Metadiscourse As Promotion In Knowledge Claiming In Research Articles: A Cross-disciplinary Study

The past few decades have witnessed a growing interest in enhancing the reliability and persuasiveness of knowledge claims in research articles.It is found that academic authors generally utilize metadiscourse to establish an interaction with their intended readers.Thus,they would persuade readers to follow their research,to engage in their discussion,to recognize and accept their knowledge claims,and ultimately,to attest to their authorial identity.In this sense,the use of metadiscourse is essential in promoting the dissemination of knowledge claims in research articles.A comparative study between research articles of different disciplines would reveal more about the strategic use of metadiscouse in knowledge claiming.Therefore,this study investigates how metadiscourse is used to promote knowledge claiming in two disciplines,mechanical engineering and electrical engineering,by analyzing 60 research articles(henceforth RAs)published in internationally renowned journals.Knowledge claims in this study are identified with Dahl's knowledge claiming signals,and the analytical framework for this study is based on Hyland's elaboration of metadiscourse.Firstly,the distribution and frequency of metadiscourse in knowledge claims in RAs of the two disciplines are investigated with the help of Ant Conc.Then,the similarities and differences of the two disciplines in terms of using metadiscourse as promotion in knowledge claiming are analyzed and compared.Last,the factors attributing to the similarities and the differences are examined.Our analysis demonstrates that there are similarities and differences between the two disciplines in using metadiscourse to promote knowledge claims.The similarities are manifested in that,for both disciplines,large quantities of metadiscourse promoting knowledge claims are used in the Introduction.Hedges are commonly used and its frequency is higher than that of boosters,while less attitude markers and almost no colloquial directives are found.In terms of differences,the frequency of metadiscourse used in electrical engineering RAs is higher than that in mechanical engineering RAs,and in the use of metadiscourse,the former is not as diversified as the latter.It is discovered in this study that the distribution and frequency of various RA sections and each category of metadiscoure in the two disciplines are different.Specifically,in electrical engineering RAs,metadiscourse,most of which is the engagement marker,are mainly distributed in the Introduction,whereas in mechanical engineering RAs,metadiscourse,most of which is the hedge,is primarily used in the Abstract.When electrical engineering scholars claim the knowledge,metadiscourse are mainly employed to construct their authorship,while mechanical engineering scholars mainly use metadiscourse to indicate their attitudinal position.Mechanical engineering scholars are found more confident in presenting knowledge claims,while electrical engineering scholars are more rigorous.This study shows that metadiscourse plays a very important role in promoting knowledge claims.Due to the disciplinary variations and the influence of commodification in academic discourse,RAs of the two disciplines are different in the use of metadiscourse to promote knowledge claims.It is hoped that this study would contribute to the establishment of the awareness of Chinese scholars in utilizing metadiscourse to promote their knowledge claims so as to improve the persuasiveness and acceptability of their research.At the same time,it is hoped that this research can also play an enlightening role in the teaching of academic English writing.