La conciencia de los estudiantes sobre los atenuadores e intensificadores en el discurso académico - un estudio sobre los estudiantes de agricultura

Autores/as

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.58859/resla.1229

Palabras clave:

Serbian ESP learners, hedges, boosters, certainty/probability/possibility markers, lexical (in)visibility

Resumen

El trabajo se centra en la medida en que los estudiantes de inglés con propósitos específicos están capaces de diferenciar la determinación de los autores hacia el continuo desde incertidumbre hasta certidumbre en la escritura académica. Basándose en la extensa investigación de Hyland en el campo, buscamos explorar si los atenuadores e intensificadores, estando en los extremos del continuo mencionado, representan los elementos (in)visibles para estudiantes de inglés con propósitos específicos. Los participantes en el estudio fueron estudiantes de licenciatura y estudiantes de máster de la Facultad de Agricultura, Universidad de Belgrado, Serbia (N=91).  Ellos rellenaron el cuestionario, en el que les pedimos que evalúen el nivel de compromiso del autor (certeza, probabilidad, posibilidad) en 15 frases modeladas basándose en frases auténticas del artículo de investigación, y después les pedimos que confirmen las palabras/expresiones en cada frase que les llevaron a tomar esa decisión. Los resultados revelan que los estudiantes en ambos grupos son mejores en reconocer marcadores de certeza que reconocer los marcadores de probabilidad y posibilidad. Aunque los estudiantes de máster recibieron la instrucción previa sobre el concepto sobre los atenuadores e intensificadores, no existe la diferencia significativa entre dos grupos en términos de éxito. No obstante, el éxito de ambos grupos en gran parte fue afectado por el nivel de habilidad de los estudiantes.

 

Estadísticas globales ℹ️

Totales acumulados desde su publicación
22
Visualizaciones
4
Descargas
26
Total

Citas

Baratta, A. M. (2009). Revealing stance through passive voice. Journal of Pragmatics, 41(7), 1406–1421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.010

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Crompton, P. (2012). Characterising Hedging in Undergraduate Essays by Middle Eastern Students. The Asian ESP Journal, 8(2), 55–78. http://asian-esp-journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Volume-8-2.pdf

Crosthwaite, P., Cheung, L., & Jiang, F. (Kevin). (2017). Writing with attitude: Stance expression in learner and professional dentistry research reports. English for Specific Purposes, 46, 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.02.001

Đorđević, D. (2017a). Ograde u naučnim radovima na engleskom i srpskom jeziku [Neobjavljena doktorska disertacija]. Univerzitet u Beogradu, Filološki fakultet. [Hedges in English and Serbian Research Articles [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Belgrade, Faculty of Philology].

Đorđević, D. D. (2017b). Epistemic Modality Markers Used as Hedges in Research Articles. Belgrade English Language and Literature Studies, 9(1), 25–47. https://doi.org/10.18485/bells.2017.9.2

Đorđević, D. D. i Vesić Pavlović, T. S. (2021). Markeri epistemičke modalnosti u naučnim radovima na engleskom i srpskom jeziku. U М. Kovačević i J. Petković (ur.). Srpski jezik, književnost, umetnost, Zbornik radova sa XV međunarodnog skupa, Knjiga 1: Modalnost u srpskom jeziku (str. 175–186). Kragujevac: FILUM. [Đorđević, D. D., & Vesić Pavlović, T.S. (2021). Epistemic modality markers in English and Serbian research articles. In М. Kovačević & J. Petković (Ed.). The Serbian language, literature, art, XV International Conference Proceedings, Book 1: Modality in the Serbian language (pp. 175–186). Kragujevac: FILUM].

Gablasova, D., Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Boyd, E. (2017). Epistemic Stance in Spoken L2 English: The Effect of Task and Speaker Style. Applied Linguistics, 38(5), 613–637. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amv055

Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Halliday’s Introduction to Functional Grammar. Routledge.

Ho, V., & Li, C. (2018). The use of metadiscourse and persuasion: An analysis of first year university students’ timed argumentative essays. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 33, 53–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2018.02.00

Holmes, J. (1982). Expressing Doubt and Certainty in English. RELC Journal, 13(2), 9–28. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368828201300202

Hyland, K. (1998a). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Hyland, K. (1998b). Boosters, hedges and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text, 18(3), 349–382. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1998.18.3.349

Hyland, K. (2000). Hedges, boosters and lexical invisibility: Noticing modifiers in academic texts. Language awareness, 9(4), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658410008667145

Hyland, K. (2005a). Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2005b). Stance and engagement: a model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365

Hyland, K., & Milton, J. (1997). Qualification and certainty in L1 and L2 students’ writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 183–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1060-3743(97)90033-3

Intaraprawat, P., & Steffensen, M. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 253–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90012-8

Lewin, B. A. (2005). Hedging: an exploratory study of authors' and readers' identification of ‘toning down’ in scientific texts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(2), 163–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2004.08.001

Li, T., & Wharton, S. (2012). Metadiscourse repertoire of L1 Mandarin undergraduates writing in English: A cross-contextual, cross-disciplinary study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(4), 345–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2012.07.004

Low, G. (1996). Intensifiers and Hedges in Questionnaire Items and the Lexical Invisibility Hypothesis. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/17.1.1

MacIntyre, R. (2017). Should I boost or should I hedge: the use of hedges and boosters in the writing of argumentative essays by Japanese university students. In C. Hatipoglu, E. Akbas, & Y. Bayyurt (Eds.), Metadiscourse in written genres: Uncovering textual and interactional aspects of texts (pp. 57–83). Peter Lang. https://doi.org/10.3726/b11093

Pallant, J. (2001). SPSS survival manual - a step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS for windows (version 10). Open University Press.

Šeškauskienė, I. (2008). Hedging in ESL: a case study of Lithuanian learners. Studies about Languages (Kalbų Studijos), 13, 71–76. https://www.kalbos.lt/zurnalai/13_numeris/10.pdf

Simon-Vandenbergen, A.-M. (2008). Almost certainly and most definitely: Degree modifiers and epistemic stance. Journal of Pragmatics, 40(9), 1521–1542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2008.04.015

Takimoto, M. (2015). Assertions and lexical invisibility in EFL learners’ academic essays. Journal of Pragmatics, 89, 85–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.pragma.2015.09.009

Vassileva, I. (2001). Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 83–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00029-0

Vázquez Orta, I. (2010). A contrastive analysis of the use of modal verbs in the expression of epistemic stance in business management research articles in English and Spanish. Iberica, 19, 77–95. https://www.revistaiberica.org/index.php/iberica/article/view/355

Vázquez, I., & Giner, D. (2008). Beyond Mood and Modality: Epistemic Modality Markers as Hedges in Research Articles. A Cross-Disciplinary Study. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 21(1), 171–190. https://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/10401/1/RAEI_21_10.pdf

Vázquez, I., & Giner, D. (2009). Writing with Conviction: The Use of Boosters in Modelling Persuasion in Academic Discourses. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 22, 219–237. https://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/13822/1/RAEI_22_14.pdf

Vesić Pavlović, T. S., & Đorđević, D. D. (2020a). Upotreba ograda i pojačivača u studentskim esejima o zaštiti životne sredine na engleskom jeziku [The use of hedges and boosters in students’ essays on environmental protection written in English]. Anali Filološkog fakulteta, 32(2), 161–176. https://doi.org/10.18485/analiff.2020.32.2.9

Vesić Pavlović, T., & Đorđević, D. (2020b). The Use of Metadiscourse Markers in Essays Written by ESP University Students. Godišnjak Filozofskog Fakulteta u Novom Sadu, XLV(5), 233–249. https://doi.org/10.19090/gff.2020.5.233-249

Wishnoff, J. (2000). Hedging your bets: L2 learners’ acquisition of pragmatic devices in academic writing and computer-mediated discourse. Second Language Studies, 19(1), 119–148. https://www.hawaii.edu/sls/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Wishnoff.pdf

Descargas

Publicado

2026-04-01

Cómo citar

Đorđević, D., Vesić Pavlović, T., & Pavlović, Z. (2026). La conciencia de los estudiantes sobre los atenuadores e intensificadores en el discurso académico - un estudio sobre los estudiantes de agricultura. Revista Española De Lingüística Aplicada Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 39(1), 77–102. https://doi.org/10.58859/resla.1229

Artículos similares

También puede Iniciar una búsqueda de similitud avanzada para este artículo.