Abstract

Academic writing, and specifically writing research articles, is regarded as an important type of discourse which is challenging for EFL learners owing to its nature and constraints. Metadiscourse is an important element of writing in an academic context, and with the growth of corpus-based studies, research interest in the prominence of academic discourse has been enhanced. Metadiscourse resources can contribute to the writer's effort to organize the text, and assist the readers in their comprehension. The present study is an attempt to explore research article discussion sections written by nonnative researchers with regard to metadiscourse markers. To this end, 40 research article discussions written by nonnative writers from humanities were selected and analyzed to reveal the number and types of metadiscourse resources and rhetorical techniques the writers used in producing these texts. In the current study, the authors deployed Hyland’s (2005) metadiscourse Model as the analytical framework to analyze the data. The findings indicate that the writers have a preference to avail ofinteractive metadiscourse markers two times more than the interactional subcategories. The findings of this study can be said to imply that nonnative writers are expected to get exposed to adequate training on the use of metadiscourse resources. Furthermore, teachers are advised to train their learners on the use of such resources through raising their awareness of using these rhetorical devices effectively, especially in the EFL context. Keywords: Academic Writing, Discussion, Hyland’s (2005) Model, Metadiscourse Markers, Research Articles