مؤشرات التفاعل لمخاطبة القراء بصفتهم مشاركين في عملية التواصل في الكتابة الأكاديمية

Ädel, A. (2010). Just to give you kind of a map of where we are going : A Taxonomy of Metadiscourse in Spoken and Written Academic English. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(2), 69–97. https://doi.org/10.35360/NJES.218

Alaghbary G. S. (2023). Is stylistics a hard science? Intersubjective positioning in Language and Literature research article abstracts between 2013 and 2022. Heliyon, 9(11), e22114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22114

Arjomandi, A., Seufert, J. H., O'Brien, M., & Rossetto, L. C. (2021). An empirical study of business student engagement with active teaching strategies: A comparison of first year and senior students. American Business Review, 24(1), 5.

Boginskaya, O. A. (2023). Interactional Metadiscourse Markers in English Research Article Abstracts Written by Non-Native Authors: A Corpus-Based Contrastive Study. Ikala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 28(1), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.17533/udea.ikala.v28n1a08

Brezina, V., Weill-Tessier, P., & McEnery, T. (2020). #LancsBox 5.x and 6.x [software].

Available at: http://corpora.lancs.ac.uk/lancsbox.

Brezina, V., Timperley, M., & McEnery, T. (2018). #LancsBox 4.x [software]. Available at: http://corpora.lancs.ac.uk/lancsbox.

Brezina, V., McEnery, T., & Wattam, S. (2015). Collocations in context: A new perspective on collocation networks. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 20(2), 139-173.

Brezina, V. (2018). Statistics in corpus linguistics: A practical guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Chan, C. M., & Pan, S. L. (2008). User engagement in e-government systems implementation: A comparative case study of two Singaporean e-government initiatives. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 17(2), 124-139.

Chou, I. C., Li, W., & Liu, K. (2023). Representation of interactional metadiscourse in translated and native English: A corpus-assisted study. PLOS ONE, 18. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0284849

Dueñas, P. M. (2007). ‘I/we focus on…’: A cross-cultural analysis of self-mentions in business management research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(2), 143-162.

Fredricks, J. A., & McColskey, W. (2012). The measurement of student engagement: A comparative analysis of various methods and student self-report instruments. In Handbook of research on student engagement (pp. 763-782): Springer.

Fu, X., & Hyland, K. (2014). Interaction in two journalistic genres: a study of interactional metadiscourse. English Text Construction, 7(1), 122–144. https://doi.org/10.1075/ETC.7.1.05FU

Gallagher, T. L., Bennett, S., Keen, D., & Muspratt, S. (2017). Examining learner engagement strategies: Australian and Canadian teachers’ self-report. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(1), 51-64.

Gong, H., Liu, L., & Cao, F. (2021). A Cross-Linguistic Study of Interactional Metadiscourse in English and Chinese Research Articles by the Same Chinese Scholars. Journal of Language Identity and Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2021.1932504

Haji, S. S., & Abdulla, K. H. (2020). The Use of Hedging Devices in English Texts Written by English and Kurdish Academics: A Comparative Study. Twejer Journal, 3(1), 1037-1076.

Hint, H., Lemendik, H., Johansson, C., & Leijen, D. A. J. (2024). Decoding Metadiscourse Markers in Estonian Academic Texts: A Language-Specific Perspective. Written Communication. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883241286901

Holquist, M. (2002). Dialogism: Bakhtin and His World (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203425855

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2008). Persuasion, interaction, and the construction of knowledge: representation of self and others in research writing. IJES, 8 (2), pp. 1-23.

Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscourse: what is it and where is it going? Journal of Pragmatics, 113, pp. 16-29.

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse: exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury.

Jalongo, M. R. (2023). Writing for an Audience: Discourse Communities Scholarly Writing: Publishing Manuscripts That Are Read, Downloaded, and Cited (pp. 71-90): Springer.

Jin, H. (2015). A Corpus-Based Study on Engagement in English Writing. English Teaching, 70(2).

Kim, H. (2016), JR Martin and PRR White (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 278 pages. 담화와인지, 23(2), 171-178.

Koutsantoni, D. (2004b). Attitude, certainty and allusions to common knowledge in scientific research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3, 163-182.

Koutsantoni, D. (2004ba). Relations of power and solidarity in scientific communities: A cross-cultural comparison of politeness strategies in the writing of native English speaking and Greek engineers. Multilingua-journal of Cross-cultural and Interlanguage Communication, 23, 111-143.

Mackinlay, E. (2002). Engaging with Theories of Dialogue and Voice: Using Bakhtin as a Framework to Understand Teaching and Learning Indigenous Australian Women’s Performance. Research Studies in Music Education, 19(1), 32–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1321103X020190010501

Mou, B. (2010). On constructive-engagement strategy of comparative philosophy. Comparative Philosophy, 1.

Müller, K., Salö, L., & Sörlin, S. (2024). Quality from within: Entry points to research quality in the humanities. Research Evaluation, 33, Article rvae029. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvae029

Prudenciano, J. B., & Raymundo, J. L. (2024). Metadiscourse Markers in Senior High School Students Academic Papers: A Constructed Learner Corpus-Based Investigation. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature & Translation, 7(10).

Qiu, X., Wang, Y. (Arthur), Dartey, E. A., & Kim, M. (2024). Interactional metadiscourse in expert and student disciplinary writing: Exploring intrageneric and functional variation. English for Specific Purposes. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2023.10.007

Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. Longman.

Rasti, I. (2011). Involving the Reader in the Text: Engagement Markers in Native and Non-native Student Argumentative Essays [Doctoral thesis, University of Liverpool].

Seyyedi, K. (2024). Rhetorical Analysis of Engagement in Discussion Section of Doctoral Dissertations Written by Kurdish Native Speakers. Cihan University-Erbil Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(1), pp 72-76. DOI: 10.24086/cuejhss.vol8n1y2024.pp 72-76

Toska, B. (2008). Dialogizing Communication through Pragmatic Markers. ELOPE, 5, 89–98. https://doi.org/10.4312/ELOPE.5.1-2.89-98

Vega Garrido, M. E. (2019). Characterizing level iv students’ use of engagement resources in academic writing in English: An exploratory study from a systemic functional perspective. Universidad del Norte.

Vergie, M. P. (2025). Academic Writing in an ODeL Institution: Stance and Engagement in Study Guides for First-year Students. UnisaRxiv.

Yuvayapan, F. & Yakut, İ. (2021). Engagement markers in L1 and L2 English academic writing: the case of master’s and doctorate theses. Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University Journal of Social Sciences, 18 (3), 1658-1670. DOI: 10.33437/ksusbd.963087

Xu, X., & Nesi, H. (2019). Differences in engagement: A comparison of the strategies used by British and Chinese research article writers. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 38, 121-134.