Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates

Interactive and interactional metadiscourse are linguistic features used to maintain the coherence in essays. It involved a one-way interaction between the writer and reader, thus a challenge for Second Language (L2) learners to write effectively and comprehensively. A study is done on how the L2 le...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Asian Journal of University Education
Main Author: Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: UiTM Press 2020
Online Access:https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85108900715&doi=10.24191%2fajue.v16i4.11946&partnerID=40&md5=00b5fbdf0c9573f96d06ed2004c16d85
id 2-s2.0-85108900715
spelling 2-s2.0-85108900715
Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
2020
Asian Journal of University Education
16
4
10.24191/ajue.v16i4.11946
https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85108900715&doi=10.24191%2fajue.v16i4.11946&partnerID=40&md5=00b5fbdf0c9573f96d06ed2004c16d85
Interactive and interactional metadiscourse are linguistic features used to maintain the coherence in essays. It involved a one-way interaction between the writer and reader, thus a challenge for Second Language (L2) learners to write effectively and comprehensively. A study is done on how the L2 learners produced the metadiscourse features and the usage is compared. A corpus of 200 evaluative essays by UiTM undergraduate students from computer science and business administration courses is analysed based on Hyland’s (2005) framework. The purpose is to find out the amount and types of metadiscourse used and whether students from different course groups make any differences in their choices. The analysis revealed that students in both courses produced more interactive than interactional metadiscourse. The most prominent feature is Self-mention and the least is Attitude Markers. The same prominent feature for both courses is Transition Markers. The business administration course shows the least feature in Evidentials, whereas Frame Markers in computer science. These are evidence as to the importance of metadiscourse in students’ academic writings and awareness is shown in its usage. This could lead to a proposition for a metadiscourse writing comparison between secondary schools and universities to gain fascinating outcomes. © 2020. All Rights Reserved.
UiTM Press
18237797
English
Article
All Open Access; Gold Open Access
author Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
spellingShingle Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
author_facet Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
author_sort Zali M.M.; Mohamad R.; Setia R.; Baniamin R.M.R.; Razlan R.M.
title Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
title_short Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
title_full Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
title_fullStr Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
title_full_unstemmed Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
title_sort Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates
publishDate 2020
container_title Asian Journal of University Education
container_volume 16
container_issue 4
doi_str_mv 10.24191/ajue.v16i4.11946
url https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-85108900715&doi=10.24191%2fajue.v16i4.11946&partnerID=40&md5=00b5fbdf0c9573f96d06ed2004c16d85
description Interactive and interactional metadiscourse are linguistic features used to maintain the coherence in essays. It involved a one-way interaction between the writer and reader, thus a challenge for Second Language (L2) learners to write effectively and comprehensively. A study is done on how the L2 learners produced the metadiscourse features and the usage is compared. A corpus of 200 evaluative essays by UiTM undergraduate students from computer science and business administration courses is analysed based on Hyland’s (2005) framework. The purpose is to find out the amount and types of metadiscourse used and whether students from different course groups make any differences in their choices. The analysis revealed that students in both courses produced more interactive than interactional metadiscourse. The most prominent feature is Self-mention and the least is Attitude Markers. The same prominent feature for both courses is Transition Markers. The business administration course shows the least feature in Evidentials, whereas Frame Markers in computer science. These are evidence as to the importance of metadiscourse in students’ academic writings and awareness is shown in its usage. This could lead to a proposition for a metadiscourse writing comparison between secondary schools and universities to gain fascinating outcomes. © 2020. All Rights Reserved.
publisher UiTM Press
issn 18237797
language English
format Article
accesstype All Open Access; Gold Open Access
record_format scopus
collection Scopus
_version_ 1809677895386267648