Meta research on theoretical rigor of selected corpora

Critical position

Abstract

The current position paper calls attention of the ELT/EFL practitioners and researchers to how
research articles have proliferated on a sigular line with one methodological or theoretical
position and a corpus/corpora and/ or context of study (classrooms/institutions). Classroom
oriented research papers, method and technique/strategy concerns in English studies are
published daily. They are precious to the academia and are opening doors to unknown and
ambiguous angles in practice and theory. However, researcher hereby conducts a review paper
composition on research articles concentrated on cohesion and metadiscourse devices/markers. I
have also taken a position that english studies practitioners seem to lack strength in theoretical
paraphrasing or extension of research dimensions they have approached. They are prone to rely
on profession centered studies, which makes them fall short on theoretical prolifierity and
position strength. They observe job and corpus and point out angles of challenge for
learners/teachers or elements that ELT practioners who have taken writing and advanced writing
and research courses know that they need to construct and reach textuality and align their
discourse production thereby.

If the researchers are acknowledged long while producer of research discourse they may use
more political like science discourses than text alignment and coalition. I would hereby engage
you, the academic audience, on how severly you need to have more linguistic theories put into
practice in applied lingistics research. Linguistics applied is when you scrutinize linguistic
speech and written productions with balsphemous sides of scrutiny with linguistic care such as
discourse analysis. However, we need to know that society of ELT practitioners and researchers
need to watch works and lexicon of one another to put applied linguistics more vividly in English
studies research. My position is that none of the researchers I have increased their citations here
have used metalingusitic awareness terminology in their evaluations of metadiscourse and
cohesion markers. None of them refer to notions of metadiscourse and cohesion devices another
synonymous term scientifically and theoretically known as metalinguistics. I invite reseacrh
discourse developers and contributors to have multiple theories in practice and theory relation
actions to persuade genre progress and prosperity. Text searches on the cited reviwed copora
have shown no reference of metalinguistics and cognitive linguistics relation attempts.

Key Words: Research discourse, genre, applied linguistics, cognitive linguistics, metadiscourse,
cohesion, review, criticism, metalinguistic awareness, position addition, semiotics

1. Introduction

As a researcher, I have gained belief in that no other genra is as additive as research paper and as
supporting as thus. Research papers procure reviews of literature and suggestions for further
future cares. Research suffers from support and deficiency while researchers act on the first and
least of theories and/or practice that they find interest in. Genre development and criticism
blasphemes whatever falls behind and needs future revision. Genre content, genre facade, and
decade while positions change research outlines and managment. These are what I note after
addition to research discourse. Researchers hurry on publication and discourse development
decisions without multitheoretical power. With one theory in applied linguistics they repeat a
group of key words one related to theory and three or four others relating to context and/or
corpora.

Researcher as a scholar postgraduate and active researcher in Iran is extensively dealing with
published articles in Iranian EFL background and/or bilingual education program cases.
Researcher has noticed that English studies researchers and scholars publish articles on
classroom observation and profession betterment suggestions and strategies. They notice a line of
problem and/or challenge for teachers and students and compose a technique, a post test, a
pretest, and/ or a preteaching and post-teaching program to cure the problem at hand. Although
they have theory and practice authority, research areas packed with pretest, postest, preteaching
and post-teaching bring in effect betterment and pedagogical results. It is hypothetically clear
that a pretest is given to tap an area of knowledge lack and a post test is posed after a teaching
program to see if instruction has made a change. Normally, even if they use SPSS analysis tools
they report significance differences and or indifferences in gender effect therefore. They fail to
connect their applied linguistics related area to linguistic theories. For example, the use of
linking words, cohesive devices are signifying students (I add researchers`) metalinguistics
awareness. Whether they fail in tests and or learning, even researchers fail in ascription of these
language related concerns to their scientific linguistic terms. Student researchers and researchers
are called in this text to relate observations with diverse linguistic theories and fulfill the
aknowledgement of new strategies and techniques in teaching English and overall languages
scientifically. They are not noting applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics is an independent
discipline that connect practice and theory to develop langauge and langauge in use. Therfore, it
is the practice of new findings in the service of linguistics and/or language related education
services (Davies & Elder, 2004).

Meta research and Metaresearch in English studies

Meta research or research on research concerns examination of research techniques,

methodology, procedure, theories, and practices (Iaonnidis, J. P, Fanellie, D., Dunne, D. D., &
Goodman, S. N., 2015). Improvement of existing research domain strategum is therefore care for
research to stay additive and novelette. Intervening criteria in application and evaluation of
research procedures can be amioliorated by meta research (Iaonnidis et al). Reliability, validity,
and reproductive capabilities of already in use research method improve as a result of research
on research. The previous meta researchers clearly note “A research effort is needed that cuts
across all disciplines, drawing from a wide range of methodologies and theoretical frameworks,
and yet shares a common objective; that of helping science progress faster by conducting
scientific research on research itself. This is the field of meta-research.” (p. 2). Con conclusively,
the field, meta-research as an independent research field aims for changes in frames of method
and research theory practice that to hope progress in solidity and rigor of findings and their
generalization and/or application. Meta research concerns reevaluation of research performance,
research results dissemination, approval, and acknowledgement acts in research implementation
that already have research practices done and research results be found.

It follows that encouragement and punishment, study format and sub stratum, participation and
after publication disclosure rules as interests of meta research hope better future landscape on
current and fruiting yet maybe challenging and or conflicting research and or research related
conduction. A related journal in English studies is Journal of English for Specific Purposes World
with a certified unique attention to research on specific use of English language use cases. At the
end, research on research proves education forward by new curriculum design in research
methodology and expertise courses (above source). Ira Nurmala, Sugeng Irianto, Sherly
Franchisca, Helfany Amsa, and Ratna Susanti (2023) analyze English language teaching tools
with special attention to technology and mobile assisted language learning. Applications used for
English language teaching and learning besides ICT availabilities manage challenges for learners
and teachers and out them forward in foreign language pedagogy track (Nurmala, I., et al (2023).
Researchers bring examples of 9 literature review studies and 1 mixed method research on the
use of technology, ICT tools, and mobile phones in language teaching and learning classrooms.
They agree that technology changes teacher power, classroom management, program efficiency,
learner efficiency for better and language education is not behind from assistance of robots.

Seraj, P.M.I., Kilmova, B., & Habil, H. (2021) in their literature review research prove that
mobile phones benefit English language teaching given access to limitless English materials and
cause teacher in confidence and anxiety despite small screens. As part of technology based
devices in social interaction mobile phones have attracted researchers` attention as independent
variables leaving effects on English language teaching.

2. Theory and critical practice

Language influences real life contexts and circumstances in pedagogy or technology. This is
what is termed as a branch of linguistics known as applied linguistics (Cambridge Advanced
Learner`s Dictionary & Thesaurus, 2013). It concerns applicable practices of language related
research practices in language teaching, translation, and therapy of speech in short. Cognitive
linguistics is another branch which combines knowledge and research from cognitive science,
cognitive psychology, neuropsychology, and linguistics. Cognition and language relate in the
branch. Our linguistic abilities are firlmly rooted in our cognitive abilities. Metalinguistics is a
precious worthwhile branch dealing with relation between language and other cultural factors in
a society (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). It then relates between language and other cultural
factors in a society. Coherence is the consistency and logical characteristic of a text. Coherence is
text consistency (Merriam-Webster Dictionary). Cohesion is actional and factual whole unity of a
whole text (Merriam-Webster Dictionary).

Without reference, I can conclude from the paragraph above that linguistics is wisely branched
into its subordinate consisting disciplines. Linguistics and language related studies are too
metalinguistic for researchers to be signular theoretical in a practice and theory
bifurcation/relation. Genre, a literay category (Merriam-Webster), here I mean research papers
on applied linguistics cry out how applied linguistists propose with limited lexicon and key word
transparency on their research papers. They fail to at times to bring into text, act
metalingusitically, a varied range of vocabulary tapping the same dimensions. If cohesion means
text uniformedness with linking words, conjunctions, connectors, and coherence means logical
contexture then it is naive and unlogical of them to bring to research genre even titles single
theory and single practice stance. Cohesion and coherence, metadiscourse markers tap
metalinguistics that call attention to text formation penning and text orientation results. Rhetorics
are another term for the same act, persuasive speech and composition maintainence supporting
expression. It is commuincation and persuasion principles therefore interactive, interactional,
interpersonal, transitional metadiscourse markers at work metalingusitically thought by to attain
cohesion and coherence with rhetorical persuation (the last phrase redundant). All applied
linguistic research papers are metalinguistic attempts of them to develop applied linguistics.
Their cognitive linguistic lexical behaviors fall short of genre expectations.

Metalinguistics is the use of text about text (Roehr-Brackin, 2018). It is the use of language to
talk about language. Pretest/posttest language related studies develop research discussion by
connection to linguistics and applied linguistocs. As if they are reporting writing class instruction
notes in research papers. Cohesion markers, writing development programs, writing, reading,
and/or any other classroom oriented /driven research area better be linked to their applied
linguistics dimension for research success and contribution. In what follows, I have briefed a
limited number of research papers on cohesion, coherence, metadiscourse markers none of which
made a reference to metalinguistics. I have refigured tiltles and key wording and have tapped
their lexical limited references as well.

Semiotics studies symbols and how they bring about senses. In Basics of Semiotics, John Deely
(2005) cites Johansen (1982) a model for discourse as semiosis. He divides semiotics into poles
of the object experienced, pole of the semiotic self, pole of the interpret ant, and pole of the
stipulable sign. Johansen (1982) gives axis to each pole for clarity of Pyramid of
Anthroposemiosis. He links indexical axis, experimental axis, informational axis, convential
axis, contractual axis, supposed experiential axis, taxonomic axis, per locutionary axis, and and
supposed conventional axis. He points out that discourse as a semiotic action has poles in which
supposed can be different from experiential, indexical, contractual and conventional axises to a
discourse party sided considering variabilities.

Researchers should remember that the research discourse should add an informational axis to the
academia and conventions of theory backing practice better not fail. I only briefly referred to
semiotics and the Pyramid as giving scientific basis for my reason that one practical angle in
language teaching can be related to many branches of linguistics as the mother science, which
incorporate semiotics, pragmatics, semantics, applied linguistics, sociolinguistics and research
output looks in worldwide knowledge addition arena. Method

The current critic draws on a number of limited research articles related to cohesion, linking
words, discourse markers. The researcher examines whole texts for the critical notes repetition
on their texts and notices no occurence of them. Finding feature of the microsoft word was used
for this end. Corpora are 8 research articles. Lexical variance of keywording, titles, and whole
text were aimed with documnet search tools available on Microsoft Word.

3. Addressed papers for criticism

Assassi and Merghami (2023) put meta-discourse markers in important place for academic
writers. They provide a corpus of abstracts of Algerian, Saudi, and native researchers’ research
articles in terms of use of frequency of interaction al and/or interactive Discourse markers.
Endophorics, code glosses, frame markers, hedges, attitude markers, and self mentions were
areas of closeness of Algerian papers to native ones. Saudi abstracts were close to native ones as
regarded transitions and engagement markers. Other devices were far from native norms to be
found close or similar in abstract section. Algerian abstract writers were still successful in using
discourse markers even if they were not highly publishing. I would thereof criticise on this there
has been no reference to metalinguistics awareness but reference to hyland’s taxonomy of
Discourse markers.

Gen and Wei (2023) draws on a corpus of 100 research articles as concerned with discourse
markers as elements of text organization and text communication. Interactive and interactional
discourse markers are examined in the corpus collected. Hyland’s interpersonal model of meta-
discourse was the basis of watch for interactive and interactional discourse markers. 50 abstracts
were related to literature and 50 abstracts were related to linguistics. Findings showed that
interactive markers were more than interactional markers in both. Both were similarly tending to
use transitions. Of the interactional category, discourse markers, boosters were the most widely
used markers, and engagement markers were the least in both Corpora. Both corpora were
different in the occurrence of self-mentions. This research makes no reference to metalinguistic.

Emma Dafouz Milne (2008) examines two news papers Times and ElPais regarding the use
meta-discourse markers to see how they construct and attain persuasion. Times and El Pais
choices have made Milne’s study cross linguistic. A corpus of 40 opinion columns 20 in English
and 20 in Persian were chosen. A group of informants were recruited to evaluate persuasion of
the 40 columns. Textual and interpersonal meta-discourse markers were present in both. They
were pursyasive according to the informants. The two groups of cross linguistic columns were
different in terms of the use of logical markers and code glosses. Critical issue is that no
reference has been made to metalinguistics awareness.

Putri et al (2023) notes the importance of meta-discourse markers in news articles compositions.
Tthey examine the interactive and interactional meta-discourse markers in news articles on
Russia and Ukraine Conflict war. Five news articles were selected from New York times news
articles. Their research is qualitative and descriptive. Results of note taking and document
analysis showed that all types of interaction and interpersonal meta-discourse are used. Among
frequently used interactional meta-discourse 65% was self mention and 84.7% were transition of
interactive Discourse markers. Researchers note the effects of these meta-discourse markers in
the content understanding and reader engagement. Critical note on this is that no other scientific
reference for meta-discourse of linguistic analysis and acription to metalinguistics and applied
linguistics has been made. They are not interactively contributing to applied linguistics even if
applied not linguistics.
Abusalim et al (2022) overviews use of interactive and interactional meta-discourse markers in
Hillary Clinton’s political discourses and meta-discourse markers persuasive roles. The
researchers examine 4 political speeches. Analysis is based on two other researcher’s taxonomy
Dafouz Milne (2008) and Mai (2016). Analysis showed Clinton using more interpersonal meta-
discourse markers than textual markers. Her political discourse is more ‘we’ inclined in use
thereby interpersonal in discourse persuasion. She has more logical achievement (logos) than
affective appeals pathos.

Dontcheva, N.O., (2017) deals cohesion and coherence as forming elements of language
production. Text nuances that ensure grammar and lexicon relates to sensibility of text/discourse.
Coherence is text/discourse interpretation born. Various discourse areas including newspaper,
spoken discourse, academic discourse, fiction and nonfiction discourse have been points of
research interests as regards cohesion and coherence. Dontcheva N.O., (2017) posit that
acknowledgement of cohesion and coherence influence production and capturing text/discourse.
Scholars and authors all agree on that cohesion does not per se and necessarily fulfill coherence.

Speakers carry over cohesive devices to build up conversations. This causes coherence and
cohesion when speakers contribute to discourse. A corpus of task-oriented dialogues between
native speakers of English and Spanish is studied. Researchers analyze speech genres and stages
included. Their analysis indicates that each dialogue stage utilizes thematic, rhetorical, and
cohesive relations. The research is corpus-based scrutiny of spoken genre (task-oriented)
dialogue. English-based analysis to Spanish and between two languages are considered
(Taboada, M., 2004).

Text cohesion and coherence are discussion lines and continues to intrigue more researchers and
scholars. Relationship between cohesion and coherence has created controversy. While one notes
cohesive devices create cohesion but coherence does not come from it. Both in the end do not
necessarily affect reality. Study happens in China and author uses Chinese and English samples
with a united attention to cohesion and coherence. Psycho-cognitive and sociological factors
include a variety of internal and external factors. Authors offer a proposition, a new theoretical
paradigm, that can play interdisciplinary roles e.g., translation and foreign language teaching
(Delu, Z., & Rushan, L., 2022). Despite cohesion and coherence bifurcation, research is not
multi-theoretic only regarding text formation and text logic.
Shah Hosseini et al (2023) focus on linking words as cohesion markers in flipped blended
writing instruction. Study takes place in an institution in Bushehr. They note that linking words
can be a challenge for EFL learners; however, coherent units and paragraphs come about through
linking words. They have 40 EFL learners as participants. EFL learners receive an Oxford
placement test (OPT) for homogeneity examination in use of linking words. Forty EFL learners
are divided into two groups, 20 conventional and 20 flipped blended. A pre-test tests their
existing ability in the use of linking words. The flipped blended group receive instruction on an
online platform; rather conventional group received traditional learning. Both groups took
posttest. Independent samples T-test proved significant difference in both groups in terms of
using linking words. Flipped blended method significantly affected learners’ knowledge of
linking words. Oxford placement test examines students on listening, grammar, vocabulary, and
reading. An exact number of 80 questions were given to students. OPT is reliable with 0.82.
Posttest shows significant difference between conventional and flipped blended groups in use of
linking words. Blended group was better in use of linking words after they received instruction
on a group of linking words. The study regards only flipped device use effect and do not relate to
more theoretical stances.

Jalilifar A., (2008) recruits 90 Iranian EFL learners (university students). Participants are 30
junior, 30 senior, and 30 M.A students in English Teaching as a foreign language. B.A students
are from Islamic Azad University and M.A students are from Ahvaz center for research and
education. Researcher uses Fraser`s taxonomy of discourse markers to analyze these university
student`s discourse markers use. For 8 weeks, students were asked to write descriptive
compositions on topics given without any instruction. A corpus of 598 compositions were
collected. Students were different in use of discourse markers and degrees of occurrence.
Elaborative discourse markers occur more frequently followed by inferential, contrastive,
causative, and topic relating discourse markers. Graduate students utilized more discourse
markers therefore a more cohesive discourse they would produce. Use of discourse markers
made quality difference in students` composition. However, a quality research, the study is still
unitheoretic.

Tahmasbi and Ebrahimipour (2023) draws attention to mobile assisted flipped language learning.
Student`s interest in cohesion and their use of cohesive devices. Researcher recruited 46 female
intermediate EFL learners in Kerman. Two groups of experimental and control both 20 come
from participant division. Study results that mobile assisted flipped learning significantly affects
learners` motivation to learn cohesive devices. Study is cause-and-effect relationship.
Participants are native Persian speakers. Students write two 200 to 250 words on two general
topics on pretest. Two IELTS English language teachers collect and grade students` writing.
Graders grade the essays according IELTS writing cohesion expectance. On posttest, 5 topics
were presented to the learners. Posttest is given to examine the effect of mobile assisted flipped
learning. Two faculty members with writing instruction expertise approve validity of the posttest
and pretest. Mobile assisted learners outperform tradition classes’ students. Study relies on one
theory in practice discussion.

Table 1: Key words and titles

Article titles Key words Rewordin Comments Theory in

g on of the practice
keywords critic
The effect of Cohesive Key Cohesion
mobile devices, wording regarding
assisted flipped exact
learning on language referent of
Iranian learning, single
Learner`s mobile theory act
cohesive assisted and similar
devices language to title
improvement learning, wording
in writing motivation,
writing
Discourse Discourse Key Discourse
Markers in marker, wording markers
Composition cohesion, different
Writings: The contrastive from title
Case of marker, words.
Iranian inferential More
Learners of marker, topic detailing
English as a relating keywords.
Foreign marker
Language
Metadiscours Metadiscourse Key Metadiscourse
e markers in markers, wording markers
abstracts of abstracts, exact
linguistics and linguistics repetition
literature research of title.
research articles,
articles from literature
Scopus research
indexed articles,
journals Scopus-
indexed
journals
Formulaic Metadiscourse Key Metadiscourse
sequences and markers, wording markers
Metadiscours formulaic exact
e markers in language, repetition
applied academic of title.
linguistics writing, cross
research linguistic,
papers Hyland`s
classification
The Effect of Mobile- Key Cohesion
Mobile assisted wording
Assisted language exact
Flipped learning, EFL repetition
Language learners, of title.
Learning on Cohesive
Iranian EFL devices,
Learner`s Improvement
Cohesive in writing
Devices
Improvement
in Writing
Textual and Textual Key Textual and
Interpersonal Metadiscourse, wording interpersonal
Meta- interpersonal exact metadiscourse
discourse Metadiscourse, repetition
Markers in political of title.
Political discourse
Discourse: A
Case Study
A Study of Interaction Key Interaction
Interaction Metadiscourse, wording and
and interactive exact interactive
Interactive Metadiscourse, repetition Metadiscourse
Meta- conflict news of title. markers.
discourse on articles,
Ukraine Ukraine-
Russia Russia
Conflict News
Articles
Flipped Writing Key Linking
Blended interaction, wording words
Writing Iranian EFL exact
Interaction: learners, repetition
Iranian EFL linking words of title.
Learners
 Learning of
Linking
Words in
Focus

4. Analysis and Conclusion (researcher`s position)

Cognition addresses metalinguistic issues as a processor of language, language functions,

linguistic monitor and controller. As long as you as a language user proceed and process a
discourse and language chunk, you move from stance to stance, position-to-position, and
ambiguity to clarification of persuasion aims, i. e., and rhetorical outcomes. You open, design,
form, and plan a text to attain a discourse line and addition. Plan how to ensure full persuasion of
audience desired readability by provision of hand in hand and correlated theories that open
discourse ambiguities, cohesion, and discourse markers. Meta-disciplines specifically in
linguistics touch genre as if you are, another time, noted on writing principles; be aware that your
argument very easily and quickly ends. Delve deep into theories and nourish practices. Cognitive
linguistics deals how language use ability relates to cognitive actions such as categorization,
memory involving, perception incidence, and attention occurrence (Ungerer F. & Schmid, H. S,
2006). I intend to draw the attention of researchers to their own language use and research
practice awareness.

Discourse markers are cohesion and meta-discourse markers. They interact on your behalf with
your audience, clarify your position, point word relevance, interpersonal linkages and whatever
else which feeds text formation, organization, and persuasion possibilities. Be rhetorical and
once there are more to pose, you make more clarifications and interpersonal devices. You move
another time on another theory implementation and you manage your aim in practical research
interests solidly and scientifically. Research practice is supported by guiding theories not one
maybe 10 at once. Provide interpersonal literature review with more discursive support. Key
wording is essential; use synonymous and closer terms instead of title repetition. If you use
enough theories to fulfill a practical issue, you have managed genre discourse with varied stances
and several times repeated text formation and audience persuasion manners. Appropriately
develop research discourses and let them be additive. With emphatics and sequencing
(Metadiscourse markers) obtain audience intrigue, procure rigor to your research discourse, and
proceed emphatically and sequentially in your research addition call–out / publication.

Practitioners and researchers in applied linguistics are invited to use more lexicon and varied
terminology in differing lines, titles, and key wording after this critical care. Key wording is
tabled into items as I hold the opinion that with more termed key wording there are more theories
at research work. Lexicon variance adds to coherence, logical dimension of text, and that is
absent from the limited works with which coverage I outlined their theoretical weaknesses.
Implicitly, my suggestions are that practitioners, researchers, linguists, and applied linguists
design their research pieces with more divided attention on theoretical positioning. “The art of
speaking effectively” is the precision of verbal communication either written and/or spoken
(Merriam-Webster online dictionary). Rather skeptical note, my attention on this critical is that I
urge applied linguistics academy who put efforts into dimensional studies and produce
knowledge addition to the research discourse world to enact text success, power, persuasion in
corpora and context practices with varied theoretical satisfactory proceeding.

Metalinguistic awareness on research discourse builds up a conspicuous and immaculate

research note addition as researchers relate a linguistic theory to a single language related issue
in practice. Normally, they need to indicate more theory and audience need awareness and/or
participation need awareness (position of the researcher). The text discourses they articulate are
aimed with their metalinguistic awareness as they transit from at least one theory to one practice.
They look beyond discourse and support text clarity and engaging aspects. Research discourse
requires attendants to more coherent (logical) research discussion theory and practice.English
language teaching research articles mostly add to knowledge limited lines if rigorous theory
integration powers theoretical stance therefore putting more effects on methodology,
participation, total command of research practice, and nurture research and answer worries of
meta-research discipline. If researchers would connect cognitive linguistics to text feature, text
formation and logic, and textual awareness they could scientifically tap all theories backing the
practical issue/case of attention.

Cohesion and discourse markers show language learners` awareness of language formation and if
learners do not hold the scientific background of text awareness as monitor factors, researchers
as English language practitioners do. My research on their research shows that theory is under
researched in their studies. Linking words and discourse markers as as language signs bring
relatedness to discourse, ensures information, convention, and experience, and intend audience
and interpretant attention. I did not mean discourse analysis rather research theoretical rigor
observation at a line of which I draw your awareness attention to the semiosis of theoretical rigor
word cases. Researchers were not restating one intention with more than one scientific term.

Bibliography

Abusalim et al. (2022). Textual and Interpersonal Meta-discourse Markers in Political Discourse:
A Case Study. Literature, Linguistics, and Criticisms. Vol 9. Issue 1.

Assassi and Merghami (2023). Formulaic Sequences and Meta-discourse Markers in Applied
Linguistics Research Paper. Academicus Scientific International Journal.

Dafouze Milne, E. (2008). The Pragmatic Role of Textual and Interpersonal Meta-discourse
Markers in the Construction and Attainment of Persuasion: a Cross Linguistic Study of
Newspaper Discourse. Journal of Pragmatics.

Davies, A. & Elder, C. (2004). The Handbook of Applied Linguistics. Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Dancygieer, B. (2017). The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge

University Press.

Deely, J. (2005). Basics of Semiotics. Tartu University Press.

Delu, Z., Rushan, L. (2022).New Research on Cohesion and Coherence in Linguistics.

Routledge.
Dontcheva, N. O. (2017). Coherence and Cohesion in English Discourse. Discourse and
Interaction.
Ungerer, F. & Schmid, H.J. (2006). An Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics. Routledge.

Jalilifar, A. (2008). Discourse Markers in Composition Writings: The Case of Iranian Learners of
English as a Foreign Language. English Language Teaching. Vol 1, No. 2.

Hui, G., & Han, W. (2023). Meta-discourse Markers in the Abstracts of Literature and
Linguistics Research Articles from Scopus indexed journal. Journal of modern languages. Vol 33.
No1.

Merriam-Webster. www.merriam-webster.com

McIntosh, C. (2013). Cambridge Advanced Learners Dictionary. Cambridge University Press.

4th edition. Online 2023.
Putri, A.N., Hastomo, T., Farhan, M., Yunaini, Kartika (2023). A Study of Interaction and
Interactive Meta-discourse on Ukraine Russia Conflict News Articles. Journal of English
Teaching, Applied Linguistics and Research Articles. Vol 6.Issue 1.

Roehr-Brackin, K. (2018). Metalinguistic Awareness and Second Langauge Acquisition.

Routledge.

Shah Hosseini, H., Rezvani, R., Yazdani, S., Behrouzi, M., Molaei, A. (2023). Flipped Blended
Writing Interaction: Iranian EFL Learners Learning of Linking Words in Focus. Iranian
Evolutionary and Educational Psychology Journal. Vol 5, No. 2, 25-40.

Tahmasbi, S., & Ebrahimipour, K.R. (2023). The Effect of Mobile Assisted Flipped Language
Learning on Iranian EFL Learner`s Cohesive Devices Improvement in Writing. International
Journal of Research in English Education (IJREE).
Ioannidis, J.P., Fanelli, D., Dunne, D.D., & Goodman, S.N. (2015). Meta-research: Evaluation
and improvement of research methods and practices. PloS Biol. 2015: 13: e1002264.
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1002264.

Nurmala, I., Irrianto, S., Franchisca, S., Amsa, H., & Ratna, S. (2023). Technology-Enhanced
Language Learning: A meta-analysis study on English language teaching tools. Journal on
Education. Volume 06, No. 01. September-December 2023, pp. 2188-2195.