THESIS PROPOSAL

META-DISCOURSE AND RHETORICAL MOVES IN

ENGLISH ABSTRACT SECTION OF
UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ FINAL PROJECT
AT UNIROW TUBAN

DHOLIFUL HADI
0203515059

ENGLISH LANGUAGE EDUCATION

GRADUATE PROGRAM
SEMARANG STATE UNIVERSITY
2017
 APPROVAL

This thesis proposal entitled METADISCOURSE AND RETHORICAL MOVES IN

ENGLISH ABSTRACT SECTION OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ FINAL
PROJECT AT UNIROW TUBANsubmitted by Dholiful Hadi 0203515059 English
Language Education, Master’s Degree Program of Semarang State University (UNNES)
has been approved for proposal examination on April 13rd, 2017

Adviser I Adviser II

Prof. Dr.Warsono, Dip. TEFL. M.A Prof. Dr. Abdurrahman Faridi, M.Pd
NIP. - NIP. 195301121990021001
 CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Topic

English is acknowledged as an important language because English

is an international language which is widely used in communication by

people in most countries in the world. Furthermore, English is often used

in writing science books, journals, or articles about knowledge and

technology. Therefore, in order to be able to develop science, knowledge,

and technology, and to communicate with people from other countries,

English is taught in Indonesia as a foreign language from kindergarten

schools until universities. The students must be able to understand all

skills in English. There are four skills in learning English, namely

listening, speaking, reading and writing. According to Brown (2004: 218),

writing is a skill that is the exclusive domain of scribes and scholars in

educational or religious institutions.

For completing the students’ study, on the final semester they are

obliges to do research and hand in written reports called final project.

They have to write a final project which is understandable and

communicative to persuade and convince the readers. Besides Hyland

(2005:6) asserts that writing is significant in all our lives, its role in social,

professional and academic context because writing is central to our

personal experience and social identities.In a final project, there are many
parts that students should make. One of them is making an abstract final

project. An abstract is a greatly condensed version of a longer piece of

writing that highlights the major points covered, and concisely describes

the content and scope of the writing (Bond, 2009:2).

The first thing an examiner will look at is the abstract; in other

words, it is an important piece of work (Paltridge and Starfield, 2007:155).

It means that abstract is also a significant component because it can

determine whether the reader will read the full final project or not. In

addition, it will also influence the examiner‘s decision in measuring their

project. For this reason, writing an abstract should find ways of how to

briefly show the information from the whole papers in a short text. It

shows that the existance of an abstract in a final project has a big role,

because an abstract is a brief summary that can help the reader to

understand about the purpose of the final project. Bond (2009) also stated

that “Abstracts give readers a chance to quickly see what the main

contents and sometimes methods of a piece of writing are. They enable

readers to decide whether the work is interesting for them”. It means that

students should pay attention when they write an abstract in their final

project because it can influence whether the readers want to read the final

project they have written or not, but there are still many students of

university do not pay attention to this and let them to make mistakes

unconciously.
 Abstract is an important component, a summary of the whole final

project. Presented at the beginning of the final project, it is likely the first

substantive description of your work read by an external examiner. It

presents all the major elements of your work in a highly condensed form.

Abstract is not merely an introduction in the sense of a preface, preamble,

or advance organizer that prepares the reader for the final project. In

addition to that function, it must be capable of substituting for the whole

final project when there is insufficient time and space for the full text.

Many studies have been carried out from different aspects such as

the analyses of move ， pronoun ， genre and so on (Xiao & Cao, 2014;

Zhang, 2008; Ge& Yang, 2005). As Wang & Cheng (2016) states abstract

is a kind of discourse and discourse can be divided into basic discourse

and meta-discourse. Therefore, the features of abstracts can be analyzed

from the perspective of meta-discourse. The concept of meta-discourse

was put forward by Zellig Harris in 1959(Hyland, 2008). However, he

didn’t give the exact definition of meta-discourse. Instead, the term “meta-

discourse” was proposed by Williams in 1981. He defined meta-discourse

as “discourse about discourse, whatever does not refer to the subject

matter being addressed.” (Williams, 1981). Similarly, VandeKopple

(1985) defined meta-discourse as “the linguistic material which does not

add propositional information but which signals the presence of an

author”. Different from previous scholars, Hyland (2000) defined meta-

 discourse as “the linguistic resources used to organize a discourse or the

writer’s stance towards either its content or the reader”.

The information of the abstract is usually written in some moves

such as background, aim, method, result and conclusion. Besides, the

abstract should be written in no more than one page and should consist of

about 150−300 words. Furthermore, rhetorical move is also important

aspect which has to be considered in writing abstract. Abstracts are guided

by a series of moves which characterize the flow of the discourse. Swales

(as cited in Noguera, 2012, p. 68) used the terms ‘moves’ and ‘steps’ refer

to the sequential subdivision of each section of the RAs (Research

Articles). Move is also defined as a segment of the abstract. Each move

presents a particular intention or purpose which complete to the overall

communicative purpose of the text (Swales, as cited by Oneplee, p. 13).

The different moves of abstract had been presented in some studies. The

studies described the three-move, the four-move, and the five-move.

Therefore, my research is quite worth of examining meta-discourse

and rhetorical moves in English abstract section of undergraduate

students’ final project at UNIROW Tuban.

1.2 Reason for Choosing Topic

Writing an abstract particularly in English is not easy to do by

students of UNIROW Tuban because they are non-native English speakers

and English learners. Lon et al (2012) say that an abstract is guided by a

series of moves which characterize the flow of the discourse. It means

 rhetorical moves are important in writing an abstract since it is another

way to reach the communicative purpose. Meta-discourse is a widely used

term in current discourse analysis and language education, referring to an

interesting, and relatively new, approach to conceptualizing interaction

between text producers and their texts and between text producers and

users (Hyland, 2005:). Therefore, the writer chooses of examining meta-

discourse and rhetorical moves in English abstract of undergraduate

students’ final project at UNIROW Tuban as topic on the research.

1.3 Research Problem

Based on the problem of the study, the researcher formulated the research

question as follow:

1. How is meta-discourse types used to accompany the moves in English

abstract section of undergraduate students’ final project at UNIROW

Tuban?

2. How are the categories of rhetorical moves used in English abstract

section of undergraduate students’ final project at UNIROW Tuban?

3. How do meta-discourse and rhetorical moves influence the abstract

section of undergraduate students’ final project at UNIROW Tuban?

1.4 Objective of the Study

Related to the research problem above, the study aims:

1. to analyze the meta-discourse types used to accompany the moves in

English abstract section of undergraduate students’ final project at

UNIROW Tuban.

2. to explain how rhetorical moves used in English abstract section of

undergraduate students’ final project at UNIROW Tuban.

3. to enlighthen how meta-discourse and rhetorical moves influence the

abstract section of undergraduate students’ final project at UNIROW

Tuban

1.5 Significance of the Study

1. Theoretically

The findings of this research are expected to provide and

support information about metadiscourse by Hyland (2005, 2013) and

rhetorical moves made by students of university in writing an abstract

final project. Theoretically, the study hopefully extends the

meaningful knowledge for lecturers in teaching writing for students

generally and especially teaching academic writing focusing on the

writing abstract and its contents used in the formal final project by

using metadiscourse and rhetorical moves.

2. Practically

It is expected that the analysis of students’ abstract writing by

using metadiscourse and rhetorical moves hopefully can assist

 lecturers to teach English and Linguistics for university students more

easily and attractively. Then, the research results will help improve

learner‘s writing skill especially in applying moves and meta-

discourse in the abstract section. It is also used as the source of

information and references for the students of English Study Program

who will write a final project.

3. Pedagogically

It is hoped that the study hopefully helps improve university

students’ ability to comprehend and analyze the study of writing

especially the writing abstract in proper rules and its contens in terms

of metadiscourse and rhetorical moves. Moreover, the result of the

research will give valuable contributions and literature to the next

researcher in education institution as one way to improve the quality

of students’ ability to write abstract on final project.

1.6 Scope of the study

The word final project in this study means a task written by

undergraduate (S1) students as the requirement to get graduate degree. The

final project for undergraduate (S1) degree in Indonesia is known as

skripsi, so the word final project in this study means as skripsi of

undergraduate (S1) students.

This study focuses on the meta-discourse by Hyland (2005,2013)

and rhetorical moves made by graduate students at English Study Program

in writing an abstract final project. This research is limited on the final

 project written by 2016undergraduate (S1) students at English Study

Program of UNIROW Tuban.

1.7 Definition of Key Terms

1. Meta-discourse

Metadiscourse is a new and interesting field of inquiry which is

believed to play a vital role in organizing and producing persuasive

writing, based on the norms and expectations of people involved.

Metadiscourse embodies the idea that writing and speaking are more

than just the communication of ideas and presentation of ideational

meaning. The cover term for the self-reflective negotiates interactional

meaning in a text, assisting the writer/speaker to express a viewpoint

and engage with readers as members of a particular community

(Hyland, 2005:37). "Metadiscourse is a functional category that can

be realized in a great variety of ways"(Adel, 2006: p.22). She believes

that an item which is metadiscursive in some point due to its relation

with its co-text and its use, may not be metadiscursive in another. The

importance of metadiscourse is gradually becoming recognized in

language classroom and a number of studies are done on the effects of

teaching metadiscourse markers on some language skills like reading,

writing and listening. These studies reveal the significance of teaching

metadiscourse markers to improve students’ communication abilities.

2. Rhetorical Moves

The application of rhetorical move analysis to applied linguistics

research articles in their entirety, thus adding to the ever-evolving

knowledge of how writing in disciplines can be understood as having

predictable and expected structures. The rhetorical moves’ instruments

that realize a sub-set of communicative purposes associated with

genre, and as such they are interpreted in the context of communicative

purposes of the genre (Bhatia, 2006:84-85). Rhetorical units are that

perform a coherent communicative function in a written or spoken

discourse. They are flexible in terms of the linguistic realizations

(Swales, 2004). Rhetorical Move analysis as represented by Pho

(2008b) represents academic research articles in terms of hierarchically

organized text made up of distinct sections; each section can be

subdivided into moves and each move can be broken down into steps.

Rhetorical moves is necessary for publishing in the given genre, the

general knowledge of the move structure of certain models and

frameworks per se does not guarantee publication in accredited

international journals. Thorough familiarity with the nuances and

details of the moves and especially the steps adopted in writing various

sections of the given genre (e.g., Ras published in international

journals in applied linguistics), as depicted by the findings of the

current study, is also necessary for the authors of local journal RAs if

they intend to get published in well-established international journals.

3. Abstract Section

An abstract serves the purpose of summarizing your research or

making your case for a project (or grant funding) to be awarded to you.

It should encapsulate the most important information that the paper or

proposal will present. In the case of obtaining grants or bids, that could

include why your firm or organization is the best for the job or award.

Present your company as the solution to the problem. A description or

factual summary of the much longer report and is meant to give the

reader an exact and concise knowledge of the full article (Bhatia,

1993:78). A greatly condensed version of a longer piece of writing that

highlights the major points covered, and concisely describes the

content and scope of the writing (Bond 2009:2). An abstract is a brief

overview of the key points of an article, report, thesis, or proposal.

Positioned at the head of a paper, the abstract is usually "the first thing

that individuals read and, as such, decide whether to continue reading"

the article or report. It is also what is most accessed by search engines

and researchers conducting their own literature reviews" (Butin, 2010).

4. Genre Analysis:

A genre-based approach to analysing texts can yield interesting

linguistic insights and may be pedagogically rewarding as well.

Teacherr, researchers, and students can now quickly find genres in

postcards, lecture notes, shopping lists and school essays (‘rare’ in the

sense that they were not included in previous-generation general

 corpora and are hard to get hold of in machine-readable format even

nowadays). A system of analysis that is able to reveal something of

patterns of organization of ‘genre’ and the language used to express

those patterns (Swales, 1981). A term for grouping a text together,

representing how writers typically use language to respond to recurring

situations (Hyland 2004:4). Martin (1984: 25) describes genre as ‘a

staged, goal-oriented, purposeful activity in whichspeakers engage as

members of our culture’. Further examination of Martin’s work, in

which he gives examples of genres such as poems, narratives,

expositions, lectures, seminars, recipes, manuals, appointment-making,

service encounters, and news broadcasts. Genres mediate relationships

and represent social contexts. Writers make social/political choices in

deciding which perspectives to incorporate, which information to

stress, which words to use, and even how to organization information.

Genres involve power dynamics in that participants who control genres

also control representations and interpretations of participants and

relationships in contexts, and thus the ways in which relationships are

constructed and managed.

1.8 Outlines of the Study

This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter one provides general

information about the present study, they are background of the study and

reasons for choosing the study which tell about the reason why the writer

chooses the topic and both the use and analysis of the topic. Second,
research questions and objectives of the study are provided by the writer

focusing on the three points which answer the analysis in the study. Third,

significances of the study which are used theoretically, practically, and

pedagogically in the real teaching and learning process.

Chapter two contains, first the review of previous studies which

contains sixty (60) previous studies. The sixty previous studies reflect the

three variables used in the study, they are metadiscourse, rhetorical

moves, abstract, and those analysis in writing abstract. Second, the

foundation of theoritical review which provides the theory of

metadiscourse, rhetorical moves, the uses of writing abstract and their

classifications, and the theoritical framework. This part elaborates the

theories of metadiscourse and rhetorical moves used in the writing,

especially in writing abstract.

Chapter three outlines the research methodology that portrays the

analysis works. This segment enlightens the qualitative approach used in

the study, focus of the unit of analysis, how the data in the study is

collected and analyzed, and the triangulation is done by the writer from

the expert’s judgment.

Chapter four presents the result of analysis and discussion of the

findings. This chapter explains the results of the analysis from the

metadiscourse and rhetorical moves used in writing abstract made by the

students to provide proper contens.

 Chapter five concludes the present research and offer some relevant

suggestions. This section summarizes the explanations of the result in

chapter four in order to get the main points as the example to be used in

the real teaching and writing.

 CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Reviews of previous studies

To identify the picture of the study, several previous studies were

examined and attached as a literature review. The research about meta-

discourse and rhetorical moves has been investigated by some foreign

researchers. The writer uses eighth previous studies related to meta-

discourse and rhetorical moves.

The first study about moves and meta-discourse in abstract section

was conducted by Lon et al (2012) who investigated rhetorical moves and

meta-discourse features in undergraduate hard science abstract section of

final term papers. They followed the Santos‘ (1996) model of move

patterns and Hyland‘s meta-discourse model (2005) to analyse the data

and achieve their goal. In their study, they found that not all moves are

used in sequence from Move 1 (situating the research ―topic

generalization‖) to Move 5 (discussing the research). Most of students

omitted Move 4 (summarizing the finding) and Move 5. This was due to

the students‘ lack of awareness in writing. Afterward, both interactive and

interactional meta-discourse resources were frequently employed in Move

1. Code glosses, attitude markers and self- mentions were dominant.

The second research is meta-discourse used in final project

abstract: A cross-cultural Study by Ozdemir and Longo. They investigate

cultural variations in the use of meta-discourse between Turkish and USA

postgraduate students’ abstracts in MA final project written in English.

The taxonomy was borrowed from Hyland (2005). The corpora in the

present study comprise a total of 52 final project abstracts written in

English from the department of English Language Teaching, 26 final

project from USA students and 26 from Turkish students. Both qualitative

and quantitative methods were employed to analyse the texts in the

corpora. The analysis revealed that there were some cultural differences in

the amounts and types of meta-discourse. The incidence of evidential,

endophorics, code glosses, boosters, attitude markers, self-mentions were

fewer in Turkish students’ master final project abstracts. However,

Turkish students used meta-discourse transitions, frame markers and

hedges more than USA students. Pedagogical implications were provided

in light of empirical data.

The third is about An Analysis of Meta-discourse in the Abstracts

of English Academic Papers ByLichan Wang & Yi Zhang. Based on the

theory of meta-discourse and the classifications of Hyland, this study

compared the different frequency and usage of meta-discourse in

mathematical and linguistic academic papers. Two small abstracts corpora

were compiled in this study including 30 mathematical and 30 linguistic

abstracts of academic papers from Social Science Citation Index (SSCI)

and Science Citation Index (SCI) journals. The results showed that there

appeared more meta-discourse in the abstracts of linguistic academic

papers than mathematical academic papers. Interactive meta discourse was

adopted more than interactional meta-discourse in abstracts of the two

disciplines. In the use of interactive meta-discourse, both disciplines

demonstrated the same trends in the frequencies of five sub-categories.

Regarding interactional meta-discourse, hedges were the most frequently

used meta-discourse markers in linguistic academic papers while self-

mentions were most frequently used in mathematics. It is suggested that

more interactive meta-discourse should be used in abstracts of both arts

and science academic papers.

The fourth study is by Tomoyuki Kawase(2015). The paper

investigates how research writers construct meta-discourse in the

introductions of their PhD theses and subsequently published research

articles. The analysis shows that the majority of the writers make greater

use of meta-discourse in their article introductions. The most significant

changes include greater use of phrases referring to previous research, less

reference to other parts of the text, and still less use of phrases signalling

authorial presence. Close examination reveals that these variations derive

from genre-specific features, including that writers of PhD thesis

introductions present previews of the subsequent chapters. This paper

closes by arguing that the variations can also be ascribed to the nature of

the PhD thesis as an educational genre and that of research articles as a

professional genre in which writers need to survive severe competition to

get their manuscripts published.

 The next study used tittle A Comparison Study on the Rhetorical

Moves of Abstracts in Published Research Articles and Master’s Foreign-

language Thesis by Hongwei Ren(2011). This topic examining the

rhetorical moves in the abstracts of Chinese Master’s English theses and

published research articles in applied linguistics, this study compares the

practices of student writers and expert writers in fulfilling the rhetorical

goal of abstracts to shed light on the degree to which students appropriate

to the practices of their own discipline and to provide relevant ESP

materials for both teachers and student writers of applied linguistics,

especially those who write in English as a foreign language.

The study is from Lam Yik San and Helen Tan using topic A

Comparative Study of the Rhetorical Moves in Abstracts of Published

Research Articles and Students’ Term Papers in the Field of Computer and

Communication Systems Engineering. This study seeks to compare and

contrast the rhetorical moves in abstracts of students’ term papers and

published articles in the field of Computer and Communications Systems

Engineering. The reason is to identify to what extend the rhetorical moves

used in the abstracts of students’ term papers approximate to the published

articles. Using Santos’ (1996) five move pattern as the model of analysis,

the data indicated that both the abstracts in the students’ term papers and

the published articles did use some of the rhetorical moves. However, the

pattern of use did vary among them. Furthermore, the study also revealed
that abstracts with a complete five moves presented a more comprehensive

overview of the content of the study when compared with abstracts with

limited moves. These findings could heighten the awareness of the student

writers as to how abstract writing should be structured and it could also

increase their sophistication in the crafting of an effective abstract. Finally,

the data could also form as an informed input for both writing instructors

and program designers to incorporate the learning of the rhetorical moves

in abstract writing instructions.

The previous study also used on the topic Rhetorical Move

Detection in English Abstracts: Multi-label Sentence Classifiers and their

Annotated Corpora by Dayrellat al(2012). Here, this study focuses on

abstracts of standard research papers written in English and aims to tackle

a fundamental limitation of current machine-learning classifiers: they are

mono-labeled, that is, a sentence can only be assigned one single label.

However, such approach does not adequately reflect actual language use

since a move can be realized by a clause, a sentence, or even several

sentences. Here, we present MAZEA (Multi-label Argumentative Zoning

for English Abstracts), a multi-label classifier which automatically

identifies rhetorical moves in abstracts but allows for a given sentence to

be assigned as many labels as appropriate. We have resorted to various

other NLP tools and used two large training corpora: (i) one corpus

consists of 645 abstracts from physical sciences and engineering (PE) and

(ii) the other corpus is made up of 690 from life and health sciences (LH).
This paper presents our preliminary results and also discusses the various

challenges involved in multi-label tagging and works towards satisfactory

solutions. In addition, we also make our two training corpora publicly

available so that they may serve as benchmark for this new task.

The last previous study is the thesis used the title A Comparative

Study on the Rhetorical Moves of Abstracts in Published Research

Articles and Egyptian Master’s Theses in Applied Linguistics by Awwaad

(2012). This thesis addresses this need and provides guidelines for

producing relevant ESP writing materials for Egyptian- MA students of

applied linguistics by: comparing the rhetorical moves in twenty abstracts

of Egyptian MA theses (EMAs) and twenty abstracts in published-

empirical research articles (RAs) and investigating the key words and

tenses in these moves. The researcher randomly chose 5 abstracts from

four different public universities that represent the four educational

regions in Egypt: Cairo University from the Center, Alexandria University

from the North, Suez Canal University from the Suez and Assiut

University from the South. Furthermore, the abstracts of published

research articles were randomly selected from two journals: 10 from

Applied Linguistics and 10 from TESOL Quarterly. All the MA-theses and

research articles were conducted and published in the period between 2007

and 2011. The researcher used an eight-move model adapted from

Hyland’s (2004) and Santos’ (1996) models to analyse the selected

abstracts. The analysis shows that there is agreement between both corpora
in classifying the moves as obligatory or optional. While Move 3,

Purpose, Move 4, Methodology and Move 5, Results are obligatory, Move

1, Situating the research, Move 2, Stating the problem, Move 6 Drawing

conclusions and Move 7, Making recommendations are optional. The

analysis shows several variations between the abstracts in both corpora

and the suggested model of analysis. For instance, two new moves are

identified in the analysis: the Delimitations Move and the Referent Move.

The study concludes that these variations between the abstracts and the

proposed model indicate that writers should choose the moves that best

serve their purposes rather than include all the moves. Concerning the use

of lexical items and tenses in both corpora, the findings of the study

indicate that the present simple is the predominant tense in most of the

moves of the abstract, apart from the Methodology and the Results Moves,

in which the past simple is the predominant one. Furthermore, it is

observed that some of the Egyptian writers show a lack of awareness of

the function of the present simple when they use it in Move 4, the

Methodology. Regarding the lexical items used in both corpora, the

analysis shows that while the Egyptian writers use verbs that denote firm

conclusions, the native writers use verbs that would allow for other

interpretations. In addition, while the Egyptian writers use authoritative

tone to give recommendations, the native writers impersonalize theirs.

There are differences between previous studies above with my

research. Lon et al‘s (2012) study only describes rhetorical moves and
 meta-discourse features that accompany the moves. Nevertheless, mine

does not only describe rhetorical moves and meta-discourse features in

each move but also explain how function of meta-discourse resources

applied in relation to the moves. Moreover, my study discusses the

occurrence of rhetorical moves and move patterns which are varied and

opposed to the guidelines as well as Weissberg & Buker‘s model (1990),

functions of abstract referring to Day‘s (1995) model, explains why certain

meta-discourse types and resources become dominant and occur in certain

move and explores the function of meta-discourse resources used in

relation to moves.

Therefore, my research topic is quite worth of examining meta-

discourse and rhetorical moves in the Abstracts section of undergraduate

students‘ final project.

2.2 Reviews of theoretical Studies

This section discusses Genre, Abstract and meta-discourse.

2.2.1 Genre

This section includes two sub-sections: first, definition of genre and

genre Analysis and the second, genre and discipline

2.2.1.1 Definition of Genre and Genre Analysis

Genre : a class or category of artistic endeavor having a particular

form, content, technique (dictionary.com).

Hyland (2004:4) states that genre is a term for grouping a text

together, representing how writers typically use language to respond to

recurring situations. For many people, it is intuitively attractive concept

that helps to organize the common sense labels they use to categorize text

and the situations in which they occur. The concept of genre is based on

the idea that members of community usually have little difficulty in

recognizing similarities in the text they use frequently and are able to draw

on their repeated experiences with such texts read, understand and perhaps

write them relatively easy.

Genre analysis has always been a multi-disciplinary activity

attracting attention not only from linguists (both applied and

computational), discourse analysts, communication experts and

rhetoricians, but also from sociologists, cognitive scientists, translators,

advertisers, and plain English campaigners (Bhatia:2002). Genres serve

typical socially recognised communicative purposes, yet we often find

genres being exploited to convey private intentions (Bhatia, 1993).

A genre comprises a set of communicative events, the members of

which share some set of communicative purposes (Swales, 1990).

In addition, Hartono (2005:5) defines that genre is used to refer to

particular text types, not the traditional varieties of literature. It is a type or

kind of text, defined in terms of its social purposes, also the level of

context dealing with social purpose. In conclusion, genre is a type of text

that has criteria different with another text, each genre has each types.
2.2.1.2 Genre and Discipline
Genre and discipline interact in an interesting and dynamic

manner, especially in academic discourse. The first thing that one can

notice in this area is that there are typical sets of genres associated with

each discipline and they are rather distinct in terms of their generic

integrity, textual and rhetorical characteristics, functional values, and

social purposes and applications, with little overlap whatsoever

(Flowerdew, 2002:31). The example of variations in academic discourse

dealing with genre and discipline is in the Figure 2.1 as follows:

Figure 1.1 Variations in academic Discourse

Moreover, Hyland (2004: 46) proposes some academic and

professional written genres as follows:
Table 2.1 Hyland‘s Some Academic and Professional Genre
Academic Professional
Research article Direct mail letters
Conference abstract Business faxes
Book reviews Engineering report
Grant proposals Legal cases and briefs
Undergraduate essays e-mail memos
 Ph.D. dissertation Company annual report
Textbooks Charity donation request
Reprint request Letters of recommendation

2.2.2 Abstract
This section is divided into eighth sub-sections. First is definition

of abstract, second is the importance of abstract final project , third is the

purposes of abstract final project, fourth is kinds of abstract, fifth is

components of abstract, sixth is some important things in writing abstract,

seventh is abstract and genre, and the last is rhetorical moves in abstract.

2.2.2.1 Definition of Abstract

According to Bond (2009:2) that an abstract is a greatly condensed

version of a longer piece of writing that highlights the major points

covered, and concisely describes the content and scope of the writing.

Journal of young Investigators stated that “An abstract is a single

paragraph of about 500 words or less. In the abstract, the author must

summarize why the research was conducted, how it was conducted, and

what the major results and conclusions were. References are typically not

cited in the abstract, since then reader expects a more full discussion in the

body of the article”. An Abstract summarizes the major aspects of a paper.

It is usually one paragraph long, and should succinctly summarize the

purpose of the paper, the methods used, the major results, and the author’s

interpretations and conclusions.

Based on the definition of an abstract above and due to the

previous page about the definition of final project, we can conclude that
 abstract final project is a brief summary or the chief point of a final project

that highlights the major points covered, and concisely describes the

content and scope of the writing and also helps the reader to understand

about the purpose of the final project.

2.2.2.2 The Importance of AbstractFinal project

An abstract in a final project is very important. Travelyan, Cook

and Fisher (2007:5) stated that “Ninety-nine per cent of readers will read

only the title and abstract of your paper.” It means that abstract has a big

role in atrracting the readers to read the article or essay made by someone.

A good abstract can help the resercher to make the readers want to read

their research paper, so that a reasercher should pay attention in writing an

abstract for their reasearch paper.

Another opinion is delivered by Blackwell and Martin (2011:13)

who stated that providing all the key of information is the most difficult,

but the most essential, in the abstract, for the following reasons:

1. It is the only parts of the paper that is read by many reades, and often

the only parts that is freely available.

2. It has to summarize the study and be fully understandable without the

rest of the paper.

3. It must be short.

4. It must show that the study has novel aspect.

 From the reasons above, the writer can say that the existance of an

abstract in a theis is very essential, so that it must be careful when

someone wants to write an abstract.

2.2.2.3 The purpose of Abstract Final project

“The purpose of abstract final project is to give readers a quick

identification of the basic content of the final project. It should "stand on

its own" and be a self-contained document. There should be no need to

look elsewhere in the final project for an understanding of what is said in

the abstract.” (http://www.squidoo.com/final projectabstract).

Bond (2009: 2) also stated that “Abstracts give readers a chance to

quickly see what the main contents and sometimes methods of a piece of

writing are. They enable readers to decide whether the work is of interest

for them.” From those statements, the writer can said that an abstract final

project has purposes to make the reader easier to find the main content of

the final project, and it is also help the reader to understand the content of

the final project quickly. Beside that it also can atrract the readers to read

the next pages of the research’s paper that someone has done.

2.2.2.4 Kinds of Abstract

According to Kilborn (1998) at http://leo.stcloudstate.edu

stated that there are two types of abstract which are typically used:

1. Descriptive abstract

Descriptive abstract is an abstract which tells the readers about the

information of the contain of a report, article or paper. It includes

purpose, methods, and scope of a report, article, or paper, but it

 doesn’t provide the results, conclusions and recommendations. A

descriptive abstract is always very short. It is ususally under 100

words. It introduces the subject to the readers, who must then read

the report, article or paper to find out the author’s result,

conclusions, or recommendation.

2. Informative abstract

Informative abstract is a kind of abstract which communicate

specific information from the report, article, or paper. It incledues

purpose, methods, and scope of the report and it provides the

result, conclusions, and recommendations of the report, article or

paper. An informative abstract is short. It is usually consist of one

until two paragraphs, depending upon the length of the original

work being abstracted. It is usully ten percent or less of the length

of the original piece, and it allows the readers to decide whether

they want to read the report, article, or paper or not.

2.2.2.5 The Components of Abstract

According to Bond (2009:2) the components of abstract are:

1. A title identical to the title of the final project

2. The name of the author

3. The date of the final project

4. Where the final project is submitted or published

5. The main topic (key words) of the final project

6. The purpose of the final project

 7. The methods used to research information

8. Further sub-sections within the final project

9. Results, conclusions, or recommendations

2.2.2.6 Some Important Things in Writing Abstract

“Providing all the critical information in the abstract can often seem

difficult, since many points could be included, but words limits are

generally very tight. Fortunately, jotting down a summary of the

rationale, objectives, what was done, findings and the implications is

also helpful when writing abstracts. Indeed, if one or more these

aspects are not included, the resulting abstract will be uninformative.”

(Blackwell and Martin:2011).

Blackwell and Martin also stated that Failing to mention the location

of a trials, the treatments, or the implications will seriously damage

chances of the paper being accepted. The result could be interesting,

but it is impossible to tell from this abstract. Thus, the whole paper

must be read to find outif it is worth reading, but many readers will not

bother. The abstract could be greatly improved, by simply mentioning

the rationale, the objective (s), what was done, the main finding and

the implications.

2.2.2.6. 1 The Quality of A good Abstract

A good abstract has the following qualities:

1. Uses one or more well developed paragraphs: these are

unified, coherent, concise

 2. Uses an introduction/body/conclusion structure which

presents the purpose, results, conclusions, and

recommendations

3. Follows the chronology of the final project

4. Provides logical connections between the information

included

5. Adds no new information, but simply summarizes

6. Often uses passive verbs to downplay the author and

emphasize information Bond (2009: 2)

2.2.2.6.2 Steps for Writing Effective Abstract

According to Blackwell and Martin, there are some ways to

make an abstract as follow:

1. The abstract could be greatly improved by mentioning

the rationale, the objective (s), what was done, the

main finding and their implications (with little

modification) as follow:

a. First, mentioning the rational

b. Then mentioning the objectives and what was

done

c. Then mention the findings

d. The last steps is mentioning the implications

e. Finally the resulting abstract is already much

more informative. All that remains to be done is

to link the statements, and add a little detail.

 2. An abstract can be composed from modified forms of

the brief statements regarding the rational, the

objective, what was done, the finding and their

implications. After regarding statements from the the

ratinale, the objective, what was done, the finding and

also the implications, an informative abstract can be

composed by linking the statements, and adding

appropiate details from notes compiled during the

study.

2.2.2.7 Abstract and Genre

Considering the importance of writing a good abstract to

persuade the reader, it is obvious that abstract is a part of genre.

The previous discussion can be summarized that genres refer to

communicative purpose, text structure and linguistic features.

The relation between abstract and genre is central to Suroso‘s

(2010:18) description that an abstract is a specific genre since it

is also part of research article. Moreover, the distinctive features

of abstract as a genre is on its communicative purpose, text

structure and linguistic features of abstract writing; for instance,

writing an abstract has a communicative purpose to represent

text briefly and objectively which also has a specific text

structure (i.e. general background, purpose, method, result, and

conclusion).
2.2.2.8 Rhetorical Moves in Abstract Section

Swales (1981), pioneering rhetorical moves in introduction

section‘, introduced the notion of move called communicative

move. Suharno (2012:22) explains that the term move by Swales

(1982) was then adopted by other language practitioners doing

similar research in academic settings. It also refers to rhetorical

function. Suharno (2012:79) says that rhetorical functions can be

seen from the format existing in the research papers such as

abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections.

All the rhetorical functions contained in those sections are

termed “communicative moves”. Concerning the term ‘move’,

Bhatia (2006:84-85) defines rhetorical moves as rhetorical

instruments that realize a sub-set of communicative purposes

associated with a genre, and as such they are interpreted in the

context of the communicative purposes of the genre‖.

In view of rhetorical moves, Day proposes (1995:30) four

rhetorical moves in abstract section, especially informational

abstracts: 1) the principal objectives and scope of the

investigation, 2) the methods used, 3) the result and 4) the

principal conclusions. However, Weissberg and Buker

(1990:192) propose that the typical elements in abstract section

consist of five features: 1) background information (B), 2) the

principal activity (or purpose) of the study and its scope (B), 3)
methods or some information about the methodology used (M),

4) the important result of the study (R), and 5) conclusion or

recommendation (C). They also add that in shortening the

abstract, the essential elements are purpose and method

presented first (background information is not included). Then

the most important results are summarized. Finally, conclusions

and recommendations are included. Recommendation is optional

and written in one or two sentences.

Different from Day (1995) and Weissberg and Buker (1990),

Santos (1996) proposed five-move model in the field of

linguistics (see table 2.1) which also offer ―optional and

obligatory move‖ (compare to Pho, 2008).

Table 2.2Santos‘ (1996) five-move models

Optional
Move Function / Description /obligatory
move
Move 1: Setting the scene for the
situating the current research (topic Optional
research (STR) generalization)
Move 2: Stating the purpose of the
presenting the study, research question Obligatory
research (PTR) and/or hypotheses
Move 3:
describing the Describing the materials,
Obligatory
methodology subject, variables, procedures
(DTM)
Move 4:
summarizing Reporting the main findings
Obligatory
the findings of the study
(STF)
Move 5: Interpreting the Optional
discussing the result/findings and/or giving
 conclusion/recommendations,
research implications/applications of
study

Meanwhile, the moves required by the guidelines are in line

with Weissberg and Buker (1990): background information,

purpose of the study and its scope, the methods, the result of the

study, and conclusion or recommendation.

2.2.3 Meta-discourse

This section is divided into three sub-sections consisting of 1) a

brief overview of meta-discourse, 2) definitions of meta-discourse,

and 3) key principles of meta-discourse, and 4) a classification of

meta-discourse.

2.2.3.6 A Brief Overview of Meta-discourse

Hyland (2005:3) explained that the concept of a way of

understanding language in use, describing a writer‘s or speaker‘s

attempt to influence a receiver‘s perception of a text coined by

Zellig Harris (1959) contributes to the term of meta-discourse.

Moreover, discussions of meta-discourse have been heavily

influenced by Halliday‘s (1973) distinction of ideational,

interpersonal and textual function. Then, the concept has been

developed by some writers including Williams (1981),

VandeKopple (1985), Crismore (1989) and Hyland (2004).

Hyland (1998:3-4) also asserted that a view of writing as social

and communicative engagement between a writer and reader

influences the approach to meta-discourse because its central

point is the ways writers place themselves into their work to

show their communicative intentions. Then, meta-discourse

takes an important concept in research in composition, reading,

rhetoric and text studies.

Some studies have suggested the importance of meta-

discourse in casual conversation (Schriffin, 1980), school

textbooks (Crismore, 1989), oral narratives (Norrick, 2001),

science popularizations (Crismore and Fransworth, 1990),

undergraduate textbooks (Hyland, 2000), postgraduate

dissertations (Button, 1999; Hyland, 2004; swales, 1990) and

company annual reports (Hyland, 1998). These studies show that

meta-discourse is an important means of facilitating

communication, supporting a position, increasing readability,

and building relationship with the receivers (Hyland, 2005:5).

Although meta-discourse is much used in the area of academic

writing, the studies of meta-discourse have been suggestive

rather than definitive, and other concepts such as evaluation

(Hunston and Thompson, 2000) and engagement (Hyland, 2001)

have made the analysts change into those concepts. Moreover, in

analysing real texts or understanding how writer communicate

effectively, the origins of meta-discourse in pedagogic style

guides (Williams, 1981) and intuitive reflection (VandeKople,

 1985) has an insufficiently solid theoretical foundation. Thus,

Hyland (2005) proposes to re-examine the term of meta-

discourse to make it more theoretically robust, empirically

usable, and pedagogically useful (Hyland, 2005:6).

2.2.3.7 Definition of Meta-discourse

Williams (1981:226) defines meta-discourse as ―writing about

writing, whatever does not refer to the subject matter being

addressed. Similarly, Williams and Kopple (1985:83) defines

meta-discourse as ―discourse about discourse or

communication about communication‖ (Compare to Crismoreet

al., 1993). It means that writers do not add propositional content

but help readers organize, classify, interpret, evaluate, and react

to such material on the level of meta-discourse.

Nevertheless, Hyland (2005:16) has recently argued that meta-

discourse is not simply ‗discourse about discourse‘ or ‗talk

about talk‘ that refers to aspects of the text itself. Hyland

(2005:37) also emphasizes a clear definition of meta-discourse as

follows:

Meta-discourse is the cover term for the self-

reflective expressions used to negotiate
interactional meaning in a text, assisting the
writer (or speaker) to express a viewpoint and
engage with readers as members of a particular
community.
 It means that meta-discourse also includes features of language

which describe not only how we organize our ideas, but also how

we relate to our readers or listeners.

2.2.3.8 Key Principle of Meta-discourse

Hyland and Tse (2004) propose three key principles of

meta-discourse: 1) meta-discourse is distinct from propositional

content, 2) meta-discourse refers to aspects of the text that

embody writer-reader interactions, and 3) meta-discourse refers

only to relations which are internal to the discourse. These three

key principles underpin the model of meta-discourse that bring

the features of meta-discourse theoretically strong and

analytically reliable.

The first principle which is an essential starting point for

both theory building and analysis concerns two main types of

entity: things in the world and things in the discourse,

propositions and meta-discourse. Proposition is generally used to

refer to information about external reality: thoughts, actors or

states of affairs in the world outside the text. Halliday (1994:70)

says that propositional material is something that can be argued

about, affirmed, denied, doubted, insisted upon, qualified,

tempered, regretted and so on. Meanwhile, meta-discourse is

explicit markers which help readers to identify how a writer‘s

arguments are to be understood and the role is to show the

writer‘s communicative intent in presenting propositional matter

(Beauvais, 1989). However, the distinction between meta-

discourse and propositional content has no separate ‗textual‘

function. Both propositional and meta-discourse elements occur

together in texts, often in the same sentences, and that both

elements are crucial to coherence and meaning in which each

element expresses its own content: one concerned with the world

and the other with the text and its reception. Meta-discourse

conveys the writer‘s intended meaning like propositional

discourse - it is part of the message. That is, it is as integral to

the process of communication and not mere commentary on

propositions. Yet, meta-discourse does not simply support

propositional content; it is by the means by which propositional

content is made coherent, intelligible and persuasive to a

particular audience.

In the second principle, Hyland and Tse (2004) suggest that

meta-discourse must be seen as embodying the interactions need

for successful communication. Hyland (2013:72) says ―the

interactions that have a significant characterization of meta-

discourse is provided by Thompson (2001) and Thompson and

Thetela (1995) consisting of interactive and interactional.

Interactive resources are related to the ways writers show the

arrangement of their texts based on their appreciation of the

reader‘s likely knowledge and understandings. This influences

the reader friendliness of a text and primarily involves the

management of information flow, addressing how writers guide

readers by anticipating their reaction and needs. Nevertheless,

interactional resources are more personal and involve the reader

collaboratively in the development of the text. These concern the

writer‘s explicit interventions to comment on and evaluate

material. Thus, interactional represents the writer‘s overt

performance in the text while the interactive more discreetly

embodies it. Consequently, the description above leads to reject

the duality of textual and interpersonal functions in meta-

discourse. Hyland (2005:41) suggests that all meta-discourse are

interpersonal; in other words, textual meta-discourse is therefore

actually another aspect of interpersonal features of the text

because it is the writers‘ highlight in the relationships and

aspects of the organization to accommodate readers‘

understanding, guide their reading, and make them aware of the

writers‘ preferred interpretation.

In the third principle, internal relation connects events in

the account and is solely communicative. Consider the

following:

(1) In contrast, these findings were not found among the low

collectivists. (Ph.D. dissertation)

 The connecting device above sets up relations between

aspects of the discourse and express meta-discourse function.

It constructs logical relations which are internal to the steps

in their arguments. ―In contrast‖ shows a conjunction

relation, alerting the reader to move away from the

expectancies set up by the prior text (Hyland, 2013:74).

2.2.3.9 A Classification of Meta-discourse

Hyland (2005, 2013) proposes the classification of meta-

discourse in Table 2.3. based on a functional approach which

regards meta-discourse as the ways writers refer to the text, the

writer or the reader. The classification also includes those three

principles of meta-discourse. The model is influenced by

Thompson and Thetela‘s (1995) conception of interactive and

interactional by including both stance and engagement features

(Hyland, 2001) and by building on earlier models of meta-

discourse (Hyland 1998, 2000)

Table 2.3 An Interpersonal Model of Metadiscourse by Hyland

(2005, 2013)
Category Function Examples
Help to guide the
Interactive reader through Resources
the text
Express relations
In addition; but;
Transitions between main
thus; and
clauses
Refer to discourse
Finally, to conclude,
Frame markers act, sequences or
my purpose is
stages
Endophoric Refer to Noted above, see
 information in
markers other parts of the Fig, in section 2
text
Refer to
According to x; z
Evidentials information from
states
other texts
Elaborate
Namely; e.g.; such
Code glosses propositional
as; in other words
meanings
Involve the reader
Interactional Resources
in the text
Withhold
Might; perhaps;
Hedges commitment and
possible; about
open dialogue
Emphasize
In fact; definitely; it
Boosters certainty or close
is clear that
dialogue
Express writer‘s
Unfortunately, I
Attitude markers attitude to
agree, surprisingly
proposition
Explicit reference
Self mentions I; we; my; me; our
to author (s)
Explicitly build
Engagement Consider; note; you
relationship with
markers can see that
reader

2.2.3.9.2 Interactive and Interactional Dimension

Hyland (2013:77-78) further explained that the

model of meta-discourse above consists of two dimensions

of interaction discussed clearly as follows:

The first dimension is the interactive dimension. This

relates to the writer‘s consciousness of a participating

receiver. Shaping and constraining a text to meet the needs

of particular readers, setting out arguments is the purpose

of the writer so that his or her preferred interpretations and

goals will be recovered by the readers. The ways of

 organizing discourse or showing the arrangement of the

text and bring out the extent to which the text is constructed

with the reader‘s needs in mind are the use of this

category‘s resources. Besides, interactive dimension

involves the management of information flow and show

how writers guide readers. The second dimension is the

interactional dimension. Meta-discourse here is essentially

evaluative and engaging, expressing solidarity, anticipating

objections, and responding to an imaged dialogue with

others. It reveals the extent to which the writer works to

jointly construct the text with readers. This involves the

ways writers organize interaction by intruding and

commenting on their message. Making an explicit view and

involving readers by allowing them to respond the

unfolding text are the writer‘s goal. This is the writer‘s

expression of a textual ‗voice‘, or community recognized

personality and includes the ways they convey their

judgments and overtly align themselves with readers.

2.2.3.9.3 Meta-discourse Resources and Functions

Furthermore, Hyland (2013:78-82) also explained

the meta-discourse resources, namely interactive and

interactional resources which represent more specific

functions. In this case, the resources or examples in each

type of meta-discourse category (interactive and

interactional) are also from other researchers such as

Hyland (1998; 2005), Lon et al (2012), Cao & Hu (2014)

and Dobakhti (2013). The resources are clearly explained

as follows:

Table 2.4 Interactive Resources

Types Subtypes Function Resources
Transitions and,
Add furthermore,
Addition elements to moreover, by
an argument the way,
both.. and …
Mark
argument as
similar:
similarly,
likewise,
equally, in
the same
way,
Compare correspondin
and contrast gly Mark
Comparison arguments argument as
and different: in
evidence contrast,
however, but,
on the
contrary, on
the other
hand,
although,
even though,
whereas.
Thus,
therefore,
Express a consequently
Consequence
result , so, as a
result, since,
hence
General Hyland
function: - (2005; 2013)
help readers
 interpret
pragmatic
connections
between
steps in
argument
help the
readers
interpret
links
between
ideas
Frame - First,
markers second, then,
next, finally
Show the
Additive etc.
sequence of
relation - Listing (a,
arguments
b, c, etc)
- Numbering
(1, 2, 3, etc)
I argue here,
my purpose
is, the paper
proposes,
aim to, I
hope to
Announce
Discourse persuade,
discourse
goals objective,
goals
want to,
intend to,
seek to, wish
to, focus,
goal, would
like to.
Discourse Label To
stages discourse summarize,
stages in sum, in
brief, to sum
up, in
summary, all
in all,
overall, at
this point, in
conclusion,
in short, at
this stage, by
 way of
introduction.
Well, right,
ok, now, let
Indicate
Topic shift us return to,
topic shift
concerning,
turning to.
General
function:
- Signal text
boundaries
or elements
of schematic
structure
Hyland
- Identify
(2005; 2013)
features
which order
arguments
in the text
rather than
events in
time
Refer to
other parts
of the text,
aid the
recovery of
See Figure 2,
the writer‘s
refer to the
meaning,
next section,
facilitate
x above, x
comprehensi
before, x
on and
below, x
Endophoric support
earlier, x
markes arguments,
later, page x,
and guide
table x,
readers
example x,
through
figure x.
discussion
(Hyland,
helping
2005; 2013)
steer them
to a
preferred
interpretatio
n.
Evidentials Represent - According
an idea from to, x/y states,
 another
source
guiding cited, quoted
reader‘s (Hyland,
interpretatio 2005)
n, provide - as Y
important argued, in
support for Z‘s study,
arguments (X, 2013) …
and (Cao & Hu,
contribute to 2014)
a persuasive
goal.
- This is
Supply
called, in
additional
other words,
information
that is, this
by
can be
rephrasing,
defined as,
explaining
for example,
or
or, Such as,
elaborating
called,
Code glosses what has
namely,
been said, to
that/this
ensure the
means, for
reader is
instance, e.g.,
able to
marking of
recover the
by parenfinal
writer‘s
project (…).
intended
(Hyland,
meaning.
2005; 2013)

Table 2.5 Interactional Resources

Types Subtype Function Resources
s
Hedges Indicate the - Might, may,
writer‘s perhaps,
decision to possible,
recognize about, seem -
alternative generally
 voices and rather, usually,
viewpoints and more or less,
so withhold most,
complete approximately,
commitment to unlikely,
a proposition. partially, at
Hedges also least, should
emphasize that (Hyland,
the information 1998) -
is an opinion Almost,
rather than a around,
fact and mostly, mainly
therefore open (Lon et al,
that position to 2012)
negotiation.
Boosters Express - Clearly,
certainty, definitely, it is
emphasize clear that,
certainty or demonstrate
close dialogue - I know.., I
and signal high am sure
degree of that…, I
confidence in believe
the truth of a strongly
particular (Hyland,
proposition. 1998) - Must,
found, realize,
shows, shown
(Lon et al,
2012)
- Actually,
 always,
certain,
certainly,
conclusively,
decidedly,
definite,
definitely,
doubtless,
establish,
evident,
evidently, in
fact, indeed,
never, really,
obvious,
obviously,
truly, true,
undeniable, of
course, prove,
think, highly
(Hyland,
2005; 2013)
Attitude Express - Verb: agree,
Markers writer‘s prefer
affective and - Adverb:
attitude to even,
proposition or reasonably,
commenting on sufficiently,
the status of curiously,
information, for interestingly,
instance, the ironically,
importance of importantly,
 something, the unfortunately,
interest of hopefully,
something, its absolutely,
appropriateness more, less etc.
, and so on. - Adjective:
interesting,
surprising,
appropriate,
logical,
remarkable,
important,
ideal, useful,
crucial,
expected
(Dobakhti,
2013)
Engagemen Explicitly build - Directives
t Markers relationship (mainly
with reader imperatives):
you can see…,
note that…,
consider the
following….,
we might say
that…. - The
use of
obligation
modals:
should, must,
have to, can -
References to
 share
knowledge
(Hyland,
2005; 2013)
Refer to the - I, we, mine,
degree of our ….
explicit author (Hyland,
presence 2005; 2013)
in the text,
show a
particular
stance and
Self-
project an
mention
impression of
themselves and
how they stand
in relation to
their arguments,
their
community and
their readers.

2.3 Theoretical Framework

The study is concerned with English abstract section focusing on

academic writing. Academic writing here is in the form of final project written

by undergraduate students at Universitas PGRI Ronggolawe (UNIROW)

Tuban. The scope of the study covers linguistic features (meta-discourse) and

moves (rhetorical moves) in the abstract section. Accordingly, the methods of

analysis employed consist of two levels: functional analysis and move analysis.
The functional analysis is aimed to find out meta-discourse resources

occurrence and functions while the move analysis is employed to identify the

rhetorical functions/patterns in the abstract section. From the two analyses the

relationship between meta-discourse and rhetorical moves is investigated. To

achieve such a purpose, therefore, the procedures of analysis are taken.

First, the writer employed move analysis to find out rhetorical

moves and second, meta-discourse is analysed to find out the functions. Third,

meta-discourse aspects which are the main point are analysed and the analysis

is always related to the moves existing in the articles. It is necessary to note

here that the conceptual frame work arranged in this final project contains a

schematic relationship between research problem, objectives, scope of the

study, methods of analysis, and procedures of analysis as can be seen in the

following figure.
 METADISCOURSE AND RETHORICAL MOVES IN ENGLISH
ABSTRACT SECTION OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS’ FINAL
PROJECT AT UNIROW TUBAN

Final Project/Abstract
Pedagogical Research and Literature
Research

Meta-discourse Rhetorical Moves

(Function analysis) (Move Analysis: A genre-based analysis)

Types of Resources of What rhetorical moves are

Meta-discourse Meta-discourse used

Meta-discourse functions applied in

relation to the moves

RESULTS

ANALYSIS
Qualitative: Discourse Genre Analysis
Analysis

Figure 1.2Theoretical framework

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3. 1 Research Design

In this research, the researcher will use descriptive qualitative

research in order to answer the research problem definitely. According to

Franken and Wallen (1992)Descriptive qualitative is a research study that

investigates the quality of relationships, activities, situations or material.

Based on the research assumption, the researcher will take notes of events

that are happening and the data collected are reported descriptively based

on the situation and events in the field. In addition, Miles and Huberman

(1997:22) argued that qualitative research is described in the form of

words rather than in the form of numbers.

The study is classified as a qualitative research. First, the study is

descriptive and explorative since the writer describe the meta-discourse

resources and explore the meta-discourse functions and rhetorical moves

applied through the words or phrases employed in a text, which is in the

abstract section of undergraduate students’ final project. Second, this

research is inductive because the writer builds the patterns from the

bottom up, by organizing the data into increasingly more abstract units of

information. Third, the researcher is the key instrument because he will

collect and analyze the data by himself (creswell, 1994:145,2009:164).

Moreover, this study also focuses on the content analysis since the

materials analyzed are in the form of written i.e, abstract section in

undergraduate students’ final project. Besides, this study identifies the

meaning reflected and particular characteristic in the use of rhetorical

moves and meta-discourse (Aryet al, 2010:457).

3.2 Subject of the Study

In this research, the objects of this study are words or phrases

dealing with meta-discourse resources and showing rhetorical moves in

the abstract section by 2016 undergraduate (S1) students of English Study

Program of Unirow Tubanwhich consists of 90 students, the writer choose

them because they have just graduated last year and they have written a

final project.. In this case, the writer chooses 20 abstract sections to

analysis about meta-discourse and rhetorical moves. The writer classified

into 2 disciplines. i.e. Pedagogical final project and linguistics final

project. The number of sample for each final project is 10. Thus, the total

of whole samples is 10 abstracts X 2 discipline = 20 samples.

3.3 Roles of the Researcher

The researcher takes the role as collector and analyser to know

what rhetorical moves are used, what meta-discourse types are used and

how meta-discourse function are applied. As data collector, he collected

the data from abstract section of the undergraduate students’ final project

at Unirow Tuban. According to (Cresswell, 2003: 21), data collection

process include setting the boundaries for the study, collecting information

through documents analysis. As data analyser the researcher analyses the

data which is collected using a qualitative descriptive research method.

Cresswell (2003: 22) explains that “data analysis and interpretation

involves preparing the data for analysis, moving deeper and deeper into

understanding the data, representing the data and making an interpretation

of the larger meaning of the data”.

3.4 Type of Data

The data are words or phrases dealing with meta-discourse

resources and showing rhetorical moves in the abstracts section written in

English. The data will take from the abstract section of the undergraduate

students‘final project at English department of Unirow Tuban. In this

study the writer will choose Pedagogical final project and Linguistics final

project. The number of sample for each final project is 10. Thus, the total

of whole samples is 10 abstracts X 2 discipline = 20 samples.

3.5 Instrument for Collecting Data

Research instrument may be equipment and medium used to get

and collect the research data, since this research is the content analysis.

The use of instrument will help the researcher to get valid data. The

instrument of this study is the writer him-self. The writer becomes the

main instrument. Based on the statements, the writer will enter and spend

considerable time in analyzing this study directly by reading,

understanding, and analyzing the data which are suitable to his study.

3.6 Procedures of Collecting Data

This study will collect through analysing documents. It is explained

below:

1. The researcher will ask permission to the Chairwoman of English

Study program of UNIROW Tuban to get permission and copy the

abstract final projectneeded by the researcher.

2. The researcher will go to the library and ask for permission to the

librarian to copy and observe the abstract final project needed by the

researcher.

3. Analysing the documents. Another method to collect the data is

documentation. Several documents will take to answer the research

question. All documents will gather under the permission from the

Unirow English Department, the principle and of course the English

lectures. The documents are the final project from class of 2012 who

are graduated in 2016. From the final project the writer will take only

abstract section, write information relate to the meta-discourse and

rhetorical moves. It is include how the students deliver their result

from the final project.

4. The researcher will collect all documents, learn them and select the

necessary data relate to the issues in the research problems.

5. Write the result of the research.

3.7 Procedures of Analysing Data

The analysis of the data covers rhetorical moves and meta-

discourse,the researcher will use some steps as follow:

1. Preparing

In writing this research, the first step done by the researcher is

prepare the data needed for his research. In this case, the data

needed for this research are words or phrases dealing with meta-

discourse resources and showing rhetorical moves in the abstracts

section written in English of undergraduate (S1) students of

English Study Program.

2. Identifying

After the researcher gets the data needed for his research, the writer

will identify it based on the problem of his research. Coding the

words or sentences which contain rhetorical moves, meta-discourse

types, meta-discourse resources are used and meta-discourse

functions applied in English abstract sectionmore specific.

3. Classifying rhetorical moves, meta-discourse types, meta-

discourse resources are used and meta-discourse functions applied

in English abstract section

4. After classifying the data, the writer will analysis data from

abstracts section written in English of undergraduate (S1) students

of English Study Program.Therefore, move analysis was employed

to examine rhetorical moves. In this approach the analysis will

focus on the organizational features of the chosen in the abstract

section. For investigating the meta-discourse aspects functional

analysis was applied. Hyland (2005:24) asserts that functional

 analysis in meta-discourse studies refers to how language works to

achieve certain communicative purpose for users. Functional

analyses recognize that a comprehensive and pragmatically

grounded description of any text must involve attending the use of

language in relation to its surrounding co-text and the purpose of

the writer in creating a text as a whole. The emphasis is therefore

on meanings in context, how language is used. Then, the analysis

referred to genre-based analysis (Swales, 1985) and meta-discourse

use (Hyland, 2005; 2013) examining one type of text; that is

abstracts section in undergraduate students‘ (final project) article at

English Department Unirow Tuban.

Moreover, distributional method by using read-marker (sic)

technique (Sudaryanto, 1993) and content analysis by employing

Abductive inferences (Krippendorff, 2004:36) also will apply to

analyse the data. Distributional method will employ to analyse the

moves inasmuch as certain linguistic features are used to decide kinds

of moves i.e. move 1-5. Besides, it will use to decide the meta-

discourse resources to be classified into its categories and types and to

explain the meta-discourse resources, categories, and types used in

relation to the rhetorical moves use. In addition, read-marker (sic)

technique will use to decide the moves and meta-discourse use based

on the markers applied and explore the role or the function of the

markers. Abductive inferential technique will employ to explain

 function of meta-discourse used in abstracts section in undergraduate

students‘ (final project).

3.8 Triangulation

Webb et al. (1966), suggested that , “Once a proposition has

been confirmed by two or more independent measurement

processes, the uncertainty of its interpretation is greatly reduced.

The most persuasive evidence comes through a triangulation of

measurement processes”. The main purpose of triangulation in

educational and social science research is to increase the credibility

and validity of the results. A valid and reliable data is important to

measure that the study

According to Denzin (1970),it can be identified 4 types of

triangulation.

1. Data triangulation, which means gathering data through

different sampling strategies, so that parts of data are collected

at different times and social situations, as well as on a variety

of people.

2. Investigator triangulation, which means using more than one

researcher in the field to gather and interpret data.

3. Theoretical triangulation, which means to use more than one

theoretical position in interpreting data.

4. Methodological triangulation, which means to use more than

one method for gathering data.

 In this case, the writer will use theoretical triangulation as drawing

on alternative observations from different researcher in order to get

valid data.

REFERENCES
Awwaad, Ibrahim. A. 2012. A Comparative Study on the Rhetorical
Moves of Abstractsin Published Research Articles and Egyptian
Master’s Theses in Applied Linguistics. A thesis. The American
University in Cairo
Beauvais, P. 1989. A Speech Act Theory of Metadiscourse.
WrittenCommunication.Volume 6. No.1: 11-30.
Bhatia, V. K. 2006. Analyzing Genre: Some Conceptual Issues. In M.
Hewings (Ed) Academic Writing in Context: Implications and
Applications. Brimingham: University of Brimingham Press.
Bhatia, V.K. 1993. Analyzing Genre: Language Use in Professional
Settings. London: Longman.
Bond, Greg.2009.Writing Abstracts for Bachelor’s and Master’s Theses.
Finland; North Karelia University
Brown, Douglas. (2004). Language Assessment: Principles and
Classroom Practices. New York: Longman.com
Blackwell, J., Martin, J.2011.A Scientific Approach to Scientific Writing.
London; Springer Science+Business Media, LCC.
Cao, Feng&Guangwei Hu. 2014. ―Interactive Metadiscourse in
Research Articles: A Comparative Study of Paradigmatic and
disclipinary Influences.‖ Journal of Pragmatics. Volume 66. ISSN
0378-2166: 15-31.
Day, R. A. 1995. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dobakhti, L. 2013. ―Attitude Markers in Discussion Sections of
Qualitative and Quantitative Research Articles.‖ International
Journal of English and
Education. Volume 2. No.3. ISSN 2278-4012: 39-52.
Denzin, N. K. (1970). The Research Act in Sociology. Chicago: Aldine.
Flowerdew, J. 2002. Academic Discourse. Great Britain: Pearson
Education.
GeDongmei, Yang Ruiying. A Genre Analysis of Research Article
Abstracts [J]. Modern Foreign Languages, 2005(5):138-146
Hartono, R. 2005. Genre Based Writing. Semarang: Unpublished
Hyland, K, 2013. Discourse Studies Reader. London, New York:
Bloomsbury
Hyland, K, 2004. Genre and Second Language Writing. Michigan: The
University of Michigan Press.
Hyland, K,2005 . Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing.
London, New York: Continuum
Hyland, K. Disciplinary interactions: metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate
writing [J]. Journal of Second Language Writing, 2004, 13, 133-151.
Hyland, K. Metadiscourse [M]. Foreign Language Teaching and
Research Press, Beijing. 2008.
Hyland, K. Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic
writing. London: Longman. 2000
OzdemirNeslihan ,O& LongoBernadette. Metadiscourse Use in Final
project Abstracts: A Cross-cultural Study. Procedia - Social and
Behavioral Sciences 141 ( 2014 ) 59 – 63
Lon, C. E, et al. 2012. ―Conveying Communicative Intent: Moves and
Metadiscourse in Abstract Writing.‖ International Journal of Applied
Linguistic and English Literature. Volume 1. No. 7. ISSN 2200-
3592: 56- 65.
Paltridge, B & Sue S. 2007. Final project and Dissertation Writing in a
Second Language.
New York: Routledge.
Santos, M. B. D. 1996. ―The Textual Organization of Research Paper
Abstracts in Applied Linguistic‖ Text. Volume 16. No.4: 481-499.
Suharno. 2012. ―Tense Shift and Rhetorical Functions in English
Scientific Research Papers by Non-native Speakers.‖ (Doctoral
Dissertation). Semarang: State University of Semarang.
Suntara, W &Siriluck U. 2013. ―Research Article Abstracts in Two
Related Disciplines: Rhetorical Variation between Linguistics and
Applied Linguistics. English Language Teaching. Volume 6. No. 2.
ISSN 1916- 4742: 84-99.
Suroso, Iman. 2010. ―Moves in the English Abstracts of Students‘ Final
Project Reports.‖ (Unpublished Master Final project). Semarang:
State University of Semarang.
Swales, J. 1981. ―Aspects of Article Introductions‖. Aston Research
Report, No.1. Birmingham: University of Aston.
Swales, J. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in academic and research
settings. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
Swales, J. M. & C. B. Feak (2009). Abstracts and the Writing of
Abstracts. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.
Travelyn, Rosie., Cook, James., Fisher, Martin.2007.Scientific Writing
and Publishing Result.UK; Tropical Biology Association
VandeKopple. Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse [J]. College
Composition and Communication,1985, 36, 82-93
Wang Qiang, Cheng Xiaoguang. A Review of the Theoretical
Perspectives of Metadiscourse Research [J]. Foreign Languages and
Their Teaching, 2016(2): 55-62.
Wang Lichan& Zhang Yi. An Analysis of Metadiscourse in the Abstracts
of English Academic Papers. Global Journals Inc. (USA). Volume
16 Issue 9 Version 1.0 (2016)
Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., and Sechrest, L. (1966).
UnobtrusiveMeasures: Nonreactive Measures in the Social Sciences.
Chicago: RandMcNally.
Weissberg, R & Suzanne B. 1990. Writing Up Research: Experimental
Research
Report Writing for Students of English. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-
Hall, Inc.
Williams, J. Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace [M]. Boston: Scott,
Foresman. 1981.
Williams, J. and Vande K. 1985. ―Some Exploratory Discourse on
Metadiscoure‖.
College Composition and Communication. Vol. 36, No.1.
Xiao Zhonghua, Cao Yan. A Multidimensional Contrastive Move
Analysis of English Abstracts by English and Chinese Writers [J].
Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 2014 (3): 260-272
Zhang Man, A Comparative Study of First Person Pronouns in Abstracts
in China and English Speaking Countries [J]. Shanghai Journal of
Translations, 2008 (2): 31-36
http://www.squidoo.com/final projectabstract)
http://leo.stcloudstate.edu