A Contrastive Study of Boosters in a Corpus of Academic Spoken English
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-3640.2023.1.45028Keywords:
academic division, academic roles, boosters, levels of interactivity , genderAbstract
The present study intended to investigate the use of boosters in the Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English (MICASE). It examined whether native and non-native speakers of English differed from each other in boosters’ use based on Hyland (2005) across academic divisions, levels of interactivity, genders, and academic roles in academic spoken English. The results of the UNIANOVA inferential test revealed that not only did native speakers of English utilize boosters more frequently than non-native ones across the four variables, but they also employed boosters in a way that was specific to academic divisions, levels of interactivity, genders, and academic roles. Besides the influence of culture and proficiency on boosters’ use, this corpus analysis study found that native English speakers put their statements under focus so that they sound convincing to the audience in soft sciences more than the hard ones. It also indicated native speakers’ greater attempt to convince their audience of the truth in their propositions, show new pieces of information as true, and back their own manipulative or persuasive purposes in highly interactive speeches more than the other levels of interactivity. Furthermore, it was shown that female native speakers exceeded to express opinions, state a suggestion with confidence in their knowledge of the topic, and minimize the possibility of accepting other options in academic spoken English of the MICASE. Ultimately, it illustrated that native academic speakers of English of faculty role rated higher to strengthen their existence, position, argument, claims, and commitment to their speech.
Downloads
References
Abdullah, S. S. (2022). A Pragmatic Analysis of Metadiscoursal Markers (Hedges and Boosters) in Linguistics and Biology MA Theses: A Linguascientific Corpus-based Study. International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education, 14(1), 1173-1185. http://dx.doi.org/10.9756/intjecse/v14i1.221134 DOI: https://doi.org/10.9756/INT-JECSE/V14I1.221134
Cazares-Cervantes, A., LaGue, A., & Dykeman, C. (2019). Authorial Stance in Counseling Research Articles. http://dx.doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8q539 DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/8q539
Dixon, J. A., & Foster, D. H. (1997). Gender and Hedging: From Sex Differences to Situated Practice. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26(1): 89-107. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025064205478 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025064205478
Donadio, P., & Passariello, M. (2022). Hedges and boosters in English and Italian medical research articles: A cross- -cultural comparison. International Journal of Language Studies, 16(1), 1-20. http://www.ijls.net/pages/volume/vol16no1.html
Dutra, D. P., & Gomide, A. R. (2016). Compilation of a University Learner Corpus. BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 6, 21-33. https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-3640.2015.s.21311 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15448/2178-3640.2015.s.21311
Farnia, M., & Gerami, S. (2021). Comparative Study of Interactional Metadiscourse Markers in the Discussion Section of Soft and Hard Science Research Articles: Hedges and Boosters in Focus. Jordan Journal of Modern Languages and Literatures, 13(2), 263-280. https://journals.yu.edu.jo/jjmll/Issues/vol13no22021/Nom5.pdf DOI: https://doi.org/10.47012/jjmll.13.2.5
Hryniuk, K. (2018). Expert-like use of hedges and boosters in research articles written by Polish and English native- -speaker writers. Research in Language, 16(3), 263-280. https://doi.org/10.2478/rela-2018-0013 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rela-2018-0013
Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English-and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11), 2795-2809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007
Hyland, K. (1998a). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text & Talk, 18(3), 349-382. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349
Hyland, K. (1998b). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 437-455. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00009-5
Hyland, K. (2004a). Disciplinary discourses, Michigan classics ed.: Social interactions in academic writing. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6719 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.6719
Hyland, K. (2004b). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 133-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Continuum.
Khabbazi Oskouei, L. (2011). Interactional variation in English and Persian: A comparative analysis of metadiscourse Features in magazine editorials [Doctoral dissertation, University of East Anglia]. https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/35688/1/2011Khabbazi-OskoueiLPhD.pdf
Meyerhoff, M. 1992. “A sort of something — hedging strategies on nouns.” Working Papers on Language. Gender, and Sexism 2(1), 59-73. https://www.academia.edu/45682739/A_sort_of_something_Hedging_strategies_on_nouns
Mokhtar, M. M., Hashim, H., Khalid, P. Z. M., Albakri, I. S. M. A., & Jobar, N. A. (2021). A Comparative Study of Boosters between Genders in the Introduction Section. Arab World English Journal, 12(1), 515-526. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3826866 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol12no1.33
Mu, C., Zhang, L. J., Ehrich, J., & Hong, H. (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
Sepehri, M., Hajijalili, M., & Namaziandost, E. (2019). Hedges and boosters in medical and engineering research articles: A comparative corpus-based study. Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 9(4), 203-213. http://dx.doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v9i4.4342
Silva, R. S. (2012). Fairy tales and moral values: a corpus- -based approach. BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 3(1), 133-145. https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/belt/article/view/10326
Simpson, R., Lee, D., & Leicher, C. (2002). The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English. Quod. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/micase
Skorczynska, H., & Carrió-Pastor, M. L. (2021). A cross- -disciplinary study of verb boosters in research articles from Engineering, Medicine and Linguistics: Frequency and co-text variations. Revista Signos, 54(106), 575-599. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342021000200575 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342021000200575
Söğüt, S., & Keçik, İ. (2020). A corpus-based analysis of stance adverbials as hedges and boosters in English argumentative essays of American university students and Turkish non-native university students. Konin Language Studies, 8 (1), 11-30. https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=989627
Ulrich, C., & Barreto, S. (2012). A corpus-based study of anaphora related to indefinite pronouns. BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal, 3(1), 59-61. https://revistaseletronicas.pucrs.br/ojs/index.php/belt/article/view/10332
Vázquez Orta, I., & Giner, D. (2009). Writing with conviction: The use of boosters in modelling persuasion in academic discourses. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 22, 219-237. http://dx.doi.org/10.14198/raei.2009.22.14 DOI: https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.2009.22.14
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Copyright
The submission of originals to BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal implies the transfer by the authors of the right for publication. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication. If the authors wish to include the same data into another publication, they must cite BELT - Brazilian English Language Teaching Journal as the site of original publication.
Creative Commons License
Except where otherwise specified, material published in this journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license, which allows unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is correctly cited.