Hassan Soodmand Afshar; Rozhin Ghaslani; Behrooz Kalantari
Abstract
This study set out to investigate the similarities and differences in frequency of incidence and type of hedging devices used in research articles written by Iranian and non-Iranian writers. For the purposes of the study, a corpus including 40 agriculture articles in English (20 written by Iranian and ...
Read More
This study set out to investigate the similarities and differences in frequency of incidence and type of hedging devices used in research articles written by Iranian and non-Iranian writers. For the purposes of the study, a corpus including 40 agriculture articles in English (20 written by Iranian and 20 by non-Iranian writers) were selected. Collection and classification of the hedging devices in the introduction and discussion sections of agriculture articles were based on the hedging taxonomy suggested by Salager-Meyer (1994).The data collected were analyzed through SPSS by means of frequency analysis and Chi-square tests. The results of the study indicated that there was a significant difference between the frequency of incidence of hedging devices in the introduction and discussion sections of agriculture research articles written by Iranian and non-Iranian writers published in international journals. Also, an interview was conducted with 32 Iranian university professors and writers of Agricultural English to shed more light on the findings of corpus analysis and to explore why Iranians used hedging devices less frequently. The content analysis of the interviews revealed that lack of conscious knowledge of Iranian writers of such devices as well as the existence of linguistic and cultural differences between the two groups of writers were reportedly the prime causes why Iranian writers used hedging devices less frequently.
