metadiscourse markers in research articles written by Iranian applied linguistics and engineering writers in English. English Linguistics Research. 1 (1), 88-96. [Google Scholar]
- Uzun, L. (2006). Bilimsel söylem ve özellikleri [Scientific discourse and its features], In Karakütük, K. (Ed.) TUBITAK ULAKBIM Periodical Publishing in Social Sciences 1st National Congress Proceedings, 133-140. [Google Scholar]
- Ünsal, Ö. (2008). A comparative study of metadiscourse used in academic texts in the fields of science and social sciences [Unpublished Master’s thesis]. Çukurova University. [Google Scholar]
- Williams, J. M. (1981). Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. Harper Collins Publishers. [Google Scholar]
- Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some explanatory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36 (1), 82-93. [Google Scholar]
- Vande Kopple, W. J. (2002). Metadiscourse, discourse and issues in composition and rhetoric. In E. Barton & G. Stygall (Eds.), Discourse Studies in Composition (pp. 91-114). Hampton Press, Inc. [Google Scholar]
- Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2011). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri [Qualitative research methods in the social sciences]. Seçkin Yayınları. [Google Scholar]
- Zarei, G. R. & Mansoori, S. (2011). A contrastive study on metadiscourse markers used in humanities vs. non humanities across Persian and English. English Language Teaching. 4 (1), 42-50. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n1p42 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]
