Marcadores endofóricos: Un estudio contrastivo de las referencias textuales en el inglés académico de trabajos fin de máster escritos por estudiantes checos en inglés como segunda lengua y por hablantes nativos
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.26754/ojs_misc/mj.20249976Palabras clave:
metadiscurso, marcadores endofóricos, Trabajos de Fin de Máster (TFM), discurso académico, análisis interculturalResumen
El objetivo de este estudio es contribuir al análisis del discurso intercultural e interdisciplinar, arrojando luz sobre las prácticas metadiscursivas de los estudiantes de inglés como segunda lengua. La investigación, basada en un corpus especializado de Trabajos de Fin de Máster en lengua inglesa escritos por estudiantes universitarios checos, explora el uso de marcadores endofóricos y sus características. Para permitir la comparación interlingüística e intercultural, se compiló un corpus de referencia que representa el discurso académico en inglés de hablantes nativos.
Se utiliza una nueva taxonomía que, basada en la lista de marcadores endofóricos de Hyland (2005) y en una extensa revisión bibliográfica, clasifica los marcadores endofóricos en tres grupos: puramente direccionales, marcadores que utilizan palabras específicas y una categoría que combina los dos primeros. El estudio explora dónde cuándo y cómo aparecen estos marcadores y la función que tienen, centrándose en las referencias anafóricas, catafóricas y no direccionales. También pretende identificar las diferencias que hay en el uso de marcadores endofóricos entre escritores noveles para quienes el inglés es su segunda lengua y escritores académicos expertos para quienes el inglés es su primera lengua. Así mismo, tiene como objetivo proporcionar información sobre tendencias y patrones en el empleo de marcadores endofóricos en la escritura académica en lengua inglesa, teniendo en cuenta la influencia en su uso de factores disciplinares y lingüísticos.
Los resultados revelan una mayor frecuencia de marcadores endofóricos en el corpus de Trabajos de Fin de Máster, lo que sugiere patrones discursivos distintivos entre los estudiantes checos que utilizan el inglés como segunda lengua, con predominio de marcadores endofóricos específicos y notables variaciones entre disciplinas.
Mostras las descargas
Referencias
ABDOLLAHZADEH, Esmaeel. 2019. “A Coss-cultural Study of Hedging in Discussion Sections by Junior and Senior Academic Writers”. Ibérica 38: 177-202.
ÄDEL, Annelie. 2006. Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing. <https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.24
AFZAAL, Muhammad, Muhammad Ilyas CHISHTI, Chao LIU and Chenxia ZHANG. 2021. “Metadiscourse in Chinese and American Graduate Dissertation Introductions”. Cogent Arts & Humanities: 8 (1). <https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2021.1970879>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2021.1970879
BUNTON, David. 1999. “The Use of Higher Level Metatext in Ph.D. Theses”. English for Specific Purposes 18: 41-56. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00022-2>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(98)00022-2
BURNEIKAITĖ, Nida. 2008. “Metadiscourse in Linguistics Master’s Theses in English L1 and L2”. Kalbotyra 59 (3): 38-47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15388/Klbt.2008.7591
BURNEIKAITĖ, Nida. 2009. “Endophoric Markers in Linguistics Master’s Theses in English L1 and L2”. Žmogus ir žodis 3: 11-16.
CAO, Feng and Guangwei HU. 2014. “Interactive Metadiscourse in Research Articles: A Comparative Study of Paradigmatic and Disciplinary Influences”. Journal of Pragmatics 66: 15-31. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2014.02.007
CELIEŠIENĖ, Vilija and Erika SABULYTE. 2018. “Metadiscourse Markers in Technical Texts”. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture 5 (4): 1-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19044/llc.v5no4a1
CRISMORE, Avon and Rodney FARNSWORTH. 1990. “Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse”. In Walter, Nash (ed.) The Writing Scholar. Studies in Academic Discourse. Newbury Park, CA: Sage: 119-136.
CRISMORE, Avon, Raija MARKKANEN and Margaret S. STEFFENSEN. 1993. “Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing: A Study of Texts Written by American and Finnish University Students”. Written Communication 10 (1): 39-71. <https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002
CONNOR, Ulla and Ana I. MORENO. 2005. “Tertium Comparationis: A Vital Component in Contrastive Rhetoric Research”. In Bruthiaux, Paul, Dwight Atkinson, William Eggington, William Grabe and Vaidehi Ramanathan (eds.) Directions in Applied Linguistics: Essays in Honor of Robert B. Kaplan. Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters: 153-164. < https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853598500-015>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853598500-015
DAHL, Trine. 2004. “Textual Metadiscourse in Research Articles: A Marker of National Culture or of Academic Discipline?” Journal of Pragmatics 36: 1807-1825. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2004.05.004
DEL SAZ RUBIO, M. Milagros. 2011. “A Pragmatic Approach to the Macro-structure and Metadiscoursal Features of Research Article Introductions in the Field of Agricultural Sciences”. English for Specific Purposes 30 (4): 258-271. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.002 >. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2011.03.002
DONTCHEVA-NAVRÁTILOVÁ, Olga. 2023. “Self-mention in L2 (Czech) Learner Academic Discourse: Realisations, Functions and Distribution across Master’s Theses”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 64: 1475-1585. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101272>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2023.101272
EL-DAKHS, Dina Abdel Salam. 2018. “Why Are Abstracts in PhD Theses and Research Articles Different? A Genre-specific Perspective”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 36: 48-60. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.005>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.09.005
FLOWERDEW, Lynne. 2015. “Using Corpus-based Research and Online Academic Corpora to Inform Writing of the Discussion Section of a Thesis”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20: 58-68. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.06.001>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.06.001
GUZIUROVÁ, Tereza. 2022. “Glossing an Argument: Reformulation and Exemplification in L2 Master’s Theses”. Topics in Linguistics 23 (2): 18-35. <https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2022-0009>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2022-0009
HYLAND, Ken. 1999. “Talking to Students: Metadiscourse in Introductory Coursebooks”. English for Specific Purposes 18 (1): 3-26. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00025-2>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00025-2
HYLAND, Ken. 2004. “Disciplinary Interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 Postgraduate Writing”. Journal of Second Language Writing 13: 133-151. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001 >. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
HYLAND, Ken. 2005. Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.
HYLAND, Ken. 2008. “Academic Clusters: Text Patterning in Published and Postgraduate Writing”. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 18: 41-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2008.00178.x
HYLAND, Ken and Feng Kevin JIANG. 2020. “Text-organizing Metadiscourse: Tracking Changes in Rhetorical Persuasion”. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 21 (1): 137-164. <https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00039.hyl>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00039.hyl
HYLAND, Ken and Polly TSE. 2004. “Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal”. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156-177. <https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
JANČAŘÍKOVÁ, Renata. 2023. “Attitude Markers in L2 Learners’ Academic Writing: A Case Study of Master’s Theses by Czech Students Compared to L1 Students’ Writings”. Brno Studies in English 49 (1): 5-31. <https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2023-1-1>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2023-1-1
KAWASE, Tomoyuki. 2015. “Metadiscourse in the Introductions of PhD Theses and Research Articles”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20: 114-124. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.006
KHALILI, Assef and Majid ASLANABADI. 2014. “The Use of Metadiscourse Devices by Non-native Speakers in Research Articles”. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Discourse Analysis 2 (2): 21-34. <https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2017.13648>
KHEDRI, Mohsen, Chan Swee HENG and Seyed Foad EBRAHIMI. 2013. “An Exploration of Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in Academic Research Article Abstracts in Two Disciplines”. Discourse Studies 15 (3): 319-331. <https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613480588>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445613480588
KILGARRIFF, Adam, Pavel RYCHLY, Pavel SMRZ and David TUGWELL. 2004. “ITRI-04-08 the Sketch Engine”. Lexical Computing. Available from <https://www.sketchengine.eu/>.
KIM, Loi Chek and Jason Miin-Hwa LIM. 2013. “Metadiscourse in English and Chinese Research Article Introductions”. Discourse Studies 15 (2): 129-146. <https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612471476>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612471476
KOBAYASHI, Yuichiro. 2017. “Developmental Patterns of Metadiscourse in Second Language Writing”. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics 21 (2): 41-54. <https://doi.org/10.25256/PAAL.21.2.3>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25256/PAAL.21.2.3
KOUTSANTONI, Dimitra. 2006. “Rhetorical Strategies in Engineering Research Articles and Research Theses: Advanced Academic Literacy and Relations of Power”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 5: 19-36. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.002>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2005.11.002
LEE, Joseph J. and J. Elliott CASAL. 2014. “Metadiscourse in Results and Discussion Chapters: A Cross-linguistic Analysis of English and Spanish Thesis Writers in Engineering”. System 46: 39-54. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.009>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.07.009
LIAO, Jianling. 2020. “Metadiscourse, Cohesion, and Engagement in L2 Written Discourse”. Languages 25 (5): 1-21. <https://doi.org/10.3390/languages5020025>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/languages5020025
MARTÍN-LAGUNA, Sofía and Eva ALCÓN. 2015. “Do Learners Rely on Metadiscourse Markers? An Exploratory Study in English, Catalan and Spanish”. Social and Behavioral Sciences 173: 85-92. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.035>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.035
MAURANEN, Anna. 1993. Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric: A Textlinguistic Study. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
MORENO, Ana I. 2008. “The Importance of Comparable Corpora in Cross-cultural Studies”. In Connor, Ulla, Ed Nagelhout and William V. Rozycki (eds.) Contrastive Rhetoric: Reaching to Intercultural Rhetoric. Amsterdam: John Benjamins: 25-41. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.169.04mor
MU, Congjun, Lawrence Jun ZHANG, John EHRICH and Huaqing HONG. 2015. “The Use of Metadiscourse for Knowledge Construction in Chinese and English Research Articles”. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 20: 135-148. <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.09.003>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.09.003
MUR-DUEÑAS, Pilar. 2011. “An Intercultural Analysis of Metadiscourse Features in Research Articles Written in English and in Spanish”. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3068-3079. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002
PALTRIDGE, Brian. 2002. “Thesis and Dissertation Writing: An Examination of Published Advice and Actual Practice”. English for Specific Purposes 16: 61-70. <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(00)00025-9>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(96)00028-2
POVOLNÁ, Renata. 2012. “Causal and Contrastive Discourse Markers in Novice Academic Writing”. Brno Studies in English 38 (2): 131-148. <https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2012-2-8>. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5817/BSE2012-2-8
PUJOL DAHME, Ana and Moisés SELFA SASTRE. 2015. “The Transition from University to Publication: Register and Interactional Metadiscourse Features in Immunology Research Written in Catalan and English”. Ibérica 30: 155-181.
QIU, Xuyan and Xiaohao MA. 2019. “Disciplinary Enculturation and Authorial Stance: Comparison of Stance Features among Master’s Dissertations, Doctoral Theses, and Research Articles”. Ibérica 38: 327-348.
SWALES, John. 1990. Genre Analysis. English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge: Cambridge U.P.
TRIBBLE, Christopher. 2002. “Corpora and Corpus Analysis: New Windows on Academic Writing”. In Flowerdew, John (ed.) Academic Discourse. London: Longman: 131-149. <https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315838069>.
VOGEL, Radek. 2008. “Sentence Linkers in Essays and Papers by Native vs. Non-native Writers”. Discourse and Interaction 1 (2): 119-126.
Descargas
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2024 Lahodová Vališová Marie
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.
Cómo citar
Aceptado 2024-04-03
Publicado 2024-12-16
Datos de los fondos
-
Grantová Agentura České Republiky
Números de la subvención 21-12150S
