A Cross-Linguistic Comparison of Hedging Density Across Sections in Academic Research Articles
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v13i2.8315Keywords:
Hedging, Academic Writing, Cross-Linguistic Comparison, IMRD Structure, Applied LinguisticsAbstract
In academic writing, hedging is a key rhetorical strategy that allows researchers to express caution and manage claims with appropriate nuance. This study investigates hedging practices in Applied Linguistics research articles written by Indonesian and Native English authors. Using a corpus of 20 articles (10 per group) totaling approximately 100,000 words, the analysis focuses on hedging density, distribution across Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections, and types of hedging devices used. Native English authors employ significantly more hedging devices (859 total) than Indonesian authors (365 total), especially modal and epistemic verbs. Both groups hedge most in the Introduction and Discussion sections, with statistically significant higher hedging densities among Native English writers in these parts, while the Methods section exhibits the least hedging for both. Indonesian authors favor approximators as hedging devices, indicating cultural preference for indirect lexical softening, contrasted with the more explicit grammatical hedging by Native English authors. These results highlight distinct cultural rhetorical preferences and suggest that academic writing pedagogy for Indonesian scholars should incorporate modal and epistemic verb strategies to better align with international norms.
References
Blagojević, S. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic prose: A contrastive study of academic articles written in English by English and Norwegian native speakers. Studies about Languages, 5, 60–67.
Clyne, M. (1987). Cultural differences in the organization of academic texts. Journal of Pragmatics, 11(2), 211–247. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(87)90196-2
Connor, U. (1996). Contrastive rhetoric: Writing in professional settings. Multilingua, 15(3). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2307/3588238
Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2011). Hedging and Boosting in Abstracts of Applied Linguistics Articles: A Comparative Study of English- and Chinese-Medium Journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43, 2795–2, 2795–2809. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007
Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in Scientific Research Articles. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and Engagement: A Model of Interaction in Academic Discourse. Discourse Studies, 7, 173–192. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365
Hyland, Ken. (2004). Genre and second language writing. University of Michigan Press.
Ismayanti, D., & Syam, A. T. (2022). The Community Manipulation through Big Brother’ s Tyranny in George Orwell’ s Nineteen Eighty-Four. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 10(2), 1556â-1569.
Kozubíková Šandová, J. (2020). Cross-cultural differences in the use of rhetorical strategies in academic texts. An English and Czech contrastive study. Linguistica Silesiana, 41, 177–195. https://doi.org/DOI: 10.24425/linsi.2020.133271
Lakoff, R. (1973). The Logic of Politeness, or Minding Your P’s and Q’s. Chicago Linguistics Society, 9, 292–305.
Liu, C., & Tseng, M. (2021). Paradigmatic variation in hedging and boosting: A comparative study of discussions in narrative inquiry and grounded theory research. English for Specific Purposes, 61, 1–16. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2020.08.002
Livytska, I. (2019). The Use of Hedging in Research Articles on Applied Linguistics. Journal of Language and Cultural Education. Journal of Language and Cultural Education, 7(1), 63–71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.2478/jolace-2019-0003
Loi, C. K. (2010). Research article introductions in Chinese and English: A comparative genre-based study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 267–279. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.09.004
Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric: A Text Linguistic Study. Peter Lang.
Mur-Dueñas, P. (2021). There may be differences: Analysing the use of hedges in English and Spanish research articles. Lingua, 260. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103131
Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1–35.
Rahman, Y. A. et al. (2025). RHETORICAL STRUCTURE IN INDONESIAN RESEARCH ARTICLE INTRODUCTIONS USING LOI’S FRAMEWORK. Pioneer, 17(1), 42–60. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.36841/pioneer.v17i1.6310
Salager-Meyer, F. (1994). Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse. English for Specific Purposes, 13(2), 149–170. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90013-2
Sanjaya, I. (2013). COMPARING HEDGES USED BY ENGLISH AND INDONESIAN SCHOLARS IN PUBLISHED RESEARCH ARTICLES: A CORPUS-BASED STUDY. TEFLIN Journal, 26(2), 209. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15639/teflinjournal.v26i2/209-227
Setiawan, E. I., Masruddin, M., & Zainuddin, Z. (2023). Semiotic Analysis and Ethnography Study on the Implementation of Local Wisdom in Economic Field at Luwu Society. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 11(2), 1912-1925.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Cambridge University Press.
Swales, J. (2004). Research genres: Explorations and applications. Cambridge University Press.
Varttala, T. A. (2001). Hedging in scientifically oriented discourse: Exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience. Unpublished Ph.D dissertation. University of Tarnpereen Yliopisto, Finland.
Wang, S.; Tatiana, K. (2016). ON HEDGES IN APPLIED LINGUISTICS AND EFL. International Journal of Education, 9(1), 44–51. https://doi.org/doi: dx.doi.org/10.17509/ije.v9i1.3717
Zare-Ee, A. (2015). Variation in Hedging Across Psychology, Medicine and chemical Engineering Research Articles AND Across different Rhetorical Sections of the RAs. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(4), 39–46.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Yenni Arif Rahman, Fitri Yeni, Fitri Apriyanti, Fiza Asri Fauziah Habibah
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under an Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See the Effect of Open Access)
