Academic Oral Presentation (AOP) is a key academic genre for undergraduates. In order to present effectively knowing the linguistic features such as metadiscourse markers is very crucial. The objective of this study is to investigate the type of metadiscourse markers used in AOPs in the English Language (EL) and discipline based (DB) classes. The study adopted Hyland’s (2005) taxanomy of metadicourse to analyse forty group AOPs in both the EL and DB courses. Findings of the study show slight variations across courses in the use of the interactive and interactional metadiscouse markers. Results of this study may help novice undergraduates to be aware of the linguistic features used in AOPs. The implications of the study are genre awareness of the AOP can help students to present effectively. Further recommendation given are conducting mock presentations and other activities to make students aware of the linguistic features, flow of the AOP genre, and how the AOP genre is conducted within their discipline.
Adel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going: A taxanomy of metadiscourse in spoken and written academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69-97
Adel, A. (2023). Adopting a ‘move’ rather than a ‘marker’ approach to metadiscourse: A
taxanomy for spoken student presentation. English for Specific Purposes 69, 4-18.
Amaal, F. M. and N., Mohd N. (2017). Corpus Analysis of
Metadiscoursein Undergraduate Academic Projects. International Journal of Modern Languages and Applied Linguistics, (1), 24-24.
Anthony, L., Orr, T and Yamazaki, A.K. (2007). Signalling Transitions in Oral Presentations: Language and Strategies. Proceedings of the IEEE International Professional Communication Conference.
Aziz, A. I., Wan Mohamed, W.N. and Mohammad Nor, N.. (2022). Oral Presentation Difficulties and Its Causes: Preliminary Analysis of UiTM Kelantan Students. ESTEEM Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(2), 45-55.
Barrett, N.E. & Liu, G.Z. (2016). Global Trends and Research Aims for English
Academic Oral Presentations: Changes, Challenges, and Opportunities for Learning Technology. Review of Educational Research, 1-45 DOI: 10.3102/0034654316628296
Biber, D., Conrad, S. & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at ...: Lexical Bundles in
Teaching and Textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25, 371-405.
Bu, J. (2014). Towards a pragmatic analysis of metadiscourse in academic lectures:
From relevance to adaptation. Discourse Studies, 16 (4), 449-472 http://dis.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/02/14/1461445613519019
Chan, S. H. and Ebrahimi, S. F. (2012). Marked themes as context frames in research
article abstracts. GEMA Online Journal of Language Studies, 12 (4), 1147-1164
Cheong, E. (2012). Stance Features in ESL Students’ Oral Presentation. Northern
Arizona University. Retrieved from https://nau.edu
Cheng, S. W. (2012). “That’s it for today”: Academic lecture closings and the impact
of class size. English for Specific Purposes, 31, 234-248.
Correia, R., Eskenazi, M. and Nuno, M. (2015). Lexical level Distribution of
Metadiscourse in Spoken Language, Proceedings of the EMNLP 2015 Workshop on Linking Models of Lexical, Sentential and Discourse-Level semantics, pp70-75, Lisbon, Portugal, 18 September 2015
Crismore, A., Markannen, R. and Steffensen, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive
writing: a study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication, 10, 39-71
Fa-gen, L. (2012). Identification and Functions of Metadiscourse, US-China Foreign
Language, 10 (1), 846-854
Fernandez-Polo, F.J. (2014). The role of I mean in conference presentations by EFL
speakers. English for Specific Purposes, 34, 58-67.
Fernandez-Polo, F.J. (2017). Functions of ‘you’ in conference presentations. English for Specific Purposes 49, 14-25.
Grieve, R., Woodley, J., Hunt, S. E., & McKay, A. (2021) Student fears of oral presentations and public speaking in higher education: A qualitative survey. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 45, (9), 1281-1293.
Hadi, M. J., Rizka, B. H., & Tarmizi, T. (2019). I feel nervous and lose my ideas when having presentation: Mapping senior students’ challenges in academic oral presentation in English. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 465.
Hyland, K. (2004). Genre and Second Language Writing. Ann Arbor, MI: University
of Michigan Press
Hyland, K. (2010). Metadiscourse: Mapping interactions in academic writing. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9 (2), 125-143
Hyland, K. and Tze,P. (2004). Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal. Applied Lingustics. 25 (2), 156-177
Iberri-Shea, G. (2009). University student public speech: language variations in
classroom contexts. Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Arizona.
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2005). Rhetorical Structure of Biochemistry Research Articles. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 269-292.
Kho, M. G. W., & Ting, S. H. (2021). Oral communication apprehension in oral presentation among Polytechnic students. Human Behavior, Development and Society, 22.
Khedri, M., Chan, S.H. and Helen, T. (2015). Interpersonal-driven Features in Research Article Abstracts: Cross-disciplinary Metadiscoursal Perspective. Pertanika Journal Social Sciences & Humanities 23 (2), 303-314
Kibler, A.K., Salerno, A.S., & Palacios, N. (2014). ‘But before I go to my next step’: A longitudinal study of adolescent English language learners’ transitional devices in oral presentations. TESOL Quarterly, 48 (2), 222-251.
Le, C. (2021). A survey on difficulties in giving English presentations experienced by students at Ho Chi Minh City University of Food Industry (HUFI). https://doi.org/10. 31219/osf.io/xwn72
Lee, J. J. (2009). Size matters: an exploratory comparison of small- and large-class university lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 42-57.
Lee, J.J. & Subtirelu, N.C. (2015). Metadiscourse in the classroom : A comparative analysis of EAP lessons and university lectures. English for Specific Purposes, 37, 52-62.
Magnuczne Godo, A. (2006). Are you with me? A Metadiscursive Analysis of Interactive Strategies in College Students Course Presentations. International Journal of English Studies, 6 (1), 55-78
Maktiar,S, K. K.(2019). A genre analysis of academic oral presentations of ESL undergraduates at a public university in Malaysia. Doctoral thesis, Universiti Putra Malaysia.
Mauranen, A. (1993), Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English Economic Texts. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 3-22
Mauranen, A. (2001). Reflexive academic talk: Observations from MICASE. In Simpson, R., Swales, J. (eds.), Corpus Linguistics in North America: Selections from the 1999 Symposium. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, p.165-178
Morell, T. (2007). What enhances EFL students' participation in lecture discourse? Student. Lecturer and discourse perspectives. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6, 222-237.
Razawi, N. A., Zulkornain, L. H., & Razlan, R. M. (2019). Anxiety in oral presentations among ESL students. Journal of Academia 7(1), 31-36.
Rowley-Jolivet, E. (2002). Visual discourse in scientific conference papers: A genre-based study. English for Specific Purposes, 21, 19–40.
Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: research article abstracts and
introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24, 141-156.
Schiffrin, D. (1980). Meta-Talk: Organizational and Evaluative Brackets in Discourse. Sociological Inquiry, 50, 199-236. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-682X.1980.tb00021.x
Shahar, H. K., & Abdul Raof, A. H. (2021). Speaking apprehension: Evidence from oral
presentations in content subject classes. International Journal of Language Education and Applied Linguistics (IJLEAL), 10 (2), 80-88.
Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Thompson, S. (1994). Frameworks and Contexts: A Genre-based approach to
analysing lecture introductions. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 171-186.
Thompson, S. (2003). Text-structuring metadiscourses intonation and the signalling
of organisation in academic lectures. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2, 5-20.
Vande Kopple, W.J. (1988). Metadiscourse and the recall of modality markers.
Visible Language, 22, 233-272.
Wan Hassan, W.A. (2014). The openings and endings of students’ spoken academic
presentations. Unpublished Masters Thesis. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia.
Wang, S and Slater, T. (2016). Oral Academic Discourse Socialization of an ESL Chinese Student: Cohesive Device Use. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6 (1), 65-72. http://dx.doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v6n1p.65
Webber, P. (2005). Interactive features in medical conference monologue. English forSpecific Purposes, 24, 157-181.
Weissberg, B. (1993). The graduate seminar: Another research-process genre. English for Specific Purposes, 12, 23-35.
Wray, A. (2008). Formulaic Language: Pushing the Boundaries. Oxford University
Press: Oxford
Yang, W.H.(2014). Stance and engagement: A corpus-based analysis of academic spoken discourse across science domains. Journal of Language for Specific Purposes 5(1),, 62-78
Yu-jung, C & Hung-Tzu, Huang. (2015). Exploring TED talks a s a pedagogical resource for oral presentations: A corpus-based move analysis. English Teaching and Learning.39.4 Special Edition. 29-62. http://dx.doi/org/10.6330/ETL.2015.39.4.02
Zareva, A. (2009). Lexical composition of effective L1 and L2 student academic
presentations. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice, 6 (1), 91-110
Zareva, A. (2011). ‘And so that was it’: Linking adverbials in student academic
presentations. RELC Journal, 42(1), 5–15.
Zareva, A. (2013). Self-mention and the projection of multiple identity roles in TESOL
graduate student presentations: The influence of the written academic genres. English for Specific Purposes, 32, 72–83.
Zareva, A. (2016). Multi-word verbs in student academic presentations. Journal of
English for Academic Purposes, 23, 83-98.
