THE USE OF ‘HEDGING’ IN RESEARCH BASED PAPER
THE USE OF ‘HEDGING’ IN RESEARCH BASED
PAPER
By; Tri Edy Kesumo Raharjo
ABSTRACT:
This study is aimed to investigate the use of hedging in introduction of
research based paper produced by postgraduate students on the type of
hedging they used and their reasons in using the hedging. The data
were collected by interview which is based on the Stimulated Recall
Methodology (SRM) and observation. Results showed that they had
used some type of ‘hedging’ and they have some reasons deal with the
use of hedging in their introduction.
I. Introduction.
1.1. Background of Study
This paper will portray a study, which I conducted, about the use of hedging in
introductory of research based paper. I want to reveal the reasons deal with the various
kinds of hedges employed in those works.
Despite of the popular misconception that scientific discourse embodies impartial
account of accurate information, linguists have come to believe that it actually
constitutes social constructed ‘rhetorical artifact’ (Hyland, 1998). Thus, instead of
structuring information in simple manner authors of scientific discourse often employ in
process of negotiation and persuasion or affiliation.
In accordance with these processes authors of scientific discussion may want to
formulate their statements carefully, adhering to the central qualities of modesty,
caution and scientific honesty (Varttala, 2001). For example, it is possible that the
1
author do not want to say that something is happen, but the may say that something is
possibly happen, or it might be happen.
From the functionalist standpoint, language when used is believed to have the potential
to represent the world and decide the nature of social relations represented among social
actors (Halliday, 1994). This linguistic occurrence is not only found in texts that are
produced in the mass media or literary texts.
Guided by such functional perspectives, I start to think that these might also contain
linguistic features that valuable in research. One of the most important characteristic of
academic writing is the use of hedging. I was drawn to examine hedges in academic
discourse of research based paper because of my curiosity in such a writing style. I want
disclose the reason beneath the various kinds of hedges employed in those works. To
accomplish the goal I have to collect data and sort them out based on some categories
that I formulated. By identifying the types of hedges used, it would be easier for me to
analyze and uncover those reasons.
1.2. Research Questions
This study is guided by three research questions, they are:
1. What types of hedging do the writers use?
2. What are their reasons in using hedging?
1.3. Research Objectives
The writer limits this study to the use of hedging in academic writing of introduction in
research based paper. The purposes of this study are; to know the types of hedging the
writers use and to know the reasons of the writers in using the hedging.
1.4. Signifcance of the Study
The study is focused on the use of hedging in scientific discourse. It might also imply
that teaching may stress on the use of hedged in specialist discourse like academic
research of research based paper. Moreover, it is hoped to infuse authors of scientific
2
discourse with the awareness of the potential effects on the use of hedging, so that, they
will be more careful in taking into account who their audience are and what the
purposes of their writing are. To sump up, this study is expected to increase with some
understanding of the importance of hedges for those wishing to improve their academic
writing skills (Hyland, 1998).
II. Theoretical Review
2.1. An Overview of Hedging
The term “hedging” was introduced by Lakoff (1972). It is a word whose job is to make
things more or less fuzzy. As Hyland (1998) states that hedging has been applied to the
linguistic devices used to qualify a speaker’s confidence in the truth of a proposition,
the kind introduction, methods, results, and discussion of caveats like I think, perhaps,
might, and maybe which we habitually add to our statements to avoid commitment to
categorical assertions. Hedges, therefore, express tentativeness and possibility in
communication, and their appropriate use in scientific discourse is critical.
In line with Lakoff’s main focus, the term ‘hedge’ has later been defined, like by Brown
and Levinson (1987) s “a particle, word or phrase that modifies the degree of
membership of a predicate or a noun phrase in a set; it is of the membership that it is
partial or true only in a certain respects, or that it is more true and complete than
perhaps maybe expected”. This is attracted that hedges include both desensitizer and
intensifier which was also how Lakoff saw them.
The most important notion across the area of hedges is that of modality. Just the same
like hedge, the modality also significantly in scope. Based on Palmer (1986) the notion
of modality is unclear and leaves open a number of possible definitions. Much of the
discussion on modality has contrasted on the modal auxiliaries but also modality has
been treated as “a central organizing principle in language”, (Stubbs, 1986).
3
2.2. Hedging in Academic Writing
Stylistic devices, including hedging acquire their meanings through the interaction
between the author and the reader interaction, on the basis of hedging is ‘a textual
phenomenon’ and ‘a virtual quality’ of a text. Hedges are present at various levels of
textualization but are not inherent characteristic of texts (Hyland, 1998).
The interaction between the author and the reader is controlled by culture. Based on
Clyne (1994), he states that in an intercultural communication situation, however,
cultural differences may cause both the reader and the author do not share the same
norm and expectations.
Just the same like others types of communication, in scientific writing, politeness has
been deemed as the main motivating factors of hedging. Myers (1989) claims that even
in this type of discourse, hedging is used for the shake of negative politeness to make a
claim as being provisional, pending acceptance in the literature, acceptance by the
community. In line with Myer, Schröder & Zimmer states that 'hedging' is used to refer
to the textual strategies of using linguistic means as hedges in a certain context for
specific communicative purposes, such as politeness, vagueness, mitigation, etc.
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rAkyvD6GGqoC&oi=fnd&pg
The use of hedging in academic writing may cause problems in some communicative
situations. This is caused by the rule of appropriateness of cross culture differences. As
Skelton (1995) says that hedge is part of language users’ pragmatic competence. Lack
of which may lead to make mistakes that are more serious than grammatical errors. It is
because that pragmatic errors are not so ‘obviously erroneous’ as faulty of syntax they
only make the foreign language user sound, in the case of hedging, more impolite or
aggressive, more tentative or assertive than he or she intends to be, which then may
even lead to a communicative failure (Tomas, 1983).
4
2.3. Types of Hedging
There are eight types of hedged statements, they are;
1. Modal Auxiliary (may or might, can or could, shall or should, will or would,
ought to, and must)
2. Epistemic Nouns (possibility, probability, a supposition, hypothesis, assumption,
conjecture)
3. Epistemic Verbs
a. Epistemic Lexical Verbs (suggest, appear, indicate, predict, believe,
conclude, assume, propose, seem)
b. Epistemic Judgment Verbs (feel, think, reckon, guess, estimate, tend,
speculate, suspect, calculate, imply)
c. Epistemic Evidential Verbs ( note, report, deduce, show, attempt, and
seek)
4. Conditional Sentence (if clause)
5. Epistemic Adverb (adjunct and disjuncts)
6. Epistemic Adjectives (it is to be hoped, it can be stated that, etc.)
7. Passive Infinitives (passive without by)
III. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Design
In relation to the nature, the purposes and research questions above, this study will
employ a qualitative research design, implementing characteristics of a case study. A
case study has been chosen for several reasons. First, this study will be carried out in “a
single case” (Stake as stated in Emi, 2005: 8), that is, the use of hedging in academic
research of research based paper.
By applying case study I hope to capture detailed contextual analysis. Of the four
subjects and their texts as well as their relationships with the various social psychology
environments and setting that surrounded those subjects throughout their process of
texts production.
5
3.2. Object of Investigation
In this study I investigate three different introductions produced by three different
writers. They are postgraduate students who are finishing their study of English
program in Indonesia University of Education.
Related to the study conducted by Clyne, I was interested in investigating the hedging
phenomena in the academic works written by the three postgraduate students. I
examined the development of hedging in the academic paper. These hedging features
were analyzed in term of their types and the author’s reasons in their employment of
edged words and sentences.
3.3. Topic Selection
The topic of the research based papers and the general description are tabled bellow.
no
1.
2.
Initial
Paper Topic
Introduction
Introduction
Page
Words
MSH
Number
Perception of English Teachers in 3 pages
Number
732 words
SGG
Teaching Writing
Identifying
Students’
704 words
Responses 3 Pages
Toward the Implementation GBC to
3.
KRO
Teaching Writing
Teachers’ Perception
Toward
The 2 pages
547 words
Implementation of GBC at Senior High
School
3.4. Data Collection
In conducting this research, the researcher will apply two instruments of collecting data,
they are; interview, observation and documentation, Alwasilah (2003). Qualitative
research is descriptive and typically nonnumeric (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Therefore,
6
data are collected by using interview which is based on the Stimulated Recall
Methodology (SRM) and observation.
Interview; it is a conversation between researcher and the respondent to confirm the
questions. Merriam (1988:71) said that it is a conversation with a purpose that one gives
information to another. In this case, the answers given by the interviewee is the
information needed by the researcher as the information data.
Observation; it can range from a highly structure, detail notation of structured by
checklists to a more holistic description of events and behavior, Marshall and Rossman
(2006).
3.5. Data Analysis
In analyzing data taken from the observations, I use the empirical and theoretical
perspective to make sense of what happened, as well as the context that caused it to
happen. Than, I interpret the information from the interviews to seek answers for my
research questions.
Some steps I used in this study deal with the data analyzing that is by analyzing the type
of hedging. The steps are;
a. Identifying hedged words, phrases, and clause based on the indicators, and
b. Classifying the hedged words in term of grammatical forms as it provided by
(Hyland, 1998).
c. Tabling the hedges to make it easy to look at the tendency of the paper writer in
using hedging.
d. Interpreting the data in relation to the subjects’ proficiency in using hedging.
7
IV. Data Analysis and Discussion
4.1. Types of Hedging the Writers Use
By applying the stimulated recall method, the researcher tried to discover some hedges
in the research based paper. At first, they did not have any basic idea about hedging or
hedges. And after they were stimulated by some question using -what, how, and whythey begin to realize it, than, they underlined the sentences, phrases, and words
consisting of hedges.
The Types of Hedge
Modal Auxiliary
Epistemic Noun
Epistemic Verbs
Conditional Sentence
Epistemic Adverb
Epistemic Adjective
Passive Infinitive
Agentless Passive
Number of Hedging
R1
7
0
3
1
3
0
0
0
14
R2
4
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
R3
4
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
8
From the table it can be seen that the introduction text written by R1 has the most
hedging awareness among the respondents. The R3 than is the second rank in using
hedging. And the R2 is the fewest in using hedging from the whole writer.
The phenomenon can be explained in the light of their reading and writing profile (in
the appendix). It can be interpreted that the R2 has more exposure to reading and
writing among the other two. MSH has started teaching since 1997, and he like to write
some articles in some local newspaper in his home town.
While, the SGG is belong to a new teacher who has been a teacher in 2002. He likes
reading and writing but he is lack experience of writing.
And KRO is also has been a teacher for long time (1999) but he doesn’t like reading and
writing too much for the past several years. He begins to enjoy reading and writing in
the recent years.
8
4.2. The Writers’ Reasons in Using Hedging
Initial
MSH
SGG
KRO
Hedging in sentence
There are some cases which may cause the problem
The study could be useful
Students should be aware of their problems
It will help them
This study would invite teachers to…
This study may also improve other teachers
They will be able to do it
Type of Hedging
Modal Auxiliary
This situation creates the problem
Epistemic Verb
If they do not like it
Conditional Sentences
Academic people mostly…..
Generally in Indonesia education
…especially in relation to….
Epistemic Adverb
Linguistic features may be less significant
Modal Auxiliary
It will be burden for students
It may become a burden
It could give the description of the students’
responses
Its implementation is considered valuable
Epistemic Noun
GBC has been applied for about two years
Epistemic Adverb
The goal may guide me…
It may include the improvement of…
Modal Auxiliary
This study provides some information input
I provide the explanation…
Epistemic Verb
The curriculum changing can not be avoided
This study can be used as another reference
Agentless Passive
From the table we can see that the most frequent hedging used by the writer is the
Modal Auxiliary, Epistemic Verb, and Epistemic Adjective. And there are some types
of hedging that they did not use at all.
9
From the interview, it was found that R1 was not sure in giving reasons of each word or
sentences that he though might contain hedge, but he did not provide any specific
reasons. At the end of the interview, he stated that the most of hedging he used was
mainly because he had tried to be careful with his writing. More over, he said that the
use of hedging is to avoid any mistake. By using hedging he hoped that it can decrease
the degree of mistake if any. At the latest interview, he said that the use of hedging to
emphasize the important thing that he wanted to say.
R2 had used hedges because of his uncertainty of the accuracy of the statements. With
the type of the hedges, he wanted the reader to take his statements as general
knowledge. He used of ‘for bout’ in order to safe the statement that he was not sure
about. At last, he suggested that it had been her pure impression in such hedges he used.
R3 has used more variation in hedging. His reasons in using the hedges that it is
justified in the sense that she used it to tone down his statement; contextually, his reason
is commonsensical, as she didn’t to make an affirmative claim. The use of the three
hedges makes his statement less precise. Furthermore, he himself did seem to be very
confidence about his statements and he engage himself in the process of negotiation and
persuasion with the readers to save her position in case of his statements.
V. Conclusion
In this study, I was guided by a functional school of linguistics spawned by Austin,
Searle, and Levinson. Throughout the undertaking of the research, however, I did not
follow functional grammar as a method of analysis.
5.1. Types of Hedging the Writers Use
Upon completion of this study, it was discovered that hedges occurred in the three
respondents’ discourse. From the eight types of hedging, not all of the type of hedging
is used by the respondents. The type that the respondents mostly used is the Modal
Auxiliary.
10
The hedge that is not used by the tree respondents is the Passive Infinitive. It is because
the length of the introductory which are around two to four pages. But from the whole
number of sentences, the sentences which consist of hedging are quite a lot. Of course,
there will be more hedging if the introduction is taken from theses, scrip, or handout
book of post graduate students.
5.2. Reasons in Using Hedging
There are some similar reasons stated by the respondents deal with the use of hedging in
their introduction, because;
a. He was not in giving reason for each word or sentence that he thought might
contain hedge, therefore, he did not provide any specific reason.
b. He had tried to be careful with everything he wrote.
c. He tried to avoid making mistake (to protect himself in case of words or
statements were proven wrong in the future).
d. He put hedging to put on emphasize that he thinks to be important.
e. He has used of hedging for the shake of caution.
f. He was uncertain about the data he presented.
g. He convinced the readers on the significance of the act of showing the social
status.
h. He was expressing of expectation on a case.
References
Alwasilah, Chaedar, A. (2002). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan
Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S.. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education. Boston: Allyn
& Bacon, Inc.
Clyne, Michael, (1994). Intercultural Communication at Work. Cambridge University
Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., (1994). Functional Grammar. London: St Edmundsbury Press Ltd.
11
Hartmut, S., H., & Zimmer, D., Hedging Research in Pragmatics: A Bibliographical
Research Guide to Hedging
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rAkyvD6GGqoC&oi=fnd&pg
Hyland, K. 1998. Hedging in scientific research articles.
John Benjamins Publishing.
Levinson, S. C., (1985). Pragmatics. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.
Marshall, C. and Rossman, G., (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. United States
of America: Sage Publication, Ltd.
Myers, Greg., (1989). The Pragmatic of Politeness in Scientific Articles. Applied
Linguistics .
Merriam. (1974). Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. Sringfield,
Massachusetts, U.S.A: G.&C. Merriam Company.
Skelton, John., (1995). Hedging and Discourse: Approach to the Analysis of a
Pragmatic Phenomenon. Berlin: de Gruiter.
12
PAPER
By; Tri Edy Kesumo Raharjo
ABSTRACT:
This study is aimed to investigate the use of hedging in introduction of
research based paper produced by postgraduate students on the type of
hedging they used and their reasons in using the hedging. The data
were collected by interview which is based on the Stimulated Recall
Methodology (SRM) and observation. Results showed that they had
used some type of ‘hedging’ and they have some reasons deal with the
use of hedging in their introduction.
I. Introduction.
1.1. Background of Study
This paper will portray a study, which I conducted, about the use of hedging in
introductory of research based paper. I want to reveal the reasons deal with the various
kinds of hedges employed in those works.
Despite of the popular misconception that scientific discourse embodies impartial
account of accurate information, linguists have come to believe that it actually
constitutes social constructed ‘rhetorical artifact’ (Hyland, 1998). Thus, instead of
structuring information in simple manner authors of scientific discourse often employ in
process of negotiation and persuasion or affiliation.
In accordance with these processes authors of scientific discussion may want to
formulate their statements carefully, adhering to the central qualities of modesty,
caution and scientific honesty (Varttala, 2001). For example, it is possible that the
1
author do not want to say that something is happen, but the may say that something is
possibly happen, or it might be happen.
From the functionalist standpoint, language when used is believed to have the potential
to represent the world and decide the nature of social relations represented among social
actors (Halliday, 1994). This linguistic occurrence is not only found in texts that are
produced in the mass media or literary texts.
Guided by such functional perspectives, I start to think that these might also contain
linguistic features that valuable in research. One of the most important characteristic of
academic writing is the use of hedging. I was drawn to examine hedges in academic
discourse of research based paper because of my curiosity in such a writing style. I want
disclose the reason beneath the various kinds of hedges employed in those works. To
accomplish the goal I have to collect data and sort them out based on some categories
that I formulated. By identifying the types of hedges used, it would be easier for me to
analyze and uncover those reasons.
1.2. Research Questions
This study is guided by three research questions, they are:
1. What types of hedging do the writers use?
2. What are their reasons in using hedging?
1.3. Research Objectives
The writer limits this study to the use of hedging in academic writing of introduction in
research based paper. The purposes of this study are; to know the types of hedging the
writers use and to know the reasons of the writers in using the hedging.
1.4. Signifcance of the Study
The study is focused on the use of hedging in scientific discourse. It might also imply
that teaching may stress on the use of hedged in specialist discourse like academic
research of research based paper. Moreover, it is hoped to infuse authors of scientific
2
discourse with the awareness of the potential effects on the use of hedging, so that, they
will be more careful in taking into account who their audience are and what the
purposes of their writing are. To sump up, this study is expected to increase with some
understanding of the importance of hedges for those wishing to improve their academic
writing skills (Hyland, 1998).
II. Theoretical Review
2.1. An Overview of Hedging
The term “hedging” was introduced by Lakoff (1972). It is a word whose job is to make
things more or less fuzzy. As Hyland (1998) states that hedging has been applied to the
linguistic devices used to qualify a speaker’s confidence in the truth of a proposition,
the kind introduction, methods, results, and discussion of caveats like I think, perhaps,
might, and maybe which we habitually add to our statements to avoid commitment to
categorical assertions. Hedges, therefore, express tentativeness and possibility in
communication, and their appropriate use in scientific discourse is critical.
In line with Lakoff’s main focus, the term ‘hedge’ has later been defined, like by Brown
and Levinson (1987) s “a particle, word or phrase that modifies the degree of
membership of a predicate or a noun phrase in a set; it is of the membership that it is
partial or true only in a certain respects, or that it is more true and complete than
perhaps maybe expected”. This is attracted that hedges include both desensitizer and
intensifier which was also how Lakoff saw them.
The most important notion across the area of hedges is that of modality. Just the same
like hedge, the modality also significantly in scope. Based on Palmer (1986) the notion
of modality is unclear and leaves open a number of possible definitions. Much of the
discussion on modality has contrasted on the modal auxiliaries but also modality has
been treated as “a central organizing principle in language”, (Stubbs, 1986).
3
2.2. Hedging in Academic Writing
Stylistic devices, including hedging acquire their meanings through the interaction
between the author and the reader interaction, on the basis of hedging is ‘a textual
phenomenon’ and ‘a virtual quality’ of a text. Hedges are present at various levels of
textualization but are not inherent characteristic of texts (Hyland, 1998).
The interaction between the author and the reader is controlled by culture. Based on
Clyne (1994), he states that in an intercultural communication situation, however,
cultural differences may cause both the reader and the author do not share the same
norm and expectations.
Just the same like others types of communication, in scientific writing, politeness has
been deemed as the main motivating factors of hedging. Myers (1989) claims that even
in this type of discourse, hedging is used for the shake of negative politeness to make a
claim as being provisional, pending acceptance in the literature, acceptance by the
community. In line with Myer, Schröder & Zimmer states that 'hedging' is used to refer
to the textual strategies of using linguistic means as hedges in a certain context for
specific communicative purposes, such as politeness, vagueness, mitigation, etc.
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rAkyvD6GGqoC&oi=fnd&pg
The use of hedging in academic writing may cause problems in some communicative
situations. This is caused by the rule of appropriateness of cross culture differences. As
Skelton (1995) says that hedge is part of language users’ pragmatic competence. Lack
of which may lead to make mistakes that are more serious than grammatical errors. It is
because that pragmatic errors are not so ‘obviously erroneous’ as faulty of syntax they
only make the foreign language user sound, in the case of hedging, more impolite or
aggressive, more tentative or assertive than he or she intends to be, which then may
even lead to a communicative failure (Tomas, 1983).
4
2.3. Types of Hedging
There are eight types of hedged statements, they are;
1. Modal Auxiliary (may or might, can or could, shall or should, will or would,
ought to, and must)
2. Epistemic Nouns (possibility, probability, a supposition, hypothesis, assumption,
conjecture)
3. Epistemic Verbs
a. Epistemic Lexical Verbs (suggest, appear, indicate, predict, believe,
conclude, assume, propose, seem)
b. Epistemic Judgment Verbs (feel, think, reckon, guess, estimate, tend,
speculate, suspect, calculate, imply)
c. Epistemic Evidential Verbs ( note, report, deduce, show, attempt, and
seek)
4. Conditional Sentence (if clause)
5. Epistemic Adverb (adjunct and disjuncts)
6. Epistemic Adjectives (it is to be hoped, it can be stated that, etc.)
7. Passive Infinitives (passive without by)
III. Research Methodology
3.1. Research Design
In relation to the nature, the purposes and research questions above, this study will
employ a qualitative research design, implementing characteristics of a case study. A
case study has been chosen for several reasons. First, this study will be carried out in “a
single case” (Stake as stated in Emi, 2005: 8), that is, the use of hedging in academic
research of research based paper.
By applying case study I hope to capture detailed contextual analysis. Of the four
subjects and their texts as well as their relationships with the various social psychology
environments and setting that surrounded those subjects throughout their process of
texts production.
5
3.2. Object of Investigation
In this study I investigate three different introductions produced by three different
writers. They are postgraduate students who are finishing their study of English
program in Indonesia University of Education.
Related to the study conducted by Clyne, I was interested in investigating the hedging
phenomena in the academic works written by the three postgraduate students. I
examined the development of hedging in the academic paper. These hedging features
were analyzed in term of their types and the author’s reasons in their employment of
edged words and sentences.
3.3. Topic Selection
The topic of the research based papers and the general description are tabled bellow.
no
1.
2.
Initial
Paper Topic
Introduction
Introduction
Page
Words
MSH
Number
Perception of English Teachers in 3 pages
Number
732 words
SGG
Teaching Writing
Identifying
Students’
704 words
Responses 3 Pages
Toward the Implementation GBC to
3.
KRO
Teaching Writing
Teachers’ Perception
Toward
The 2 pages
547 words
Implementation of GBC at Senior High
School
3.4. Data Collection
In conducting this research, the researcher will apply two instruments of collecting data,
they are; interview, observation and documentation, Alwasilah (2003). Qualitative
research is descriptive and typically nonnumeric (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992). Therefore,
6
data are collected by using interview which is based on the Stimulated Recall
Methodology (SRM) and observation.
Interview; it is a conversation between researcher and the respondent to confirm the
questions. Merriam (1988:71) said that it is a conversation with a purpose that one gives
information to another. In this case, the answers given by the interviewee is the
information needed by the researcher as the information data.
Observation; it can range from a highly structure, detail notation of structured by
checklists to a more holistic description of events and behavior, Marshall and Rossman
(2006).
3.5. Data Analysis
In analyzing data taken from the observations, I use the empirical and theoretical
perspective to make sense of what happened, as well as the context that caused it to
happen. Than, I interpret the information from the interviews to seek answers for my
research questions.
Some steps I used in this study deal with the data analyzing that is by analyzing the type
of hedging. The steps are;
a. Identifying hedged words, phrases, and clause based on the indicators, and
b. Classifying the hedged words in term of grammatical forms as it provided by
(Hyland, 1998).
c. Tabling the hedges to make it easy to look at the tendency of the paper writer in
using hedging.
d. Interpreting the data in relation to the subjects’ proficiency in using hedging.
7
IV. Data Analysis and Discussion
4.1. Types of Hedging the Writers Use
By applying the stimulated recall method, the researcher tried to discover some hedges
in the research based paper. At first, they did not have any basic idea about hedging or
hedges. And after they were stimulated by some question using -what, how, and whythey begin to realize it, than, they underlined the sentences, phrases, and words
consisting of hedges.
The Types of Hedge
Modal Auxiliary
Epistemic Noun
Epistemic Verbs
Conditional Sentence
Epistemic Adverb
Epistemic Adjective
Passive Infinitive
Agentless Passive
Number of Hedging
R1
7
0
3
1
3
0
0
0
14
R2
4
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
6
R3
4
0
2
0
0
0
0
2
8
From the table it can be seen that the introduction text written by R1 has the most
hedging awareness among the respondents. The R3 than is the second rank in using
hedging. And the R2 is the fewest in using hedging from the whole writer.
The phenomenon can be explained in the light of their reading and writing profile (in
the appendix). It can be interpreted that the R2 has more exposure to reading and
writing among the other two. MSH has started teaching since 1997, and he like to write
some articles in some local newspaper in his home town.
While, the SGG is belong to a new teacher who has been a teacher in 2002. He likes
reading and writing but he is lack experience of writing.
And KRO is also has been a teacher for long time (1999) but he doesn’t like reading and
writing too much for the past several years. He begins to enjoy reading and writing in
the recent years.
8
4.2. The Writers’ Reasons in Using Hedging
Initial
MSH
SGG
KRO
Hedging in sentence
There are some cases which may cause the problem
The study could be useful
Students should be aware of their problems
It will help them
This study would invite teachers to…
This study may also improve other teachers
They will be able to do it
Type of Hedging
Modal Auxiliary
This situation creates the problem
Epistemic Verb
If they do not like it
Conditional Sentences
Academic people mostly…..
Generally in Indonesia education
…especially in relation to….
Epistemic Adverb
Linguistic features may be less significant
Modal Auxiliary
It will be burden for students
It may become a burden
It could give the description of the students’
responses
Its implementation is considered valuable
Epistemic Noun
GBC has been applied for about two years
Epistemic Adverb
The goal may guide me…
It may include the improvement of…
Modal Auxiliary
This study provides some information input
I provide the explanation…
Epistemic Verb
The curriculum changing can not be avoided
This study can be used as another reference
Agentless Passive
From the table we can see that the most frequent hedging used by the writer is the
Modal Auxiliary, Epistemic Verb, and Epistemic Adjective. And there are some types
of hedging that they did not use at all.
9
From the interview, it was found that R1 was not sure in giving reasons of each word or
sentences that he though might contain hedge, but he did not provide any specific
reasons. At the end of the interview, he stated that the most of hedging he used was
mainly because he had tried to be careful with his writing. More over, he said that the
use of hedging is to avoid any mistake. By using hedging he hoped that it can decrease
the degree of mistake if any. At the latest interview, he said that the use of hedging to
emphasize the important thing that he wanted to say.
R2 had used hedges because of his uncertainty of the accuracy of the statements. With
the type of the hedges, he wanted the reader to take his statements as general
knowledge. He used of ‘for bout’ in order to safe the statement that he was not sure
about. At last, he suggested that it had been her pure impression in such hedges he used.
R3 has used more variation in hedging. His reasons in using the hedges that it is
justified in the sense that she used it to tone down his statement; contextually, his reason
is commonsensical, as she didn’t to make an affirmative claim. The use of the three
hedges makes his statement less precise. Furthermore, he himself did seem to be very
confidence about his statements and he engage himself in the process of negotiation and
persuasion with the readers to save her position in case of his statements.
V. Conclusion
In this study, I was guided by a functional school of linguistics spawned by Austin,
Searle, and Levinson. Throughout the undertaking of the research, however, I did not
follow functional grammar as a method of analysis.
5.1. Types of Hedging the Writers Use
Upon completion of this study, it was discovered that hedges occurred in the three
respondents’ discourse. From the eight types of hedging, not all of the type of hedging
is used by the respondents. The type that the respondents mostly used is the Modal
Auxiliary.
10
The hedge that is not used by the tree respondents is the Passive Infinitive. It is because
the length of the introductory which are around two to four pages. But from the whole
number of sentences, the sentences which consist of hedging are quite a lot. Of course,
there will be more hedging if the introduction is taken from theses, scrip, or handout
book of post graduate students.
5.2. Reasons in Using Hedging
There are some similar reasons stated by the respondents deal with the use of hedging in
their introduction, because;
a. He was not in giving reason for each word or sentence that he thought might
contain hedge, therefore, he did not provide any specific reason.
b. He had tried to be careful with everything he wrote.
c. He tried to avoid making mistake (to protect himself in case of words or
statements were proven wrong in the future).
d. He put hedging to put on emphasize that he thinks to be important.
e. He has used of hedging for the shake of caution.
f. He was uncertain about the data he presented.
g. He convinced the readers on the significance of the act of showing the social
status.
h. He was expressing of expectation on a case.
References
Alwasilah, Chaedar, A. (2002). Pokoknya Kualitatif: Dasar-dasar Merancang dan
Melakukan Penelitian Kualitatif. Bandung: Pustaka Jaya.
Bogdan, R. and Biklen, S.. (1992). Qualitative Research for Education. Boston: Allyn
& Bacon, Inc.
Clyne, Michael, (1994). Intercultural Communication at Work. Cambridge University
Press.
Halliday, M. A. K., (1994). Functional Grammar. London: St Edmundsbury Press Ltd.
11
Hartmut, S., H., & Zimmer, D., Hedging Research in Pragmatics: A Bibliographical
Research Guide to Hedging
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=rAkyvD6GGqoC&oi=fnd&pg
Hyland, K. 1998. Hedging in scientific research articles.
John Benjamins Publishing.
Levinson, S. C., (1985). Pragmatics. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics.
Marshall, C. and Rossman, G., (2006). Designing Qualitative Research. United States
of America: Sage Publication, Ltd.
Myers, Greg., (1989). The Pragmatic of Politeness in Scientific Articles. Applied
Linguistics .
Merriam. (1974). Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary. Sringfield,
Massachusetts, U.S.A: G.&C. Merriam Company.
Skelton, John., (1995). Hedging and Discourse: Approach to the Analysis of a
Pragmatic Phenomenon. Berlin: de Gruiter.
12