Content Details | NUML Online Research Repository

Title METADISCOURSE MARKERS IN ACADEMIC WRITING: A CORPUS-BASED STUDY OF LINGUISTICS AND LITERATURE RESEARCH PROPOSALS AT NUML, ISLAMABAD

Author(s) Javaria Nawaz

Abstract Title: Metadiscourse Markers in Academic Writing: A Corpus-Based Study of Linguistics and Literature Research Proposals At NUML, Islamabad The present study explored the use of metadiscourse markers in M.Phil research proposals authored by students from the disciplines of literature and linguistics at the National University of Modern Languages (NUML) in Islamabad. A total of sixty research proposals were analyzed, with thirty selected from linguistics and thirty from literature. The researcher used a mixed-methods approach to examine the differences in frequency and the use of metadiscourse markers between these two fields. A quantitative analysis was conducted to identify frequency differences between the two disciplines. The study was corpus-based, utilizing AntConc 4.0.2 software to analyze these frequency variations. The primary focus was on the identification of how frequently metadiscourse markers were used in literature proposals compared to linguistics. Initial findings indicated that literature proposals exhibit a significantly higher frequency of metadiscourse markers than their linguistic counterparts. The frequency of interactive metadiscourse markers in literature is 6,626, while it stands at 5,255 in linguistics. Likewise, the Interactional type of metadiscourse markers was utilized 1,263 times in literature, compared to just 785 linguistic occurrences. These figures highlight the differences between the two fields. Additionally, the researcher conducted a thematic analysis to identify instances of misuse and omissions of these markers, demonstrating how their proper incorporation enhanced coherence, cohesion, and the overall presentation of arguments within the text. To assess the appropriateness of metadiscourse marker usage, the researcher compared these findings against Hyland's (2005) model, evaluating whether these markers function correctly according to established criteria. A qualitative study was conducted to explore how the usage of metadiscourse markers differs between linguistics and literature. The conclusions of this research indicated that the greater use of metadiscourse markers in literature proposals suggests that coherence and cohesion in the presentation of arguments were more prominent in the literature compared to linguistics. Learners, educators, and curriculum designers were recommended to improve the understanding and application of these essential linguistic tools.

Type Thesis/Dissertation

Faculty Languages

Department English

Language English

Publication Date 2025-06-16

Subject

Publisher

Contributor(s)

Format

Identifier

Source

Relation

Coverage

Rights