Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles

Academic writers resort to hedging as one of the interpersonal metadiscourse categories needed to present their findings cautiously in the hope that their research contribution can be accepted by the academic community. Such acceptance, to a great extent, depends on how propositions and claims ar...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Chek, Kim Loi, Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2019
Online Access:http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/1/27187-96210-3-PB.pdf
id ukm-14045
recordtype eprints
spelling ukm-140452020-01-24T09:23:33Z http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/ Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles Chek, Kim Loi Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa Academic writers resort to hedging as one of the interpersonal metadiscourse categories needed to present their findings cautiously in the hope that their research contribution can be accepted by the academic community. Such acceptance, to a great extent, depends on how propositions and claims are presented to the academic community. The purpose of the present study was to compare and contrast the hedges used in the Discussion sections of educational research articles in English with those in Malay. To provide additional insights, information was elicited from both English and Malay specialist informants on their perceptions of hedging in research article writing. This study contributes to an understanding on the use of hedges throughout the Discussion sections of the research articles from the two languages and possible contextual and socio-cultural factors which may have influenced their use. The corpus of the present study is made up of the Discussion sections of English and Malay research articles published between 2012 and 2017. The analytical framework of this study is based on Hyland’s (1996) four hedging functions, which are writer-oriented, attributeoriented, reliability-oriented, and reader-oriented. Our analysis shows that overall, hedges are found in more English than Malay discussions. The greater number of hedges in the English data is in principle expected as English is a remarkably hedging culture. A closer examination reveals that English writers tend to subtly bring the value of the writer’s contribution to the fore, tone down the force of the arguments, and bring forth the tentative nature of the conclusion drawn on the issue examined. The findings provide pedagogical implications in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) classroom. Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia 2019-02 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/1/27187-96210-3-PB.pdf Chek, Kim Loi and Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa (2019) Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles. GEMA ; Online Journal of Language Studies, 19 (1). pp. 36-61. ISSN 1675-8021 http://ejournal.ukm.my/gema/issue/view/1171
repository_type Digital Repository
institution_category Local University
institution Universiti Kebangasaan Malaysia
building UKM Institutional Repository
collection Online Access
language English
description Academic writers resort to hedging as one of the interpersonal metadiscourse categories needed to present their findings cautiously in the hope that their research contribution can be accepted by the academic community. Such acceptance, to a great extent, depends on how propositions and claims are presented to the academic community. The purpose of the present study was to compare and contrast the hedges used in the Discussion sections of educational research articles in English with those in Malay. To provide additional insights, information was elicited from both English and Malay specialist informants on their perceptions of hedging in research article writing. This study contributes to an understanding on the use of hedges throughout the Discussion sections of the research articles from the two languages and possible contextual and socio-cultural factors which may have influenced their use. The corpus of the present study is made up of the Discussion sections of English and Malay research articles published between 2012 and 2017. The analytical framework of this study is based on Hyland’s (1996) four hedging functions, which are writer-oriented, attributeoriented, reliability-oriented, and reader-oriented. Our analysis shows that overall, hedges are found in more English than Malay discussions. The greater number of hedges in the English data is in principle expected as English is a remarkably hedging culture. A closer examination reveals that English writers tend to subtly bring the value of the writer’s contribution to the fore, tone down the force of the arguments, and bring forth the tentative nature of the conclusion drawn on the issue examined. The findings provide pedagogical implications in an English for Academic Purposes (EAP) classroom.
format Article
author Chek, Kim Loi
Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa
spellingShingle Chek, Kim Loi
Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa
Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
author_facet Chek, Kim Loi
Lim, Jason Miin-Hwa
author_sort Chek, Kim Loi
title Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
title_short Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
title_full Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
title_fullStr Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
title_full_unstemmed Hedging in the discussion sections of English and Malay educational research articles
title_sort hedging in the discussion sections of english and malay educational research articles
publisher Penerbit Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
publishDate 2019
url http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/
http://journalarticle.ukm.my/14045/1/27187-96210-3-PB.pdf
first_indexed 2023-09-18T20:06:13Z
last_indexed 2023-09-18T20:06:13Z
_version_ 1777407175508885504