Gender Differences in the Use of Hedging Devices in the Pakistani Opinion Columns: A Corpus-Based Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53057/linfo/2022.4.1.5Keywords:
gender, hedges, Hyland (2004), Pakistani English opinion columns, metadiscourse, corpus analysisAbstract
This study investigates the use of hedges in the opinion columns written by Pakistani male columnists and female columnists. For this, the present study uses Hyland (2004) model interpersonal metadiscourse to recognize hedging devices. This study also investigates how or both genders show difference and similarity in the employment of hedges. The corpus was built of 580 opinion articles. The columns totaled 290 by male and 290 by female writers. For the present study, a mixed method approach was used. As for sampling, this study uses random sampling. The finding of this research reveals that both Pakistani male and female writers did not differ in the use of hedges devices in their opinion columns and concludes that the choice and distribution of hedges depend on genre of the text rather than on the gender of the text.Downloads
References
Ädel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.
Akhter, I. (2014). Differences in Language Use by Male and Female Students in Tertiary Academia in Dhaka City. Doctoral Dissertation, BRAC University.
Alshebl, A. (2021). Gender Differences in Classroom Interactions and Preferences. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 17, pp. 534–552. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1285177.pdf
Alsubhi, A.S. (2016). Gender and Metadiscourse in British and Saudi Newspaper Column Writing: Male/Female and Native /Nonnative Differences in Language Use. Doctoral Dissertation, University College Cork. Available from http://hdl.handle.net/10468/397 [accessed on: 02/01/19] Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.
Aull, L. (2015). Corpus Linguistic Analysis of Scope and Certainty in FY and Expert Writing. In First-Year University Writing (pp. 84-112). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Beauvais, P. (1989). A Speech-Act Theory of Metadiscourse. Written Communication, 61, pp. 11-30.
Bhatia, V., Garzone, G., & Degano, C. (2012): Arbitration Awards: Generic Features and Textual Realizations. Cambridge Scholars Press: Newcastle upon Tyne.
Bunton, D. (1999). The Use of Higher Level Metatext in PHD theses. Journal of English for Specific Purpose, 18, pp. 41-56.
Chipeta, N. (2021). Metadiscourse Variations in Some Zambian Female and Male Written Discourses on Political Matters: The Case of Post Newspaper Opinion Articles. Doctoral dissertation, The University of Zambia.
Creswell, J. W., (2014). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative and Mixed Method. (4th Ed.) London: SAGE Publication Inc.
Crismore, A., & Fransworth, R. (1989). Mr. Darwin and His Readers: Exploring Interpersonal Metadiscourse as a Dimension of Ethos. Rhetoric Review, 8(1), pp. 91-112.
Crismore, A. (2004). Fundraising Letters: A Corpus Linguistic. Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics, 24, p. 307.
Crismore, A., Makkannen, R., & Steffensen, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing: A Study of Texts Written by American and Finnish University Students. Written Communication, 10, pp. 39-71.
D'Angelo, L. (2008). Gender Identity and Authority in Academic Book Reviews: An Analysis of Metadiscourse Across Disciplines.
Enkvist, N. E. (1978). Stylistics and Text Linguistics. Current Trends in Textlinguistics, pp. 174-190.
Francis, B., Robson, J., & Read, B. (2001). An Analysis of Undergraduate Writing Styles in the Context of Gender and Achievement. Studies in Higher Education, 26(3), pp. 313-326.
Fraser, B. (1999). What are Discourse Markers?. Journal of Pragmatics, 31(7), pp. 931-952.
Gul, S., Ilyas, R., Lohar, S. A., & Ahmed, M. (2020). Exploring Gender Differences in the Use of Hedges in Pakistani Engineering Research.
Harris, Z. S. (1959). The Transformational Model of Language Structure. Anthropological Linguistics, pp. 27-29.
Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and Context: The Pragmatics of Academic Metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30, pp. 437–455.
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
Intaraprawat, P., & Steffensen, M. S. (1995). The Use of Metadiscourse in Good and Poor ESL Essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), pp. 253-272.
Keller, E. (1979). Gambits: Conversational Strategy Signals. Journal of Pragmatics, 3(3-4), pp. 219-238.
Khanbutayeva, L. M. (2020). Hedging in Newspaper Editorials in the English and Azerbaijan Languages. International Journal of English Linguistics, 10(1). Communication, pp. 82-93.
Kopple, W. J. V. (1985). Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, pp. 82-93.
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.
Lautamatti, L. (1978). Observations on the Development of the Topic in Simplified Discourse. AFinLAn vuosikirja, pp. 71-104.
Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics: Volume 2. Cambridge University Press.
Markkanen, R., & Schröder, H. (1997). Hedging: A Challenge for Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis. Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts, 24, pp. 3-18.
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP Rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English Economics Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12(1), pp. 3-22.
Memon, M. A., Pathan, H., & Memon, S. A. (2021). An Intercultural Investigation of Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in Research Articles by Pakistani & British Engineers. CORPORUM: Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 3(2), pp. 51-72.
Mirzapour, F. (2016). Gender Differences in the Use of Hedges and First-Person Pronouns in Research Articles of Applied Linguistics and Chemistry. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 5(6), pp. 166-173.
Pakzadian, M., & Tootkaboni, A. A. (2018). The Role of Gender in Conversational Dominance: A Study of EFL Learners. Cogent Education, 5(1), pp. 1560-602.
Pasaribu, T. A. (2017). Gender Differences and the Use of Metadiscourse Markers in Writing Essays. International Journal of Humanity Studies (IJHS), 1(1), pp. 93-102.
Rafi, M. S. (2008). SMS Text Analysis: Language, Gender and Current Practices. Gender and Current Practices.
Schiffrin, D. (1980). Meta‐talk: Organizational and Evaluative Brackets in Discourse. Sociological Inquiry, 50(3‐4), pp. 199-236.
Sedaghat, A., Biria, R., & Amirabadi, Y. A. (2015). Cross Cultural Analysis of Hedges in Persian and English Editorial Columns. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 8(1), pp. 37-50.
Shafqat, A., Memon, R. A., & Khan, T. A. (2022). Do Pakistani English Writers Hedge more in Linguistics Research than Native English Writers? Journal of Humanities, Social and Management Sciences (JHSMS), 3(1), pp. 243-257.
Siddique, A. R., Ahmad, M., & Ahmad, S. S. (2020). Frame Markers as Metadiscoursal Features in Pakistani English Newspapers’ Editorials: A Corpus-Based Study. Pakistan Social Sciences Review (PSSR), 4(3), pp. 81-94.
Takimoto, M. (2015). A Corpus-Based Analysis of Hedges and Boosters in English Academic Articles. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(1), pp. 95-105.
Tse, P., & Hyland, K. (2008). ‘Robot Kung fu’: Gender and Professional Identity in Biology and Philosophy Reviews. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(7), pp. 1232-1248.
Kopple, W. J. V. (1985). Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, pp. 82-93.
Williams, J. (1989). Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. (3rd Ed). Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.
Yasmin, T., Mahmood, M. A., Jabeen, S., & Siddiqui, G. K. (2020). Hedging as a Marker of Variation in Pakistani Research Dissertations of Sciences and Social Sciences. Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, 3(3), pp. 361-368.
Yeganeh, M. T., & Ghoreyshi, S. M. (2015). Exploring Gender Differences in the Use of Discourse Markers in Iranian Academic Research Articles. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 192, pp. 684-689.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Abdul Ali, Dr. Aleem Shakir
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
License Terms
All articles published by MARS Publishers are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. This means:
- everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles published in MARS Publishers' journals;
- everyone is free to re-use the published material if proper accreditation/citation of the original publication is given.