Hedges and Boosters in Student Scientific Articles within the Framework of a Pragmatic Metadiscourse

Mimas Ardhianti, Jimat Susilo, Asep Nurjamin, Eko Cahyo Prawoto

Abstract


The ability of students to edit scientific papers is still low, especially in mastering the use of hedge (fencing devices) and boosters (strengthening devices). Hedges and boosters are forms of expression of the author's attitude towards propositional content through epistemic modalities. This study aims to describe hedges and boosters in student scientific articles within the framework of a pragmatic metadiscourse. A qualitative descriptive approach was used in this study. The data used is in the form of editing words, sentences, and paragraphs in scientific articles editing courses. The source of this research data is a scientific article by PGRI Adi Buana University Surabaya students in 2022. Data collection techniques use documentation techniques and recording techniques. Data analysis techniques to identify hedges and word lists of boosters using the AntConc application built by Lawrence Anthony. Data that has been obtained from the AntConc application found the frequency of hedges and boosters in scientific articles. The results of this study showed that the use of modal verb hedges in the first position was 214 frequencies, followed by 59 adverbs of hedges, and verb hedges were 3 frequencies, while the use of booster in the first position was 202 frequencies, followed by adverbs booster of 63 frequencies, and booster verbs of 6 frequencies. This study shows that students ability to tendency to (1) use epistemic modalities in modal verbs, (2) tend to use more capital verbs that mean certainty and possibility, and (3) tend to use adverbs to mean epistemic modalities.

Keywords


Academic writing; Student articles; Boosters; Hedges; Epistemic modality; Pragmatics metadiscourse;

Full Text:

FULL PDF

References


Amalia, N. (2021). Penyuntingan Naskah (Nadra Amalia (ed.); Cetakan Pe). Umsu.

Bacang, Bernadita C, Rillo, Richard, M, Alieto, Ericson, O. (2019). The Gender Construct in the Use of Rhetorical Appeals, Hedges, and Boosters in ESL Writing. A Discourse Analysis, Asian EFL Journal, 25(5.2), 210–224.

Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Pearson Education Limited.

Celce-Murcia, M., & Larsen-Freeman, D. (1999). The Grammar Book: An ESL/EFL Teacher’s Course (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

Chen, Z. (2012). Expression of epistemic stance in EFL Chinese university students’ writing. English Language Teaching, 5(10), 173–179.

Coates, J. (1983). The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. Croom Helm.

Coates, J. (1987). Epistemic Modality and Spoken Discourse. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.1987.tb00714.x

Coates, J. (1995). The expression of root and epistemic modality in English. In B. Aarts & C. F. Meyer (Eds.), The verb in contemporary English: Theory and description. 145–156.

Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in academic writing: some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes. 16(4), 271–287. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/doi: 10.1016/S0889-4906(97) 00007-0

Farahani, M. V. (2019). Metadiscourse in academic English texts: A corpus-based probe into British Academic Written English Corpus. Studies About Languages, 34, 56–73. https://doi.org/10.5755/j01.sal.0.34.21816

Fraser, B. (2010). Pragmatic Competence: The Case of Hedging. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Getkham, K. (2016). Authorial stance in Thai students’ doctoral dissertations. English Language Teaching. 9(3), 80–95. https://doi.org/doi:10.5539/elt.v9n3p80

Hidayati, F. (2020). Penggunaan Hedges dan Boosters Sebagai Strategi Metadiskursus dalam Artikel Ilmiah: Suatu Analisis Penggunaan Piranti Pemagaran dan Penguat dalam Artikel Bidang Linguistik, Ekonomi, dan Kimia. Disertasi: Universitas Pendidikan Indonesia.

Holmes, J. (1990). Hedges and Boosters in women’s and men’s speech, Language, and communication. 10(3), 185–205. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(90)90002-S

Hu, C., & Li, X. (2015). Epistemic modality in the argumentative essays of Chinese EFL learners. English Language Teaching, 8(6), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n6p20

Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing. 6(2), 183–205.

Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics. 25(2), 156–177.

Hyland, K. (1996). Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics. 17(4), 433–454.

Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. John Benjamins Publishing.

Hyland, K. (2010). Metadiscourse: Mapping Interactions in Academic Writing. University of London: UK.

Jalilifar, A. dan M. A.-N. (2012). We are surprised; wasn’t Iran disgraced there? A functional analysis of Hedges and Boosters in televised Iranian and American presidential debates, Discourse & Communication. Journal SAGE.

Kim, L.C., & L. J.-H. (2015). Hedging in academic writing - a pedagogically-motivated qualitative study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, pp. 197, 600- 607.

Malášková, M. (2015). Hedging in academic discourse: A comparative analysis of applied linguistics and literary criticism research articles (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Masaryk University in Brno.

Navratilova, D. (2016). Cross-Cultural Variation in the Use of Hedges and Boosters in Academic Discourse. Prague Journal of English Studies, 5(1), 163–184. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1515/pjes-2016-0009

Oktay, S. A. (2020). The metadiscursive aspects of advice-giving: Hedging and boosting in an agony aunt’s column. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(3), 1611–1620. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803918

Palmer. (2007). Mood and Modality. Cambridge.

Peng, J. E., & Zheng, Y. (2021). Metadiscourse and Voice Construction in Discussion Sections in BA Theses by Chinese University Students Majoring in English. SAGE Open, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211008870

Radojičić, S., & Novakov, P. (2022). Hedging and Boosting Strategies in Linguistics and Geography – A Case Study of Student Perception. Folia Linguistica et Litteraria, 13(42), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.31902/fll.42.2022.16

Risaldi, Antok, D. (2021). Modalitas sebagai fitur lingual praktik kuasa dalam komunitas pedofilia. Jurnal Kembara, 7, 2.

Sánchez-Jiménez, D. (2022). Linguistic variation of politeness in written academic discourse: Hedges and boosters of the author’s voice in the evaluation of sources. Revista Signos, 55(108), 260–286. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342022000100260

Sukhanindr, M. (2008). Hedging in research articles about English language teaching written by Thai and native speakers of English. Kasetsart Journal of Humanities, 16(2), 109–120.

Sumanat, W. (2017). Examining Hedges in persuasive letters: A case of Thai ESP learners at the Rajamangala University of Technology, Phra Nakhon (RMUTP). Proceedings from: Pibul Research’17. 672–678.

Takimoto, M. (2015a). A Corpus-Based Analysis of Hedges and Boosters in English Academic. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 99–105. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.17509%2Fijal.v5i1.836

Takimoto, M. (2015b). A Corpus-Based Analysis Of Hedges And Boosters In English Academic Articles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.17509/Fijal.v5i1.836

Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics. 22(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.58

Triyoko, H, I Dewa Putu Wijana, Praptomo, B. (2021). Hedges and Boosters in Indonesian Scientific Articles. Register Journal, 14(1), 65–82. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.18326/rgt.v14i1.65-82

Vartalla, T. (2001). Hedging in scientifically oriented discourse: Exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Tampere, Finland.

Vassileva, I. (2001). Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing, English for Specific Purposes. 20(1), 83–102.

Viktorova, E. Y. (2023). Hedges vs. boosters: Communicative mitigation and enhancement in the genre of dissertation review. International Journal “Speech Genres,” 18(2 (38)), 126–131. https://doi.org/10.18500/2311-0740-2023-18-2-38-126-131




DOI: https://doi.org/10.33394/jollt.v11i4.9018

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2023 Mimas Ardhianti, Jimat Susilo, Asep Nurjamin, Eko Cahyo Prawoto

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

JOLLT Journal of Languages and Language Teaching (p-issn: 2338-0810 | e-issn: 2621-1378) has been Indexed/Listed by

 Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.