A Comparative Study On The Features Of Interactive Metadiscourse Used By Chinese And Native Students In Master’s Theses Introductions Of English Linguistics

Metadiscourse can help writers organize and construct their discourse in a coherent way.A large number of researchers have explored the use of metadiscourse in students’ writing.However,there are few researches focusing on the features of interactive metadiscourse in the masters’ theses of English linguistics.The present study is intended to explore the similarities and differences of interactive metadiscourse between Chinese and English native students in master’s theses introductions of English linguistics.Three research questions are as follows:1)What are the similarities and differences in the general frequency of interactive metadiscourse used by Chinese and native students in master’s theses introductions of English linguistics?2)What are the similarities and differences in the distribution of interactive metadiscourse in different moves used by Chinese and native students in master’s theses introductions of English linguistics?3)What are the similarities and differences in the function and form of interactive metadiscourse used by Chinese and native students in master’s theses introductions of English linguistics?Two corpora are built:Chinese-based Corpus and Native-based Corpus.Based on Hyland’s(2005)interpersonal model of metadiscourse and Swales’(1990)CARS model,interactive metadiscourse and moves in the two corpora are annotated by UAM Corpus Tool.Chi-square test with p value is used in data analysis to find out the similarities and differences in the use of interactive metadiscourse between the two corpora.The research results indicate that there exist similarities and differences in the use of interactive metadiscourse between Chinese students and English native students.First,with regard to the general frequency of interactive metadiscourse,the results show that the frequency trend of interactive metadiscourse in CC is similar with that in NC.Both Chinese students and English native students use Transitions and Evidentials more frequently while the other three subcategories,namely,Frame markers,Endophoric markers and are used relatively less.However,there are also some differences between the two corpora.Chinese students use more interactive metadiscourse than English native students and they may overuse interactive metadiscourse,especially Transitions,Frame markers and Endophoric markers.Second,with regard to the distribution of interactive metadiscourse in different moves,the results show that interactive metadiscourse in move 1 in CC and NC is used in the same way.The difference is that Chinese students overuse Frame markers but underuse Endophoric markers in move 1.For move 2,in CC and NC,Transitions rank first,followed by Evidentials,Code glosses,Frame markers and Endophoric markers.The difference is that Chinese students overuse Transitions while underuse Evidentials and Code glosses in move 2.For move 3,in CC and NC,Transitions rank first,followed by Frame markers,Endophoric markers,Code glosses and Evidentials.Transitions,Frame markers and Endophoric markers in each corpus are used more frequently,however,overused by Chinese students.Finally,there exist similarities and differences in the function and form of interactive metadiscourse between the two corpora.First,in terms of function of interactive metadiscourse,the similarities and differences are:1)Addition ranks first in both CC and NC.Addition is used the most frequently and Comparison is used the least frequently by Chinese students but Addition,Comparison and Consequence are used evenly by English native students.2)In CC and NC,sequencing parts of a text ranks first,but the items numeral,then,firstly and secondly are used more frequently in CC.3)Endophoric markers are used to inform readers of the source of information and there is no difference between the two corpora.4)Evidentials are used to cite other researchers’ viewpoints and there is no difference between the two corpora.5)Reformulators and Exemplifiers are distributed equally in each corpus,but Reformulators are used more frequently in NC.Second,with regard to the form of interactive metadiscourse,the similarities and differences are:1)For Transitions,the items and,also and addition are used in both CC and NC,but some simple items like and and also are overused by Chinese students.2)For Frame markers,the frequently used items include numeral and then,but items marking the order of a text are overused in CC.3)For Endophoric markers,many items are frequently used in both CC and NC and overused by Chinese students.4)For Evidentials,the form(name,year)is used more frequently than other forms.English native students use more sb.+verb(that)than Chinese students.5)For Code glosses,frequently used items are such as,e.g.,and for example,among which for example is underused by Chinese students.Based on the above findings,the study has some implications for teaching and learning English writing,especially academic writing.Firstly,there is a need to teach interactive metadiscourse in English writing class in a systematic way.Secondly,ESL learners should read more academic papers written by English native students to improve their ability to write English academic papers,and pay more attention to how to use correct and regularized interactive medadiscourse.