Study on Hedges and Boosters in the Conclusions of Research Articles

Abstract

This study aims to examine similarities and differences in the use of hedges and boosters in the conclusions of English research articles (RAs) written by Korean writers and English native writers and also compare them with other sub-genres (i.e., abstract, introduction). It is differentiated from previous studies which have focused on other sub-genres or students’ writing. 60 conclusions of RAs in the discipline of applied linguistics (30: written by Korean writers, 30: written by English native writers) are selected from four leading journals published domestically and internationally, and analyzed based on Hyland’s model (2005a). The results show that there is no statistically significant difference between both groups, but Korean writers use booster slightly more than native writers, while native writers choose hedges more often. Second, there is no salient sub-genre-based variation (i.e. conclusion-specific), compared with other sub-genres. Third, journal-based variations are not statistically significant, either. Pedagogical implication is that RA writers should recognize the importance of hedges and boosters in RA, practice how to use them efficiently and develop better methods of use. With other metadiscourse markers, extending the corpora into various disciplines and application of qualitative approach are recommended for future research.