A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF METADISCOURSE MARKERS IMPLEMENTATION IN WRITTEN COMMUNICATION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v7si3.1455Keywords:
systematic literature review, metadiscourse, interactive metadiscourse, markersAbstract
The main objective of conducting this systematic review is to study the usage of metadiscourse markers in expository writing among ESL and EFL novice writers by reviewing pertinent aspects such as the types of metadiscourse markers used, the effect of language proficiency on metadiscourse usage and the types of language errors committed from the perspective of metadiscourse studies. To achieve the objective, the literature published in four different databases was reviewed. After applying a series of selection criteria, 26 empirical articles were selected including a total of 1696 novice writers in English writing with ages ranging from 15 to 59 years and the analysis of 17,777 essays. These students were evaluated with two categories of metadiscourse markers namely interactive and interactional as well as taking their language proficiency and language errors committed into consideration. The findings from this review show that (1) there are 86% (19 out of 22 articles) metadiscourse studies conducted on interactional markers as compared to interactive markers; (2) 43% (6 out of 14 articles) metadiscourse studies done on high proficiency students as compared to low and average proficiency students, and (3) 66% of the language errors commonly associated with undergraduate students are the misuse of metadicourse markers (6 out of 9 articles). This systematic review would benefit future researchers in determining the research direction based on the gaps discovered from the previous study and language educators in catering their learners with different proficiencies of the proper use of metadiscourse markers. Additionally, this systematic review would give priority to aspects of metadiscourse that have received less attention, such as interactive metadiscourse markers, the use of metadiscourse markers by learners who are less proficient, and the necessity of a framework that focuses on the mistakes made when using metadiscourse markers rather than language in general.
References
[1] Abdelrahim, A., Abdelrahim, M. (2019): Teaching and assessing metadiscoursal features in argumentative writing: A professional development training for EFL teachers. – International Journal of Applied Linguistics 30(1): 70-91.
[2] Ahmadi, P., Gholami, J., Abdi, R., Mohammadnia, Z. (2021): Metadiscourse markers in the abstract section of applied linguistics research articles: Celebrity vs. non-celebrity authors. – International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research 9(37): 159-176.
[3] Ahmed, A.M., Zhang, X. (2023): Students' voice in L2 English writing: A systematic review of literature. – Ampersand 10: 1-11.
[4] Ahmed, A.M., Zhang, X., Rezk, L.M., Pearson, W.S. (2023): Transition markers in Qatari university students' argumentative writing: A cross-linguistic analysis of L1 Arabic and L2 English. – Ampersand 10: 1-11.
[5] AlJazrawi, D., AlJazrawi, Z., Mahmood, I.I. (2021): Act together to end COVID-19: Interactional metadiscourse in the WHO's speeches during the COVID-19 pandemic. – International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis 4(11): 1655-1663.
[6] Almashour, M., Davies, A. (2023): Exploring learning strategies used by Jordanian university EFL learners in argumentative writing tasks: The role of gender and proficiency. – Frontiers in Education 8: 1-13.
[7] Alotaibi, H.S. (2018): Metadiscourse in dissertation acknowledgments: Exploration of gender differences in EFL texts. – Educational Sciences: Theory and Practice 18(4): 899-916.
[8] Alrashidi, R.S. (2022): The effects of data-driven learning on intermediate language learners' use of metadiscourse markers in argumentative essay writing: A quasi-experimental study. – University of Liverpool 423p.
[9] Ashofteh, Z., Shirvan, M., Golparvar, S. (2020): The move structure of abstracts in applied linguistics research articles in light of the distribution and functions of metadiscourse markers. – Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies 16(4): 2077-2096.
[10] Bax, S., Nakatsuhara, F., Waller, D. (2019): Researching L2 writers' use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and advanced levels. – System 83: 79-95.
[11] Brimo, D., Nallamala, K., Werfel, K.L. (2023): Writing errors of children with developmental language disorder. – Topics in Language Disorders 43(4): 302-316.
[12] Carrió-Pastor, M.L. (2021): The assessment of metadiscourse devices in English as a foreign language. – Assessing Writing 50: 12p.
[13] Chung, E., Crosthwaite, P.R., Lee, C. (2023): The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: Insights from a corpus-based study. – International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 32p.
[14] Cuevas-Alonso, M., Miguez-Alvarez, C. (2021): Metadiscursive markers and text genre: A metareview. – Publications 9(4): 1-20.
[15] El-Dakhs, D.A.S. (2020): Variation of metadiscourse in L2 writing: Focus on language proficiency and learning context. – Ampersand 7: 1-8.
[16] Erarslan, A. (2021): Correlation between metadiscourse, lexical complexity, readability and writing performance in EFL university students' research-based essays. – Shanlax International Journal of Education 9(S1-May): 238-254.
[17] Fairooz, R.A. (2023): Using macro-level metadiscourse coherence devices in written texts: A product perspective. – International Journal of Linguistics and Translation Studies 4(3): 30-48.
[18] Farahani, M.V. (2020): Metadiscourse in academic written and spoken English: A comparative corpus-based inquiry. – Research in Language 18(3): 319-341.
[19] Farahani, M.V., Sbetifard, M. (2017): Metadiscourse features in English news writing among English native and Iranian writers: A comparative corpus-based inquiry. – Theory and Practice in Language Studies 7(12): 1249-1260.
[20] Fareed, M., Ashraf, A., Bilal, M. (2016): ESL learners' writing skills: Problems, factors and suggestions. – Journal of Education and Social Sciences 4(2): 83-94.
[21] Fisal, F.A.M., Said, N.E.M. (2023): ESL pre-university learners' needs analysis for web-based English academic vocabulary learning resource. – International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research 22(4): 195-216.
[22] Graham, S., Collins, A.A., Ciullo, S. (2023): Special and general education teachers' beliefs about writing and writing instruction. – Journal of Learning Disabilities 56(3): 163-179.
[23] Hall-Mills, S., Wood, C. (2023): Complex syntax production in informational writing by students with language impairment from diverse linguistic backgrounds. – Topics in Language Disorders 43(4): 333-348.
[24] Hayatolain, S., Ganji, M. (2023): Investigating the instruction and usage frequency of transition markers in grammar textbooks: Focusing on English for academic purposes books. – Iranian Journal of English for Academic Purposes 12(1): 84-105.
[25] Ho, V., Li, C. (2018): The use of metadiscourse and persuasion: An analysis of first year university students' timed argumentative essays. – Journal of English for Academic Purposes 33: 53-68.
[26] Hooi, C., Tan, H., Lee, G., Danarajan, S. (2020): Texts with metadiscourse features are more engaging: A fact or a myth? – 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies 26(4): 58-73.
[27] Hu, Y., Saleem, A. (2023): Insight from the association between critical thinking and English argumentative writing: Catering to English learners' writing ability. – PeerJ 11: 25p.
[28] Huong, L.T.P., Phung, D. (2023): Engagement in collaborative writing: Exploring learners' control of task content and text quality. – International Journal of Applied Linguistics 33: 242-259.
[29] Hussein, K., Khalil, J., Abbas, N. (2019): Metadiscourse markers in master thesis abstracts of American and Iraqi English theses. – Arab World English Journal 9(4): 347-360.
[30] Hyland, K. (2017): Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going? – Journal of Pragmatics 113: 16-29.
[31] Hyland, K., Tse, P. (2004): Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. – Applied Linguistics 25(2): 156-177.
[32] Kapranov, O. (2020): Self-mention in argumentative essays written by pre-service teachers of English. – Beyond Philology 17(2): 97-128.
[33] Kostareva, E., Utkina, T. (2022): Metadiscourse use in argumentative essays written by Russian students at different levels of ESAP study of economics. – Brno Studies in English 48(1): 71-92.
[34] Kurniasih, K., Sholihah, F., Umamah, A., Hidayanti, I. (2020): Writing process approach and its effect on students' writing anxiety and performance. – Jurnal Arbitrer 7(2): 144-150.
[35] Lateh, N.H.M., Shamsudin, S., Raof, A.H.A., Mohamed, A.F., Mahmud, N., Mohd Nasir, N.S., Hanapi, N.F. (2021): Learners' collocation use in writing: Do proficiency levels matter? – Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics 11(2): 418-426.
[36] Lindström, E., Lubinska, D. (2022): Target-like and non-target-like conjunctive relations in L2 Swedish beginner writing. – Linguistics and Education 71: 11p.
[37] Lombardi, A. (2022): Moral outrage or mere possibility? An exploration of epistemic versus deontic stance in reading-to-write argumentation. – Journal of Second Language Writing 58: 13p.
[38] Madzlan, N.A., Seng, G.H., Kesevan, H. (2020): Use of video blogs in alleviating public speaking anxiety among ESL learners. – Journal of Education and E-Learning Research 7(1): 93-99.
[39] Maniam, M., Singh, J.K.S., Singh, C.K.S., Jeyaraja, S.S.B. (2023): The effects of 36663 layout and gender differences in writing narrative essay among Junior 3 ESL learners. – International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences 13(1): 766-781.
[40] Mat Zali, M., Mohamad, R., Setia, R., Baniamin, R., Razlan, R. (2021): Comparisons of interactive and interactional metadiscourse among undergraduates. – Asian Journal of University Education 16(4): 21-30.
[41] Mat Zali, M., Razlan, R., Baniamin, R., Setia, R. (2022a): Interactional metadiscourse analysis of ESL learners' essays. – Environment-Behaviour Proceedings Journal 7(SI9): 55-60.
[42] Mat Zali, M., Razlan, R., Baniamin, R. (2022b): Essays by ESL learners: Interactional metadiscourse (MD) analysis. – Journal of Asian Behavioural Studies 7(23): 47-60.
[43] McCarthy, P.M., Kaddoura, N.W., Ahmed, K., Buck, R.H., Thomas, A.M., Al-Harthy, A., Duran, N.D. (2021): Metadiscourse and counterargument integration in student argumentative papers. – English Language Teaching 14(6): 96-113.
[44] Mhilli, O. (2023): Authorial voice in writing: A literature review. – Social Sciences and Humanities Open 8: 1-11.
[45] Mohamed, A., Rashid, R., Lateh, N. (2021): The use of metadiscourse markers in Malaysian undergraduate persuasive essay corpus at Universiti Malaysia Kelantan. – Kresna Social Science and Humanities Research 1: 3p.
[46] Myhill, D., Ahmed, A., Abdollazadeh, E. (2022): Going meta: Bringing together an understanding of metadiscourse with students' metalinguistic understanding. – Language Teaching 56(1): 146-148.
[47] Nation, I.S.P., Beglar, D. (2007): A vocabulary size test. – The Language Teacher 31: 9-13.
[48] Ndoricimpa, C. (2019): Scaffolding ESL tertiary students' challenges with essay genre: A systemic functional linguistics perspective. – International Journal of Research in English Education 4(4): 55-69.
[49] Ngai, C.S.B., Singh, R.G. (2020): Relationship between persuasive metadiscoursal devices in research article abstracts and their attention on social media. – PLOS ONE 15(4): 25p.
[50] Pandey, G. (2020): Metadiscourse use in thesis abstracts: A case of M.Ed. English majors. – Nepal Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 3(2): 1-17.
[51] Paneerselvam, A., Mohamad, M. (2019): Learners' challenges and English educators' approaches in teaching speaking skills in an ESL classroom: A literature review. – Creative Education 10(13): 3299-3305.
[52] Park, S., Oh, S.Y. (2018): Korean EFL learners' metadiscourse use as an index of L2 writing proficiency. – The SNU Journal of Education Research 27(2): 65-69.
[53] Pasaribu, A.N., Pasaribu, T.K., Sinambela, E., Manullang, V.R. (2022): Interactive metadiscourse markers in Indonesian EFL students' academic writing. – English Review: Journal of English Education 10(3): 883-890.
[54] Pavlović, T.V., Đorđević, D. (2020): The use of metadiscourse markers in essays written by ESP university students. – Annual Review of the Faculty of Philosophy, Novi Sad 45(5): 233-249.
[55] Pearson, W.S., Abdollahzadeh, E. (2023): Metadiscourse in academic writing: A systematic review. – Lingua 293: 1-32.
[56] Pyykönen, M. (2023): Epistemic stance in written L2 English: The role of task type, L2 proficiency, and authorial style. – Applied Corpus Linguistics 3: 10p.
[57] Qin, W., Uccelli, P. (2019): Metadiscourse: Variation across communicative contexts. – Journal of Pragmatics 139: 18p.
[58] Qiu, X., Wang, Y.A., Dartey, E.A., Kim, M. (2024): Interactional metadiscourse in expert and student disciplinary writing: Exploring intrageneric and functional variation. – English for Specific Purposes 73: 124-140.
[59] Ruonan, L., Al-Shaibani, G. (2022): An investigation into the use of metadiscourse in undergraduates' abstracts in social sciences. – Topics in Linguistics 23(2): 36-49.
[60] Serfaty, J., Serrano, R. (2022): Lag effects in grammar learning: A desirable difficulties perspective. – Applied Psycholinguistics 43(3): 513-550.
[61] Siu, W.Y.B., Afzaal, M., Aldayel, H.S. (2024): A corpus-based comparison of linguistic markers of stance and genre in the academic writing of novice and advanced engineering learners. – Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 11(284): 1-10.
[62] Spinelli, F. (2024): Examining learning opportunities and perceptions of Latin American ESL learners in varying proficiency-level groups. – International Journal of Applied Linguistics 21p.
[63] Thomson, J.J. (2021): Metadiscourse in upper secondary English essays: Exploring genres in L1 and L2 educational contexts. – University of Stavanger 348p.
[64] Trane, F.E., Willcutt, E.G. (2023): Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and academic functioning: Reading, writing, and math abilities in a community sample of youth with and without ADHD. – Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology 51: 583-596.
[65] Uchihara, T., Webb, S., Saito, K., Trofimovich, P. (2023): Frequency of exposure influences accentedness and comprehensibility in learners' pronunciation of second language words. – Language Learning 73(1): 84-125.
[66] Veerappan, V., Yong, C., Wong, S. (2022): Metadiscourse features in undergraduate electrical engineering laboratory reports. – Proceedings of the International Conference on Communication, Language, Education and Social Sciences (CLESS 2022) 13p.
[67] Veličković, M., Danilović-Jeremić, J. (2020): Stance markers: An underdeveloped aspect of Serbian EFL writers' competence. – Scientific Conference Science and Teaching in Educational Context, Faculty of Pedagogy in Užice 17p.
[68] Vermeiren, H., Brysbaert, M. (2024): How useful are native language tests for research with advanced second language users? – Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 27(1): 204-213.
[69] Yoon, H.J. (2020): Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: Effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse. – Reading and Writing 34: 705-725.
[70] Yoon, S.Y., Kim, N.Y. (2022): The use of metadiscourse markers in mobile-assisted flipped learning in L2 writing. – The Journal of Asia TEFL 19(1): 180-196.
[71] Yuksel, H.G., Kavanoz, S. (2018): Dimension of experience: Metadiscourse in the texts of novice non-native, novice native, and expert native speaker. – Advances in Language and Literary Studies 9(3): 104-112.
[72] Yusob, K.F., Nikman, K. (2023): A linguistic analysis of farewell emails by Malaysian workers. – ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities 7(2): 56-70.
[73] Zakaria, M.K., Malik, F.A. (2018): Metadiscourse in academic writing of pre-university Arab students at the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM). – MATEC Web of Conferences 150: 7p.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 SITI FARIDAH KAMARUDDIN, NAGINDER KAUR
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
