Authorial Presence Without ‘I’ or ‘We’: Examining First-Person Pronoun Usage in Malaysian Research Abstracts

Berlian Nur Morat; Syazliyati Ibrahim; Noor ‘Izzati Ahmad Shafiai; Sharina Ismail

doi:10.21834/e-bpj.v10iSI37.7615

Authors

Berlian Nur Morat Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kedah, Malaysia
Syazliyati Ibrahim Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kedah, Malaysia
Noor ‘Izzati Ahmad Shafiai Academy of Language Studies, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Kedah, Malaysia
Sharina Ismail Faculty of Science and Technology, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia, Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21834/e-bpj.v10iSI37.7615

Keywords:

authorial presence, first-person pronouns, stance strategies, journal abstracts

Abstract

Authorial presence, often expressed through the use of first-person pronouns, assists writers in claiming stance and ownership. Nonetheless, the lack of first-person pronouns in the journal abstracts indexed by Web of Science (WoS) in Malaysia raised questions on authorial identity development without explicit self-mention. Based on Hyland’s framework, we investigated the presence of linguistic means of stance and authorial voice in selected Malaysian journal abstracts with AntConc software. The results help to better understand how the authorial stance is negotiated in the local scholarly setting, as well as inform future pedagogical and editorial decisions for academic visibility.

References

Ahmad, N. K., & Abd Samad, A. (2018). Metaphors as proxies for identity: A case study of a teaching English to young learners (TEYL) teacher. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 24(4), 143-157.

Almudhaffari Musa, Supyan Hussin, & Ho, I. A. (2019). Interaction in academic L2 writing: An analysis of interactional metadiscourse strategies in applied linguistics research articles. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 25(3), 16-32. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2019-2503-02

Anthony, L. (2004). AntConc: A learner and classroom friendly, multi-platform corpus analysis toolkit. In L. Anthony, S. Fujita, & Y. Harada (Eds.), Proceedings of IWLeL 2004: An Interactive Workshop on Language e-Learning (pp. 7-13). Waseda University.

Bakhtiary, M. R., Rezvani, E., & Namaziandost, E. (2021). Effects of strategic and unpressured within-task planning on Iranian intermediate EFL learners’ oral production. Journal of Nusantara Studies (JONUS), 6(2), 97-115.

Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2022). Multifunctionality of stance markers in soft sciences: A cross-disciplinary and cross-paradigmatic study. In Z. Yin, & E. Vine (Eds.), Multifunctionality in English: Corpora, language and academic literacy pedagogy (pp. 51-73). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003155072-6

Deng, L., & He, P. (2023). “We may conclude that:” A corpus-based study of stance-taking in conclusion sections of RAs across cultures and disciplines. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1175144.

Dobakhti, L., & Norizah Hassan. (2017). A corpus-based study of writer identity in qualitative and quantitative research articles. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 23(1), 1-14. http://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2017-2301-01

Dueñas, P. M. (2007). ‘I/we focus on…’: A cross-cultural analysis of self-mentions in business management research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 6(2), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2007.05.002

Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2011). Hedging and boosting in abstracts of applied linguistics articles: A comparative study of English- and Chinese-medium journals. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(11), 2795–2809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.007

Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2015). Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 12-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2015.03.002

Hyland, K. (2002). Authority and invisibility: Authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of pragmatics, 34(8), 1091-1112. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00035-8

Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(2), 133-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2004.02.001

Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365

Işık-Taş, E. E. (2018). Authorial identity in Turkish language and English language research articles in Sociology: The role of publication context in academic writers' discourse choices. English for Specific Purposes, 49, 26-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2017.10.003

Kaya, F., & Yağız, O. (2020). Move analysis of research article abstracts in the field of ELT: A comparative study. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 16(1), 390-404. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.712854

Khojasteh, L., Shokrpour, N., & Torabiardakani, N. (2017). EFL advanced adult learners' use of English modals in narrative composition. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 25(4).

Li, Z. (2021). Authorial presence in research article abstracts: A diachronic investigation of the use of first person pronouns. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 51, Article 100977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2021.100977

Loi, C. K., Lim, J. M.-H., & Wharton, S. (2016). Expressing an evaluative stance in English and Malay research article conclusions: International publications versus local publications. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2015.08.004

Mizusawa, K., & Kiss, T. (2020). Connecting multiliteracies and writing pedagogy for 21st century English language classrooms: Key considerations for teacher education in Singapore and beyond. Journal of Nusantara Studies, 5(2), 192-214. http://dx.doi.org/10.24200/jonus.vol5iss2pp192-214

Molino, A. (2010). Personal and impersonal authorial references: A contrastive study of English and Italian Linguistics research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9, 86-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.007

Mur-Dueñas, P. (2011). An intercultural analysis of metadiscourse features in research articles written in English and in Spanish. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(12), 3068-3079. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.05.002

Samraj, B. (2005). An exploration of a genre set: Research article abstracts and introductions in two disciplines. English for Specific Purposes, 24(2), 141–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2002.10.001

Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2001). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach (2nd ed.). Blackwell Publishers.

Suhandoko, Ningrum, D. R., & Mustofa, A. (2025). A corpus-based study of authorial presence in the academic writing of Indonesian higher education EFL learners. Studies in English Language and Education, 12(3), 1246-1263. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v12i3.39813

Tang, R., & John, S. (1999). The “I” in identity: Exploring writer identity in student academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 18(S1), S23–S39. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-4906(99)00009-5