Hedges and boosters in L2 (Czech) Master's theses and published research articles: A contrastive analysis

IF 1.5 3区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Olga Dontcheva‐Navratilova
{"title":"Hedges and boosters in L2 (Czech) Master's theses and published research articles: A contrastive analysis","authors":"Olga Dontcheva‐Navratilova","doi":"10.1111/ijal.12602","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article studies the use of lexical hedges and boosters in English‐medium Master's theses by L2 (Czech) graduates in English language and literature programmes. Drawing on the metadiscourse framework and adopting a corpus‐based approach, the study analyses the frequency, realisations, and function of hedges and boosters in a corpus of 48 Master's theses in linguistics, literature, and education. The results are also compared to a reference corpus representing L1 English published academic discourse in the same disciplines. The analysis shows that the Master's theses of Czech students use fewer hedges and slightly more boosters than L1 expert writers and thus display a somewhat less cautious stance. The results also indicate that Czech graduates show a strong preference for content‐oriented hedges and emphatics as boosters. This suggests that the rhetorical choices of Czech graduates bear features of learner discourse and may be affected by the merging of L1 and L2 academic conventions and the power relations between the student‐writer and the examiners inherent to the Master's thesis. Based on these findings, the article draws some implications for L2 writing pedagogy.","PeriodicalId":46851,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ijal.12602","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article studies the use of lexical hedges and boosters in English‐medium Master's theses by L2 (Czech) graduates in English language and literature programmes. Drawing on the metadiscourse framework and adopting a corpus‐based approach, the study analyses the frequency, realisations, and function of hedges and boosters in a corpus of 48 Master's theses in linguistics, literature, and education. The results are also compared to a reference corpus representing L1 English published academic discourse in the same disciplines. The analysis shows that the Master's theses of Czech students use fewer hedges and slightly more boosters than L1 expert writers and thus display a somewhat less cautious stance. The results also indicate that Czech graduates show a strong preference for content‐oriented hedges and emphatics as boosters. This suggests that the rhetorical choices of Czech graduates bear features of learner discourse and may be affected by the merging of L1 and L2 academic conventions and the power relations between the student‐writer and the examiners inherent to the Master's thesis. Based on these findings, the article draws some implications for L2 writing pedagogy.
第二语言(捷克语)硕士论文和已发表研究文章中的 "篱笆 "和 "助推器":对比分析
本文研究了英语语言文学专业的第二语言(捷克语)毕业生在以英语为媒介的硕士论文中使用词汇对冲和助推词的情况。该研究以元话语框架为基础,采用基于语料库的方法,分析了 48 篇语言学、文学和教育学硕士论文语料库中对冲和助推词的使用频率、实现方式和功能。研究结果还与一个参考语料库进行了比较,该语料库代表了同一学科的 L1 英语学术论文。分析结果表明,与母语为英语的专家作者相比,捷克学生的硕士论文中使用的对冲词较少,助推词略多,因此表现出的谨慎态度较少。分析结果还表明,捷克毕业生更倾向于使用以内容为导向的对冲修辞和作为助推器的实证修辞。这表明,捷克语毕业生的修辞选择具有学习者话语的特征,并可能受到 L1 和 L2 学术习惯的融合以及硕士论文固有的学生写作者与考官之间的权力关系的影响。基于这些发现,文章得出了对 L2 写作教学法的一些启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Applied Linguistics (InJAL) publishes articles that explore the relationship between expertise in linguistics, broadly defined, and the everyday experience of language. Its scope is international in that it welcomes articles which show explicitly how local issues of language use or learning exemplify more global concerns.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信