Home Metadiscourse Use in L2 Student Essay Writing: A Longitudinal Cross-Contextual Comparison
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

Metadiscourse Use in L2 Student Essay Writing: A Longitudinal Cross-Contextual Comparison

  • Zhoulin Ruan

    Zhoulin Ruan is Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Department of English at Xi’an Jiaotong Liverpool University. He received his Ph.D. in applied linguistics from the University of Reading, UK. His research interests include academic writing, metacognition and self-regulated language learning, EAP/ESP in the Chinese context, discourse analysis and Systemic Functional Grammar.

    EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: January 17, 2020
Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Abstract

This paper investigates developmental patterns of metadiscourse use in Chinese students’ EAP writing in an English medium university, in comparison with English majors’ EFL writing in mainstream state universities and L1 student writing in UK universities. Taking a longitudinal and cross-contextual perspective, the study explores corpora of L1 and L2 student writing gathered from three sources: EAP essays written by Chinese undergraduate students at an English Medium Instruction (EMI) university; argumentative essays written by English majors in the Written English Corpus of Chinese Learners (WECCL); and academic essays of English L1 students from the British Academic Written English (BAWE) corpus. Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse was adopted to identify interactive and interactional devices in each corpus, and results were compared between different levels as well as across the corpora to reveal developmental features. Findings show marked differences in metadiscourse use between Chinese EMI students’ EAP essays and English major students’ EFL essays in mainstream state universities, whereas a similar pattern of use occurred in EAP essays and English L1 student academic essays. Significant changes were also found between different year levels in two L2 essay corpora. The findings suggest that metadiscourse use in L2 writing had developmental trajectories distinctive to different institutional contexts, with EAP instruction in the EMI institution having mixed effects on Chinese students’ awareness and use of metadiscourse in essay writing.


1 This work was supported by Research Development Fund of Xi’an Jiaotong-Liverpool University and Jiangsu Ministry of Education Philosophy and Social Sciences Funding Scheme.


About the author

Zhoulin Ruan

Zhoulin Ruan is Professor of Applied Linguistics at the Department of English at Xi’an Jiaotong Liverpool University. He received his Ph.D. in applied linguistics from the University of Reading, UK. His research interests include academic writing, metacognition and self-regulated language learning, EAP/ESP in the Chinese context, discourse analysis and Systemic Functional Grammar.

References

Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English Amsterdam/ Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.24Search in Google Scholar

Ädel, A. (2017). Remember that your reader cannot read your mind: Problem/solution-oriented metadiscourse in teacher feedback on student writing. English for Specific Purposes 45, 54-68.10.1016/j.esp.2016.09.002Search in Google Scholar

Aull, L. L., & Lancaster, Z. (2014). Linguistic markers of stance in early and advanced academic writing: A corpus-based comparison. Written Communication 31, 151-183.10.1177/0741088314527055Search in Google Scholar

Bruce, I. (2016). Constructing critical stance in university essays in English literature and sociology. English for Specific Purposes 42, 13-25.10.1016/j.esp.2015.10.005Search in Google Scholar

Cai, J. (2013). On college English education standards framework in Shanghai. Foreign Languages in China10(2), 4-10.Search in Google Scholar

Chiang, S. (2003). The importance of cohesive conditions to perceptions of writing quality at the early stages of foreign language learning. System 31, 471-484.10.1016/j.system.2003.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Crismore, A. (1984). The case for a rhetorical perspective on learning from texts: Exploring metadiscourse (p. 26). Indiana University. ED257035.Search in Google Scholar

Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication 10, 39-71.10.1177/0741088393010001002Search in Google Scholar

Crossley, S. A., & McNamara, D. S. (2011). Shared features of L2 writing: Intergroup homogeneity and text classification. Journal of Second Language Writing 20, 271-285.10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.007Search in Google Scholar

Hong, H. Q., & Cao, F. (2014). Interactional metadiscourse in young EFL learner writing: A corpus-based study. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 19, 201-224.10.1075/ijcl.19.2.03honSearch in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics 34, 1091-1112.10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00035-8Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 13, 133-151.10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing London: Continuum.10.1002/9781118611463.wbielsi003Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2005b). Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices. Linguistics and Education 16, 363-377.10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a gloss: Exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse. Applied Linguistics 28, 266-285.10.1093/applin/amm011Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K. (2012). Undergraduate understandings: Stance and voice in final year reports. In K. Hyland & C. Sancho Guinda (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres (pp. 134-150). New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9781137030825_9Search in Google Scholar

Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 6, 183-205.10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3Search in Google Scholar

Intaraprawat, P., & Steffensen, M. S. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing 4, 253-272.10.1016/1060-3743(95)90012-8Search in Google Scholar

Lee, J., & Deakin, L. (2016). Interactions in L1 and L2 undergraduate student writing: Interactional metadiscourse in successful and less-successful argumentative essays. Journal of Second Language Writing 33, 21-34.10.1016/j.jslw.2016.06.004Search in Google Scholar

Lee, S. H. (2015). Evaluative stances in persuasive essays by undergraduate students: Focusing on appreciation resources. Text & Talk 35, 49-76.10.1515/text-2014-0029Search in Google Scholar

Leedham, M., & Cai, G. (2013). Besides… on the other hand: Using a corpus approach to explore the influence of teaching materials on Chinese students’ use of linking adverbials. Journal of Second Language Writing 22, 374-389.10.1016/j.jslw.2013.07.002Search in Google Scholar

Li, T., & Wharton, S. (2012). Metadiscourse repertoire of L1 Mandarin undergraduates writing in English: A cross-contextual, cross-disciplinary study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 11, 345-356.10.1016/j.jeap.2012.07.004Search in Google Scholar

Nesi, H. (2011). BAWE: An introduction to a new resource. In A. Frankenberg-Garcia, L. Flowerdew, & G. Aston (Eds.), New trends in corpora and language learning (pp. 213-228). London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar

Nesi, H., & Gardner, S. (2012). Genres across the disciplines: Student writing in higher education Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009030199Search in Google Scholar

Ruan, Z., & Chen, J. (2017). Students’ perceptions and practices in L2 disciplinary writing at an English medium university in China. In H. Reinders, D. Nunan, & Z. Bin (Eds.) Innovation in language learning and teaching: The case of China (pp. 197-222). London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/978-1-137-60092-9_9Search in Google Scholar

Scott, M. (2015). Oxford WordSmith Tools (Version 6.0). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Shaw, P., & Liu, E. (1998). What develops in the development of second-language writing? Applied Linguistics 19, 225-254.10.1093/applin/19.2.225Search in Google Scholar

Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22, 58-78.10.1093/applin/22.1.58Search in Google Scholar

Wang, S., & Yao, C. (2013). Some thoughts on English for academic purposes (guanyu xueshu yingyu jiaoxue de jidian sikao). Foreign Languages in China10(4), 4-10.Search in Google Scholar

Wen, Q., Wang, L., & Liang, M. (2005). Spoken and written English corpus of Chinese learners Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.Search in Google Scholar

Wu, S. M. (2007). The use of engagement resources in high- and low-rated undergraduate geography essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6, 254-271.10.1016/j.jeap.2007.09.006Search in Google Scholar

Xu, H. (2001). Metadiscourse: A cross-cultural perspective Nanjing: Southeast University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2020-01-17
Published in Print: 2019-11-26

© 2020 FLTRP, Walter de Gruyter, Cultural and Education Section British Embassy

Downloaded on 23.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/CJAL-2019-0028/html
Scroll to top button