English teaching
AliReza Jalilifar
Abstract
This study aimed to account for metadiscourse variations in the discussion sections of articles written in Persian and English and published in Iranian as well as international scholarly journals in English Language Teaching and Psychiatry. For this purpose, 90 research article discussions were ...
Read More
This study aimed to account for metadiscourse variations in the discussion sections of articles written in Persian and English and published in Iranian as well as international scholarly journals in English Language Teaching and Psychiatry. For this purpose, 90 research article discussions were selected, and then hedges and boosters were identified based on the taxonomies of metadiscourse markers. The results of the quantitative and qualitative analyses revealed significant differences in frequency, type, and functions of these devices in the texts. These differences might be attributed to lack of awareness of the conventional rules of English rhetoric, limited and fragile knowledge of academic English by Persian writers, and lack of explicit instruction and exposure to pragmatic and sociolinguistic rules of English by Persian researchers. Further research in other disciplines will help to make more accurate generalizations about the role of metadiscourse markers in research articles.
