Abstract
Hedging, a crucial rhetorical strategy in academic discourse, allows writers to express appropriate caution and modesty while presenting claims. While extensively studied in English academic writing, research on hedging in Spanish academic discourse, particularly comparing non-native and native writers, remains limited. This study investigates hedging practices in Spanish academic writing across three writer groups: non-native (L1 Chinese) novice, native novice, and native expert writers. Using a corpus-based approach, it examines the distribution of lexico-grammatical and functional hedging categories, individual hedging preferences, and specific hedging functions. The analysis reveals significant differences in the use of modal verb hedges and shield hedges, with non-native writers employing these devices less frequently than both native novice and expert writers. Non-native writers also demonstrate a distinct overuse of certain approximators and informal expressions, while underutilizing the conditional morpheme -ría. Functionally, non-native writers show a preference for less tentative strategies and overt personal involvement, contrasting with the more detached or nuanced stance-taking of native writers. These variations may be attributed to linguistic challenges, cultural influences, and L2 proficiency factors. The study highlights the complex interplay between cultural rhetorical traditions, language expertise, and pragmatic competence in academic hedging. Pedagogical implications include the need for explicit instruction in pragmatic functions of hedging devices, raising awareness of cross-cultural differences in authorial presence, and enhancing register awareness among L2 writers. This research contributes to our understanding of hedging in Spanish academic discourse and informs L2 writing instruction in academic contexts.
Gang Yao
Lecturer
My research interests include corpus linguistics, Spanish as a Foreign Language, and academic discourse.