Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||A Corpus-based analysis of stance marking in research articles|
|Other Titles:||a comparative study of the literature reviews written by native and nonnative researchers in applied linguistics|
|Keywords:||Literature review section|
|Abstract:||A large amount of studies have investigated stance marking in different genres; however, little attention was drawn to the literature review section. Several studies have favoured other parts of research as important genres for exploring stance because it is commonly believed, especially by novice non-native researchers, that the section is a mere statement of propositional content reporting on previous knowledge. The current study attempts to determine the frequency and types of stance MD devices used in LR sections of RAs written by native and nonnative researchers of English and to compare the stance MD markers employed by either researchers and explore if there are significant differences among the LR sections of these RAs in terms of the use of stance IMDMs. Twenty literature reviews of research articles compiled into two equal-sized corpora each representing one of two different cultures, namely Algerian and British cultures, were analyzed and compared in terms of stance features. The analysis was carried out using AntConc software based on Hyland’s (2005) framework of stance interactional metadiscourse markers. After that data were subjected to comparison, contrast then a Chi-square test through SPSS software. The findings obtained demonstrated both differences as well as similarities between the two corpora in terms of types, order and frequency of the markers employed. It was found that Algerian researchers used limited numbers of stance interactional metadiscourse markers in comparison to native researchers. Similarly, the results of the Chi-square test indicated the presence of a significant difference in the use of those markers between both groups of researchers. Consequently, the alternative hypothesis was accepted and stance and culture were proved associated. Hence, this study highlights the evaluative nature of the literature review section as well as the importance of cross cultural differences in discourse.|
|Appears in Collections:||قسم اللغة الإنجليزية|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.