چکیده:
Thanks to recent developments in metadiscourse studies, it is now increasingly
accepted that metadiscourse practices are closely related to social activities,
cognitive styles and epistemological beliefs of academic communities. Despite
widespread interest and research among applied linguists to explore metadiscourse
use, very little is known of how metadiscourse resources have evolved over time in
response to the historically developing practices of academic communities.
Motivated by such an ambition, the current research drew on a corpus of 4.3 million
words taken from three leading journals of applied linguistics in order to trace the
diachronic evolution of stance and engagement markers across four different
sections of research articles (Introduction, Method, Result, Discussion/ Conclusion)
from 1996 to 2016. Hyland‘s (2005b) model of metadiscourse was adopted for the
analysis of the selected corpus. The data were explored using concordance software
AntConc (Anthony, 2011). Moreover, a Chi-Square statistical measure was run to
determine statistical significances. The analysis revealed a significant decline in the
overall frequency of metadiscourse resources in all sections of RAs. Interestingly,
this decrease was entirely due to the overall decline in the use of stance markers
particularly in result and method sections. It might be argued that, diachronic
perspective on metadiscourse contributes to teachers and novice writers‘ awareness
of the malleability of academic writing and its sensitivity to context as well as
providing access to current practices for the creation and delivery of teaching
materials in EAP courses.
خلاصه ماشینی:
Cross-Sectional Diachronic Corpus Analysis of Stance and Engagement Markers in Three Leading Journals of Applied Linguistics Shirin Rezaei Keramati1*, Davud Kuhi2, Mahnaz Saeidi3 1*Ph. D.
3 million words taken from three leading journals of applied linguistics in order to trace the diachronic evolution of stance and engagement markers across four different sections of research articles (Introduction, Method, Result, Discussion/ Conclusion) from 1996 to 2016.
23) ―over time, the conventions of disciplinary discursive practices become taken-for-granted along with the ideological assumptions they carry, constantly shifting in response to changes in the dominant socio-cultural 3 forces in society‖ (see, for example, Ayers, 2008; Banks, 2008; Biber & Gray, 2011; Gillaerts, 2013; Hyland & Jiang, 2018b; Jiang &Wang 2018; Li & Ge, 2009).
This study focuses on interactional metadiscourse because these resources, by affording research article writers various means of marking their presence, negotiating knowledge claims, and engaging their readers, lie at the very core of academic communication as socio-rhetorical activity.
2. How have stance and engagement markers evolved diachronically across four different sections of research articles (introduction, methodology, results, and discussion/conclusion) published in three leading journals of applied linguistics (AL, ESP, MLJ) between 1996 and 2016?
5. Conclusion and Implications In this study, we have tracked how stance and engagement practices have changed across four different sections of research articles (introduction, methodology, results, and discussion/conclusion) published in three leading journals of applied linguistics (applied linguistics, English for specific purposes, modern language journal) between 1996 and 2016.