Hedging in ESL Academic Essays: A Corpus-Based Analysis of Malaysian Undergraduate Writing

Abstract

Hedging and stance markers play an important role in academic writing because they allow writers to express evaluation and manage the strength of their claims. However, these linguistic features can be challenging for second language writers who are still developing control over academic discourse conventions. This study examines the use of hedging and stance markers in argumentative essays written by Malaysian ESL undergraduates. The research aims to identify the types and frequencies of stance markers used in student writing and to explore how learners express certainty and evaluation in academic arguments. The study adopts a corpus-based analytical approach guided by Hyland’s stance framework, which categorises stance markers into hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions. Thirty argumentative essays written by undergraduate ESL students were collected and analysed. The essays were coded manually to identify the occurrence and distribution of stance markers across the texts. The findings indicate that students rely heavily on a limited range of hedging expressions, particularly modal verbs such as may and can. Boosters and attitude markers appear less frequently, suggesting that learners have a restricted repertoire of stance resources. The results also show that some claims are presented without sufficient hedging, which may affect the level of academic caution expected in scholarly writing. The study contributes to research on second language academic writing by highlighting patterns of stance use among ESL learners. The findings provide insights for writing instruction and suggest that explicit teaching of stance and hedging may support the development of more effective academic arguments.