A Comparative Study of Hedging Expressions in the Conclusion Sections of Science Research Articles Authored by Yemeni Nonnative English Writers and English Native Writers
This study explores the use of hedges in the Conclusion sections of scientific research articles (RAs) written by Yemeni nonnative English writers (NNEWs) and native English writers (NEWs). To this end, a corpus was collected of 48 Conclusion sections of research articles (24 by NNEWs and 24 by NEWs) published over a span of two years (2022-2024) in four science disciplines: Chemistry, Physics, Biology, and Medicine. The corpus was analyzed using AntConc concordance program, supplemented by manual analysis to ensure the identified items have hedging functions in their specific contexts and then to sort them into categories according to Hyland’s (1996a, 1998b) poly-pragmatic model. The results revealed that while the overall frequency of the identified hedging items was very similar across both groups of writers, there were noticeable differences in terms of the categories employed. Yemeni NNEWs exhibited a greater tendency towards Attribute and Writer-oriented hedges, whereas native writers favored Reliability hedges. Regarding disciplinary variation, Medicine articles by both writer groups employed the highest proportion of hedges, followed by Physics and Biology articles in favor of Yemeni NNEWs. Chemistry articles had the lowest proportion of hedges in the two groups in favor of NEWs. The findings suggest that cultural variation in hedging lies in strategic preference and positioning rather than overall frequency, which has implications for scientific writing pedagogy and cross-cultural research.
Metrics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.