Abstract

A Pragmatic Study of Hedging in Academic Discourse

Prof. Abdulkarim Fadhil Jameel

Volume: 13 Issue: 1 2023

Abstract:

Academic writings are no longer seen as just impartial descriptions of factual knowledge; rather, they are regarded as socially produced rhetorical artefacts aimed at negotiating and influencing the reader. As a result, there is increased interest in hedging as a beneficial rhetorical instrument for achieving this communicative purpose in academic writing. Despite the abundance of studies on hedging in various academic genre types (e.g., textbooks, conference paper presentations, examiners' reports), it is likely that the research article has received the greatest attention in the literature. Second, the literature on hedging focuses primarily on how the notion is structured in various disciplines and across various rhetorical parts, with minimal or no attention given to its discourse functions, despite the fact that the underpinning inspiration for the use of hedging in the enactment of academic texts has been well expressed. Thus, the current study analyses the discourse roles of hedges in various academic texts using Hyland's (1998) Poly-pragmatic Model. It goes on to investigate the disparities in the discourse functions hedges fulfil in both professions. The study, which is both qualitative and quantitative in character, demonstrates that hedging in academic speech serves three pragmatic roles and that preference for these functions differs to some extent in both fields due to a variety of reasons.

DOI: http://doi.org/10.37648/ijrssh.v13i01.054

Back Download

References

• Altheide, D. L. (1996). Qualitative Media Analysis. Sage
• Atkinson, D. (1999). Scientific Discourse in Sociohistorical Context. The Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, 1675-1975. Mahwah. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema, 2 (1) Written Communication.
• Brown, P., Levinson, S. (1987) Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage, CUP.
• Crystal, D., Davy, D. (1975) Advanced Conversational English, Longman. Chris, C. J. & Zawacki, T.M. (2006). Engaged Writers and Dynamic
• Disciplines: Research on the Academic Writing Life. Boynton/Cook. Drury, J. (2001). Extending Usability Inspection Evaluation Techniques for Synchronous Collaborative Computing Applications. University of Massachusetts. Lowell.
• Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1990). How to Design and Evaluate Research in Education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
• Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as Social Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. University Park Press.
• Hinkel, E. (1997). Indirectness in L1 and L2 academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics 27, 361-386
• Holmes, J. (1983). Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks. Applied linguistics, 9(1), 21-44.
• House, J., Kasper, G. (1981), Politeness markers in English and German, F. Coulmas (Ed.), Conversational Routine, Mouton, The Hague.
• Hubler, A. (1983). Understatements and hedges in English. Amsterdam and John Benjamins Publishing Company.
• Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in academic writing and EAP textbooks. English for Specific Purposes, 13.
• Irvin, L. (2010). What is “academic” writing?. In: Writing Spaces: Reading and Writing (pp. 117- 128). Parlor Press.
• Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study of meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Papers from the Eighth.
• Myers, G. (1989). The Pragmatics of Politeness in Scientific Articles. Applied Linguistics 10 (1).
• Stubbs, M. (1983). A matter of prolonged fieldwork: Notes towards a modal grammar of English. Applied Linguistics, 7(l),l-25.
• Widdowson, H. (1984). Explorationsin applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.
• Salager-Meyer, F. (2011). Scientific discourse and contrastive linguistics: hedging. European Science Editing, 37(2), 35-37.
• Varttala, T. (2001). Hedging in scientifically oriented discourse. Exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience. Tampere University Press. Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control 8(3), 338-353
• Zuck, J. G., & Zuck, V. L. (1985). Hedging in newspapers. In A. M. Cornu, J
• Vanparijs, and M. Delahene (Eds.), Beads or Bracelet: How Do We Approach, LSP (pp. 172-180). Oxford University Press