Metadiscourse is one linguistic component that helps authors make their writing coherent and reader-friendly (MD). All authors write for their readers, and by honing their MD skills, they may successfully engage with them. It's crucial for writers to tie their readers to the propositional content in the engaging part. Some authors are more adept at predicting the interests and concentration spans of their readers. There has been an increase in research on MD analyses of academic papers among writers who write in a second language (L2). This systematic review study provided empirical research on MD analysis studies among writers who write in English as a Second Language (ESL) to identify and summarize the studies that are related to MD analysis of L2 writings. The articles are from Scopus, Web of Science (WOS) and Google Scholar from January 2018 until December 2022. It was found that 26 journal articles are eligible for the analysis. The result showed that the present studies had been identified its aims to review previous pertinent research in terms of research design, study types, conceptual framework, taxonomies, corpus characteristics and elicitation measures, analytical methods and reporting practices to be beneficial in assisting L2 writers to write coherently and effectively.
Abbas, A., Zahra, T., & Batool, S. (2022). A Linguistic Study of Persuasion and Negotiation in Research Articles of Islamic Studies: Issues and Challenges. Pakistan Journal of Humanities & Social Sciences Research. Volume No. 05, 01 https://doi.org/10.37605/pjhssr.v5i1.367
Adel, A. (2006). Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Aliyu, M. M., & Korau, S. M. (2020). Nigerian Undergraduates’ Awareness of Metadiscourse and its Relationship with their Persuasive Writing Quality. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 9(1), 40-49. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.9n.1p.40
Al-Mudhaffari, M., Hussin, S., & HoAbdullah, I. (2020). Interactional strategies in L2 writing: An exploration of hedging and boosting strategies in applied linguistics research articles. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 20(1), 171-186.
Bacang, B. C., Rillo, R. M., & Alieto, E. O. (2019). The Gender Construct in the Use of Rhetorical Appeals, Hedges, and Boosters in ESL Writing: A Discourse Analysis. Online Submission, 25, 210-224.
Bax, S., Nakatsuhara, F., & Waller, D. (2019). Researching L2 writers’ use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and advanced levels. System, 83, 79-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2019.02.010
Castillo-Hajan, B., Hajan, B. H., & Marasigan, A. C. (2019). Construction of Second Language Writer Identity in Student Persuasive Essays: A Metadiscourse Analysis. Online Submission, 21, 36-60.
Demir, C. (2018). Hedging and academic writing: an analysis of lexical hedges. Journal of language and linguistic studies, 14(4), 74-92.
Ekawati, R & Rosyiidah, AA. (2022). Metadiscourse Markers in English Essays Written by Indonesian Students in EFL Setting. Journal of English Language Teaching in Indonesia. 10(2) DOI : 10.22460/eltin.v10i2.p%p
El-Dakhs, D. A. S. (2020). Variation of metadiscourse in L2 writing: focus on language proficiency and learning context. Ampersand, 7, 100069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amper.2020.100069
Firoozjahantigh, M., Fakhri Alamdari, E., & Marzban, A. (2021). Investigating the effect of process-based instruction of writing on the IELTS writing task two performance of Iranian EFL learners: Focusing on hedging & boosting. Cogent Education, 8(1), 1881202.
Gamad, J., Gustilo, L., Correo, C., Dimaculangan, N., & Asuncion, R. (2022). An Analysis of Interactional Markers in the Methodology Sections of Research Articles Across Englishes and Disciplines. Modern Journal of Studies in English Language Teaching and Literature, 4(2), 36-62.
Ghazanfari, M., Barani, G., & Rokhsari, S. (2018). An investigation into metadiscourse elements used by native vs. non-native university students across genders. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 10(1), 61-94.
Goltaji, F., and Hooshmand, M. (2022). The Study of Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in TEFL Textbooks Written by Native vs. Non-Native Authors. Journal of English Language Research Volume 3, Number 1, July 2022, (pp. 27-38).
Hyland, K. (2001). Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written communication, 18(4), 549–574
Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, Vol 13, Issue 2, 133–151.
Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. London: Continuum.
Kashiha, H. (2018). Malaysian ESL students' metadiscourse in essay writing. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 8(3), 193-201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12973/ojcmt/2650
Kadir, N. A., Rahmat, N. H., Wahid, H. S. A., & Dzuradeen, N. S. (2020). Positive Side of Covid-19? A Metadiscourse Analysis of A Personal Blog. European Journal of Applied Linguistics Studies, 2(2).
Kashiha, H. (2018). Malaysian ESL students' metadiscourse in essay writing. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 8(3), 193-201.
Li, Z., & Xu, J. (2020). Reflexive metadiscourse in Chinese and English sociology research article introductions and discussions. Journal of Pragmatics, 159, 47-59.
Liao, J. (2020). Metadiscourse, cohesion, and engagement in L2 written discourse. Languages, 5(2), 25.
Lo, Y. Y., Othman, J., & Lim, J. W. (2021). Mapping the Use of Boosters in Academic Writing by Malaysian First-Year Doctoral Students. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 29(3). https://doi.org/10.47836/pjssh.29.3.23
Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural differences in academic rhetoric. Peter Lang.
Musa, A. M., & Hussin, S. (2020). Interactional Metadiscourse Strategies in Academic Discourse: An Analysis of Research Articles Produced by Arab Writers. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 28(1).
Musa, A., Hussin, S., & HO, I. A. (2019). Interaction in Academic L2 writing: An analysis of Interactional Metadiscourse Strategies in Applied Linguistics Research Articles. 3L: Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 25(3). http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2019-2503-02
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo Wilson, E., McDonald, S., Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. The BMJ, 372, 1–9.
Radonja, M. S. (2020). The Use of Interactive Metadiscourse in Serbian Students’ Writing in English. Works of The Faculty of Philosophy, (21). DOI: 10.7251/FIN1921121R
Rahmat, N. H., Abdullah, N. A. T., Yahaya, M. H., Yean, C. P., & Whanchit, W. (2020). Gender differences on the use of metadiscourse on reflective essays: A case study of inbound students. International Journal of Asian Social Science, 10(5), 248-261. DOI: 10.18488/journal.1.2020.105.248.261
Ruan, Z. (2019). Metadiscourse use in L2 student essay writing: A longitudinal cross-contextual comparison. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 42(4), 466-487. DOI 10.1515/CJAL-2019-0023
Singh, J. K., & Daniel, B. K. (2018). The prevalence and frequency of authorial identity among undergraduate students in Fiji. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 7(6), 136-152. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.6p.136
Takac, V. P. (2018). Sentence-initial interactive metadiscourse and text coherence in EFL argumentative essays. Lonaka Journal of Learning and Teaching, 9(2), 13-29.
Takac, V. P., & Ivezic, S. V. (2019). Frame Markers and Coherence in L2 Argumentative Essays. Discourse and Interaction, 12(2), 46-71.
Takac, V. P., & Ivezic, S. V. (2019). Frame Markers and Coherence in L2 Argumentative Essays. Discourse and Interaction, 12(2), 46-71. https://doi.org/10.5817/DI2019-2-46
Tasso, C. (2020). Interactional Metadiscourse Features in the Written Production Made by Spanish EFL Learners. In Corpus Analysis in Different Genres (pp. 206-218). Routledge.
Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82–93.
Velickovic, M. V., & Danilovic-Jeremic, J. R. (2020). Stance Markers: An Underdeveloped Aspect of Serbian EFL Writers’ Competence. Scientific Conference Science and teaching in the educational context. DOI 10.46793/STEC20.457V
Yuksel, H. G., & Kavanoz, S. (2018). Dimension of Experience: Metadiscourse in the Texts of Novice Non-Native, Novice Native and Expert Native Speaker. Advances in language and literary studies, 9(3), 104-112. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.3p.104
Yoon, H. J. (2021). Interactions in EFL argumentative writing: Effects of topic, L1 background, and L2 proficiency on interactional metadiscourse. Reading and Writing, 34(3), 705-725. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2022.19.1.11.180
