Abstract

Many scholars perceive metadiscourse as a communication resource used in facilitating meaning, while others see it as a linguistic mannerism which should be avoided especially in scholarly publications. This study investigates the perception of Nigerian students on metadiscourse as a communication resource used to enhance understanding of publications. It also finds out the perception of Nigerian scholars on the use of metadiscourse in scholarly writings. The study adopted the survey method and Focus Group Discussion (FGD). It was discovered that Nigerian students perceive metadiscourse as a communication resource used in enhancing understanding of publications. It specifically indicates that Nigerian students perceive visual metadiscourse as facilitating understanding more than lexical metadiscourse. The study also indicates that Nigerian scholars believe that interactive lexical metadiscourse is good as it enhances effective understanding of proposition. However, they perceive interactional metadiscourse, as regard self – mention, as unconventionally wrong, but not bad while considering hedges, boosters, engagement markers and attitude markers. The study further revealed that visual metadiscourse is good, but cannot be effectively employed due to economic consideration and technological accessibility.

Key Words: Metadiscourse, Publications, Scholarly Writing, Interaction,

                     Understanding

^JCMRJournal of Communication and Media Research, Vol. 4, No. 2, October 2012, 195 - 207.

© Delmas Communications Ltd.

About the author

[1]M. Olanrewaju Biobaku is a lecturer in the Department of Journalism and Book Publishing, Adebola  Adegunwa School of Communication, Lagos State University, Lagos, Nigeria.

Full Article

Words: 6,246; Pages: 14