DIANA, SUKANDI (2023) METADISCOURSE MARKERS ON STUDENTS’ ARGUMENTATIVE WRITING IN THE 3rd SEMESTER, ENGLISH EDUCATION PROGRAM UNIVERSITY OF MATARAM. S1 thesis, Universitas Mataram.
![[img]](http://eprints.unram.ac.id/style/images/fileicons/text.png) |
Text
A Thesis_Diana Sukandi_E1D019065.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (1MB) |
|
|
Text
Journal_Diana Sukandi_E1D019065.pdf Download (285kB) | Preview |
Abstract
The results of previous research conducted by Fitrah (2016) show that when using metadiscourse markers, there are still many students who find it difficult to distinguish between facts and ideas. So many students who use metadiscourse markers categorized in different metadiscourse sub-categories function in the same way. Therefore, the researcher is interested in finding out about the use of metadiscourse markers in the argumentative writing results of 3rd semester students. The aims of this research are 1) to investigate the types of metadiscourse established by Hyland (2004) used in the argumentative writing of 3rd semester students of English Education, University of Mataram. 2) To explain the proper use of metadiscourse markers in writing to improve the argumentative writing skills of the students in the 3rd semester, English education program, University of Mataram. 3) To describe the most dominant of metadiscourse markers used in the argumentative writing of 3rd semester students of English Education, University of Mataram. The total population in the study was 30 3rd semester students of English Language Education at the University of Mataram who had completed their final argumentative writing assignment, and 10 of them were selected by convenience as the research sample. The results show that 1) students in presenting their arguments use all types of metadiscourse markers found in the interactive type, such as transitions, frame markers, endophoric markers, evidentials and code glosses. Likewise with the interactional metadiscourse markers, such as hedges, boosters, attitude markers, engagement markers and self-mention, proposed by Hyland (2004). 2) the use of metadiscourse markers can be applied appropriately, but there are still some that are inappropriate for conveying an argument as found in datum 3.2, 7.1, 8.3 and 10.2, the writer is still wrong in using metadiscourse markers of the same type. 3) the most dominant type of metadiscourse marker used is transitional marker in interactive metadiscourse, with a total percentage of 39.9%, this shows that students present their arguments using appropriate semantic links at each point of the argument presented.
| Item Type: | Thesis (S1) |
|---|---|
| Keywords (Kata Kunci): | Metadiscourse Markers, Argumentative Writing |
| Subjects: | L Education > LC Special aspects of education L Education > LC Special aspects of education > LC5201 Education extension. Adult education. Continuing education |
| Divisions: | Fakultas Keguruan dan Ilmu Pendidikan |
| Depositing User: | Meike Megawati |
| Date Deposited: | 31 Aug 2023 07:42 |
| Last Modified: | 31 Aug 2023 07:42 |
| URI: | http://eprints.unram.ac.id/id/eprint/42468 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
