Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Akses terbuka Jurnal SINTA 2

Metadiscourse Markers in Scientific Journal Articles

Langkawi: Journal of The Association for Arabic and English · Vol. 6 No. 1 (2020)

DOI
10.31332/lkw.v6i1.1528
ISSN
2549-9017, 2460-2280
Terbit
2020-06-25
Penerbit
Institut Agama Islam Negeri Kendari
Lisensi
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

Abstrak

This paper aimed to investigate the use of metadiscourse markers in scientific journal articles. Data of this qualitative research consisted of metadiscourse markers collected from eight journal articles of a special edition published by LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching. The collected metadiscourse markers used in the journal articles were analyzed using discourse analysis based on ten metadiscourse marker categories. Results showed that the analysed journal articles contained 708 metadiscourse markers, with more interactive metadiscourse markers, reaching 529 occurrences, than interactional metadiscourse markers, occurring 179 times. Transitions, such as “but” and “thus”, with 249 occurrences, were the most frequently-used metadiscourse marker and boosters, such as “in fact” and “definitely”, with 24 occurrences, were the least productive marker. Thus, readers can gain a better understanding of the use of metadiscourse markers when using English. It is expected that English language learners and instructors can benefit from the results of this study, particularly concerning the use of metadiscourse markers in academic writing.

Jaringan kolaborasi para penulis

14 penulis · 16 tautan kepenulisan bersama

Arahkan kursor atau ketuk sebuah nama untuk menyorot rekan penulisnya. Klik dua kali untuk membuka halaman penulis.

  • Sanata Dharma University
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Organisasi berbeda
  • Organisasi sama
  • Afiliasi tidak diketahui
  • Garis lebih tebal = lebih banyak artikel bersama · lingkaran lebih besar = lebih banyak artikel
Tampilkan sebagai tabel
Rekan penulisOrganisasiArtikel bersama
Angelina Kusuma Jelita MawarniSanata Dharma University2
Yulius NahakAfiliasi tidak diketahui1
Marcellina Hastya HanindaSanata Dharma University1
Alfonsa Vina KanasyaSanata Dharma University1
Natasha Ayalus Yoan Yola YolandaSanata Dharma University1
Lisa Elvi WijayaSanata Dharma University1
Concilianus Laos MbatoSanata Dharma University1
Paulus KuswandonoSanata Dharma University1
Yuli Ari SandySanata Dharma University1
Teofanne Nurinik WeaSanata Dharma University1
Ave Lucia NadeakSanata Dharma University1
Patricia AngelinaSanata Dharma University1

Afiliasi berasal dari OpenAlex; metadata OAI-PMH jurnal tidak memuatnya. Penulis tanpa ID OpenAlex dicocokkan berdasarkan nama, sehingga dua orang bisa tergabung atau satu orang bisa terpisah.

Data ini berasal dari Crossref (yang disetorkan penerbit), karena endpoint OAI-PMH milik jurnal tidak dapat di-harvest.

Sumber metadata: Crossref API (cadangan, berdasarkan ISSN) https://api.crossref.org/journals/2549-9017/works, pertama di-harvest 29 Okt 2026, terakhir terlihat 8 Nov 2026.
Metadata sebagai oai_dc, dikonversi dari Crossref
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/"><dc:title>Metadiscourse Markers in Scientific Journal Articles</dc:title><dc:creator>Nugrahani, Veronica Esti</dc:creator><dc:creator>Bram, Barli</dc:creator><dc:description>&lt;jats:p&gt;This paper aimed to investigate the use of metadiscourse markers in scientific journal articles. Data of this qualitative research consisted of metadiscourse markers collected from eight journal articles of a special edition published by LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching.  The collected metadiscourse markers used in the journal articles were analyzed using discourse analysis based on ten metadiscourse marker categories. Results showed that the analysed journal articles contained 708 metadiscourse markers, with more interactive metadiscourse markers, reaching 529 occurrences, than interactional metadiscourse markers, occurring 179 times. Transitions, such as “but” and “thus”, with 249 occurrences, were the most frequently-used metadiscourse marker and boosters, such as “in fact” and “definitely”, with 24 occurrences, were the least productive marker.  Thus, readers can gain a better understanding of the use of metadiscourse markers when using English. It is expected that English language learners and instructors can benefit from the results of this study, particularly concerning the use of metadiscourse markers in academic writing. &lt;/jats:p&gt;</dc:description><dc:publisher>Institut Agama Islam Negeri Kendari</dc:publisher><dc:date>2020-06-25</dc:date><dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:identifier>https://doi.org/10.31332/lkw.v6i1.1528</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>10.31332/lkw.v6i1.1528</dc:identifier><dc:source>Langkawi: Journal of The Association for Arabic and English; Vol 6 No 1 (2020); 1</dc:source><dc:source>2549-9017</dc:source><dc:source>2460-2280</dc:source><dc:relation>http://ejournal.iainkendari.ac.id/langkawi/article/viewFile/1528/1234</dc:relation><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0</dc:rights></oai_dc:dc>