Textual Metadiscourse in Academic Book Reviews in Serbian and English
Abstract
This paper examines the forms and patterns of use of the markers of textual metadiscourse in the academic book reviews from the fields of humanities (linguistics and literature) and social sciences (sociology, history, and ethnography) in both Serbian and English languages. The principal aim of our research was to attempt to establish a potential variation in the use of these markers with regard to the parameters of the type of markers, discipline, and language in which the reviews were written. The qualitative-quantitative analysis was carried out according to the model provided by Blagojević (2008). As for the first parameter, the comparison showed the predominance of logical textual connectives in comparison to both other textual connectives and markers of discourse actions/references to discourse across disciplines and languages. When it comes to the parameter of discipline, linguistics, literature and sociology reviews contained the greatest number of markers. Regarding the language criterion, cumulatively speaking, more markers were observed in the reviews in Serbian than in the reviews in English. However, the difference was rather subtle and it pointed to similarities rather than disparities in the use of these markers.
References
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Ädel, A. (2010). Just to Give You Kind of a Map of Where We Are Going: A Taxonomy of Metadiscourse in Spoken and Written Academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9 (2), 69–97.
Araújo, A. D. (1996). Lexical signalling: A study of unspecific nouns in book reviews (the manuscript of defended doctoral thesis). UFSC, Florianópolis.
Bal-Gezegin, B. (2016). A Corpus-based Investigation of Metadiscourse in Academic Book Reviews. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences, 232, 713–718.
Blagojević, S. (2008). Metadiskurs u akademskom diskursu. Niš: Filozofski fakultet.
Blagojević, S. (2012). O engleskom i srpskom akademskom diskursu. Niš: Filozofski fakultet.
Blagojević, S. (2012a). How to Help a Reader Trough an Academic Article? Signalling Devices in Research Articles Written by English and Serbian Academics. Facta Universitatis: Series Linguistics and Literature. 10 (2), 79–87.
Blagojević, S. and Vukić, M. (2012). Tekstualni konektori za izražavanje logičkih odnosa u srpskom i engleskom akademskom diskursu. In: M. Kovačević (Ed.), Zbornik radova sa VI međunarodnog naučnog skupa održanog na Filološko-umetničkom fakultetu u Kragujevcu: Strukturne karakteristike srpskog jezika (477–488). Kragujevac: Filološko-umetnički fakultet.
Bogdanović, V. (2017). Žanr i metadiskurs u odabranim udžbenicima engleskog jezika struke. Novi Sad: Filozofski fakultet.
Cao, F. and Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15–31.
Correia, R. et al. (2015). Lexical Level Distribution of Metadiscourse in Spoken Language. In: Proceedings of the EMNLP 2015 Workshop on Linking Models of Lexical, Sentential and Discourse-level Semantics (70–75). Lisboa: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Crismore, A. et al. (1993). Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing: A study of Texts Written by American and Finnish University Students. Written Comunication, 10 (1), 39–71.
Dafouz-Milne, E. (2008). The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 40 (1), 95‒113.
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscourse in research articles: a marker of national culture or of academic discipline?. Journal of Pragmatics, 36 (10), 1807–1825.
Đorđević D. and Vesić Pavlović, T. (2020). Metadiskursni markeri u kontekstu sažetaka naučnih radova iz poljoprivredne tehnike. In: V. Lopičić, B. Mišić (Eds.), Jezik, književnost, kontekst (303–317). Niš: Filozofski fakultet.
Figar, V. (2018). Conjuctive Adverbs as Elements of Metadiscourse in Research Articles in the Field of Psychology Written by Native and Non-Native Speakers of English. Folia linguistica et litteraria, 21, 7–40
Gea Valor, M. L. (2000). A Pragmatic Approach to Politeness and Modality in Book Review Articles. Valencia: Universitat de Valencia.
Herriman, J. (2014). Metadiscourse in English and Swedish Non-fiction Texts and their Translations. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 13 (1), 1–32.
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30 (4), 437–455.
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13 (2), 133–151.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. (2008). Persuasion, Interaction and the Construction of Knowledge: Representing Self and others in Research Writing. International Journal of English Studies, 8 (2), 1–23.
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic Discourse: English in a Global Context. London: Continuum.
Hyland, K. and Diani G. (2009). Introduction: Academic Evaluation and Review Genres. In: K. Hyland and G. Diani (Eds.), Academic Evaluation: Review Genres in University Settings (1–14). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Junqueira, L. and Cortes, V. (2014). Metadiscourse in book reviews in English and Brazilian Portuguese: A corpus-based analysis. Rhetoric, Professional Communication, and Globalization, 6, 88–109.
Kilgarriff, A. et al. SketchEngine (Computer Software and Information Resource). https://www.sketchengine.eu/.
Koprivica Lelićanin, M. (2014). Metadiskurs u savremenim italijanskim akademskim i novinskim člancima (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Filološki fakultet, Beograd.
Lee, J. J. and Casal, J. E. (2014). Metadiscourse in results and discussion chapters: A cross-linguistic analysis of English and Spanish thesis writers in engineering. System, 46 (1), 39–54.
Lin, C. (2005). Metadiscuourse in Academic Writing: An investigation of Graduate Students’ MA Theses in Taiwan. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 2 (1), 1–66.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish – English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes, 2 (1), 3–22.
Motta-Roth, D. (1995). Book reviews and disciplinary discourses: Defining a genre. Unpublished manuscript, Letras Estrangerias Modernas, Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, Brasil.
Motta-Roth, D. (1998). Discourse Analysis and Academic Book Reviews: A Study of Text and Disciplinary Cultures. In: I. Fortanet, S. Posteguillo, J. C. Palmer, J. F. Coll, (Eds.), Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes (2 –85). Castello de la Plana: Universitat Jaume I.
Motta-Roth, D. (1996). Same Genre, Different Discipline: a Genre-Based Study of Book Reviews in Academe. The Especialist, 17/2, 99–131.
Piršl, D. (2009). Analiza retoričkih funkcija tekstualnog metadiskursa sportskog jezika. Sport Mont, VI (18, 19, 20), 401–408.
Šandova, J. K. (2008). Rhetorical Structure of English and Czech Academic Book Reviews. SKASE: Journal of Theoretical Linguistics, 15/3, 202–216.
Toumi, N. (2009). A Model for the Investigation of Reflexive Metadiscourse in Research Articles. Language studies working papers, 1, 64–73.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 82–93.
Zhang, M. et al. (2017). A multidimensional analysis of metadiscourse markers across spoken registers. Journal of Pragmatics, 117, 106–118.
Zou, H. and Hyland, K. (2020). Managing evaluation: Criticism in two academic review genres. English for Specific Purposes, 60, 98–112.
The details about the publication policy, including copyright and licensing, are available at: