{"title":"Interactional Metadiscourse in the Classroom: A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Native and Non-Native EAP Teachers","authors":"Xinxin Wu","doi":"10.1111/ijal.70054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Although interactional metadiscourse is recognized as a key feature of effective English for academic purposes (EAP) pedagogy, its use varies significantly across teachers’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This corpus-based study employs mixed quantitative and qualitative methods to address the scarcity of direct cross-cultural comparisons by analyzing 16 EAP writing classes, contrasting native English-speaking teachers (NESTs) in the United Kingdom with non-native English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) in China. Findings reveal that while both groups employ metadiscourse for pedagogical scaffolding, their strategies diverge notably. NESTs favor hedges and diverse tag questions, fostering dialogic environments that scaffold student autonomy and co-construct knowledge. NNESTs rely more heavily on boosters and restricted directives, creating monologic environments emphasizing authoritative knowledge transmission. Interpreted through sociocultural theory, these patterns represent distinct approaches to managing the Zone of Proximal Development, demonstrating how cultural constructs such as power distance and politeness manifest in classroom discourse. The study advances theory in sociocultural learning and cross-cultural pragmatics while offering important implications for EAP teacher education, advocating for critical reflection on how metadiscursive choices shape pedagogical environments.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":46851,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Applied Linguistics","volume":"36 3","pages":"2049-2061"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-20","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://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijal.70054","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/11/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Although interactional metadiscourse is recognized as a key feature of effective English for academic purposes (EAP) pedagogy, its use varies significantly across teachers’ linguistic and cultural backgrounds. This corpus-based study employs mixed quantitative and qualitative methods to address the scarcity of direct cross-cultural comparisons by analyzing 16 EAP writing classes, contrasting native English-speaking teachers (NESTs) in the United Kingdom with non-native English-speaking teachers (NNESTs) in China. Findings reveal that while both groups employ metadiscourse for pedagogical scaffolding, their strategies diverge notably. NESTs favor hedges and diverse tag questions, fostering dialogic environments that scaffold student autonomy and co-construct knowledge. NNESTs rely more heavily on boosters and restricted directives, creating monologic environments emphasizing authoritative knowledge transmission. Interpreted through sociocultural theory, these patterns represent distinct approaches to managing the Zone of Proximal Development, demonstrating how cultural constructs such as power distance and politeness manifest in classroom discourse. The study advances theory in sociocultural learning and cross-cultural pragmatics while offering important implications for EAP teacher education, advocating for critical reflection on how metadiscursive choices shape pedagogical environments.
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.