HEDGING AND BOOSTING AS INTERACTIONAL METADISCOURSE IN LITERATURE DOCTORAL DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS

Writing traditions of different disciplines of study are linguistically uniquely ritualized in the way writers present their arguments. Claims in other subjects are strengthened by showing commitment through boosting devices while other subjects recommending detached way of writing through hedging. The present study was undertaken to investigate the culture of writing in literature subject by analyzing dissertation abstracts of PhD candidates in the field using Hyland’s (2005) metadiscourse taxonomy. Sixty abstracts, from 2007 to 2012, were selected and analysed using AntConc concordance tool supplemented by manual analysis. The study discovers that literature PhD candidates hedge three times more than they use boosters favoring the use of low commitment modal auxiliary can and solidarity phrases. They boost only when they are convinced that their claims share some universal understanding. The study recommends that lessons on hedging and boosting need to be included in the research writing subjects of novice writers for them to be more conversant with the conventions of research writing that strictly obeys the required formality.