Rhetorical distinctions: Comparing metadiscourse in essays by ChatGPT and students

IF 3.2 1区文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS

English for Specific Purposes Pub Date : 2025-03-28 DOI:10.1016/j.esp.2025.03.001

Feng (Kevin) Jiang , Ken Hyland

{"title":"Rhetorical distinctions: Comparing metadiscourse in essays by ChatGPT and students","authors":"Feng (Kevin) Jiang , Ken Hyland","doi":"10.1016/j.esp.2025.03.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study investigates the use of metadiscourse in argumentative essays generated by ChatGPT compared to those written by British university students. Using Hyland's (2005) framework, we analysed interactive and interactional metadiscourse to uncover rhetorical and linguistic distinctions. The findings reveal that ChatGPT essays, though structurally coherent and logically organised, exhibit a significantly lower frequency of interactional metadiscourse, such as hedges, boosters, and attitude markers, leading to a more impersonal and expository tone. Conversely, student essays demonstrate higher rhetorical engagement, employing nuanced stance markers and personalised expressions to foster reader interaction. ChatGPT prioritises clarity and structural coherence through transitions and endophoric markers, reflecting its algorithmic nature and training. The variability in student writing highlights the influence of individual style and instructional practices. These differences underscore the complementary roles of AI and human authorship in academic writing, with implications for pedagogy. This research advances our understanding of the rhetorical strategies employed by large language models and their potential in academic contexts.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47809,"journal":{"name":"English for Specific Purposes","volume":"79 ","pages":"Pages 17-29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"English for Specific Purposes","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0889490625000134","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study investigates the use of metadiscourse in argumentative essays generated by ChatGPT compared to those written by British university students. Using Hyland's (2005) framework, we analysed interactive and interactional metadiscourse to uncover rhetorical and linguistic distinctions. The findings reveal that ChatGPT essays, though structurally coherent and logically organised, exhibit a significantly lower frequency of interactional metadiscourse, such as hedges, boosters, and attitude markers, leading to a more impersonal and expository tone. Conversely, student essays demonstrate higher rhetorical engagement, employing nuanced stance markers and personalised expressions to foster reader interaction. ChatGPT prioritises clarity and structural coherence through transitions and endophoric markers, reflecting its algorithmic nature and training. The variability in student writing highlights the influence of individual style and instructional practices. These differences underscore the complementary roles of AI and human authorship in academic writing, with implications for pedagogy. This research advances our understanding of the rhetorical strategies employed by large language models and their potential in academic contexts.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

English for Specific Purposes LINGUISTICS-

CiteScore

5.70

自引率

8.00%

发文量

审稿时长

62 days

期刊介绍： English For Specific Purposes is an international peer-reviewed journal that welcomes submissions from across the world. Authors are encouraged to submit articles and research/discussion notes on topics relevant to the teaching and learning of discourse for specific communities: academic, occupational, or otherwise specialized. Topics such as the following may be treated from the perspective of English for specific purposes: second language acquisition in specialized contexts, needs assessment, curriculum development and evaluation, materials preparation, discourse analysis, descriptions of specialized varieties of English.