(LUẬN văn THẠC sĩ) a study of the english quantifiers as hedges used in theses by MA students of english at the university of languages and international studies, vietnam national university, hanoi

DECLARATION I hereby certify the thesis entitled “A study of the English quantifiers as hedges used in theses by MA students of English at the University of Languages and International

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

ở trường Đại Học Ngoại Ngữ, Đại Học Quốc Gia Hà Nội)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 02 01

Hanoi- 2014

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HA NOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

ở trường Đại Học Ngoại Ngữ, Đại Học Quốc Gia Hà Nội)

M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Linguistics Code: 60 22 02 01

Supervisor: ĐỖ THỊ THANH HÀ, Ph.D

Hanoi- 2014

DECLARATION

I hereby certify the thesis entitled “A study of the English quantifiers as hedges used in

theses by MA students of English at the University of Languages and International Studies,

Vietnam National University, Hanoi” is the result of my own research for the Degree of

Master of Arts at University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National

University, Hanoi The contents of this thesis have not been published anywhere for any

purposes I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library can be accessible for

the purposes of study

The work was carried out under my supervisor, Do Thi Thanh Ha Ph.D, at University

of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi

Hanoi, September 2014 Student’s signature

Ngô Thị Hòa

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

First of all, I would like to express my special thank to my supervisor, Do Thi Thanh Ha, Ph.D for her enthusiastic guidance as well as her helpful comments and suggestions during the research process

I wish to send my deep gratitude to Ngo Huu Hoang, Ph.D for his inspiration to do this research topic

I also wish to express my sincere thank to the librarians who helped me a lot in trying to suggest and encourage me to go on when I got in troubles for data collection

Last but not least, my heart-felt thanks are sent to my family, my uncle, my best friends and classmates those who always supported and encouraged me to complete this thesis

ABSTRACT

This study investigates how English quantifiers are used as hedges in theses by MA students of English at the University of Languages and International Studies (ULIS), Vietnam National University, Hanoi It explores intercultural characteristics of Vietnamese minds influencing on their written English

The samples for the study are 10 MA English theses of the ULIS All of them have been published from the last five years to make sure of the update This study not only mentiones to the uses of quantifiers in English theses but sheds light on their roles as hedging devices in academic writing The purpose of this study is to find out the frequencies of using quantifiers in MA theses as well as to investigate the pragmatic meanings of quantifiers used as hedges in these theses This study is a quantitative and qualitative research It is based on the corpus combined with observation, description and discussion in the light of pragmatics The study helps to know how MA Vietnamese students use quantifiers in written English, especially in theses

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS iv

PART A: INTRODUCTION 1

1 Rationales 1

2 Significances of the study 2

3 Aims of the study and Research Questions 2

4 Scope of the study 2

5 Organization of the study 3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT 4

CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND .4

1 Academic Discourse 4

2 Hedging in Academic Discourses 5

2.1 Definitions of hedging 5

2.2 Functions of hedging 6

2.3 Overview of hedging in second language writings 7

3 Quantifiers 8

3.1 Definitions of quantifiers 8

3.2 Classification of quantifiers 10

3.3 Functions of quantifiers 10

3.4 Quantifiers in terms of pragmatics 10

CHAPTER 2: The Study 13

2.1 Corpus 13

2.2 Procedure 13

2.3 Methodology 13

2.4 Data analysis and Discussions 18

PART C: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 42

1 A summary of the findings 42

2 Limitations of the study 42

3 Suggestions for further studies 43

REFERENCES 44

PART A: INTRODUCTION

This initial chapter will introduce the rationales, the aims and the research questions, together with the scope of the study More importantly, this is also the chapter giving the

clearest guideline for the whole research

1 Rationales of the study

Academic writing recently plays an important role in higher education and it also has become a requirement or an assessment of the students’ knowledge through essays, studies,

or dissertations In order to get language proficiency in writing, students have to learn and practise a lot

However, because of being non-native writers, they have many difficulties in gaining the qualities of an academic writing such as formality, caution, succinctness Besides, it can be explained that their ways of thinking in Vietnamese have somehow influences on their English writings As Dr Ngo Huu Hoang mentioned in Journal of Science and technology (2014:67), Vietnamese culture prefers subtle,discreet and emotional ways of speaking and always appreciates the balance of the relationships In other words, Vietnamese people often try to avoid conflicts in conversation Vietnameses often say

“Miếng trầu là đầu câu chuyện” It means that to start a conversation they tend not to go

straight to the point but have a roundabout way of saying something before The purpose is mainly to lead to topic of conversation sensitively In writing, saying something in a roundabout way may be the reason for redundancy but in some ways it becomes an effective strategy to express their cautions in giving information without causing strong disagreements from the readers In English, it is so-called hedging Hedging is one of the prominent features in academic writing which appreciates the concept of cautious language Especially, to research issues, every information needs to be given persuasively and clearly However, not at all time writers can make sure of something absolutely because in fact everything changes constantly Therefore, to get both caution in language and reality of the problems, people use quantifiers in their language For example, in

“There are ten good students in class, the researchers may also replace it by using

quantifiers which are suitable with their meanings as follows:

There are many good students in class (a) There are a few good students in class (b)

There are some good students in class.(c)

The sentence (a) can be explained that researcher considers the number “ten” as a large number in comparison with the class But when using quantifier “a few” in the sentence (b), “ten” may be referred to a smaller number of good students while“some” in the

sentence (c) can be considered medium quantity The questions are raised that why and how they use these quantifiers instead of exact numbers and how Vietnamese culture relects on their writings

This study exams the uses of quantifiers as hedges in theses through investigating the frequencies of using specific quantifiers Moreover, it emphasizes pragmatic meanings in using quantifiers as hedges in MA theses at ULIS The research result will contribute to develop the learners’ writing ability by using quantifiers for effective academic writing

2 Significances of the study

The result of the study may

 enhance students’ awareness of the importance of using quantifiers as hedging devices in academic writing

 help students expand their lexical repertoire by understanding deliberately how quantifiers are used in academic writing

 find out in what ways Vietnamese ways of thinking have influences on English academic writings

3 Aims of the study and Research Questions

The study is aimed

3.1 To identify the strategies and purposes of using quantifiers in written languages 3.2 To identify pragmatic meanings of using quantifiers as hedges in MA theses

Research Questions

This study aims to answer the following research questions:

1 What are frequencies of using quantifiers in the Introductions and Discussions of English MA theses at ULIS?

2 What are the uses of quantifiers as hedges in MA theses at ULIS?

4 Scope of the study

The study only focuses on using quantifiers as hedges in formal written discourse, not in other written or conversational registers It is analyzed in terms of pragmatics Data analysis concentrates on Introduction and Discussion sections of the MA theses

5 Organization of the study

This thesis composes of three parts

Part A, Introduction, presents the rationales, significances, aims, scope, and organization

of the study

Part B, Development, consists of the following chapters

 Chapter one, Theoretical background, presents the concepts relevant to the study

such as definitions of hedging and quantifiers, hedging in the second language writings, hedging in terms of pragmatics, etc

 Chapter two, The Study, is done to know how to choose samples, how to collect and

analyze data It also discusses the findings of the study to find out the frequencies

of using quantifiers in the theses and to make some in-depth discussions

Part C, Conclusions and Implications, addresses the key issues in the study,

summarizing some limitations revealed during the process of conducting this research paper

PART B: DEVELOPMENT CHAPTER 1: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

This chapter reveals background theories relating to the topic such as academic discourses, hedging in academic discourses, definitions of hedging, definitions of quantifiers and their functions, etc

1 Academic discourses

According to Nunan (1993:5), “discourse can be defined as a stretch of language

consisting of several sentences which are perceived as being related in some way” Those

several sentences can build a conversation (spoken form) or a text (written form) Academic discourse is one type of discourse that has become a popular term in the development of linguistics and it is considered as something standard Academic discourse

in terms of written forms can be essay writings, journal articles, academic textbooks, or dissertations, etc Students are expected to reach the conventions of academic writing such

as formality, clarity and conciseness, etc Therefore, academic discourse inspires researchers with much attention to many aspects and it also motivates students to gain

proficiency of the English language, especially at higher education As cited in “Academic

Discourse and Critical Consciousness”, academic discourses are understood as the ways

of thinking and using language that prevail in the academy (Bizzell, 1992) In the definition of academic discourse of Karen Bennett (2008:60), in the acamdemy may be in research or higher educational environment While Helsingin Yliopisto (2012:12) in the one hand also defines academic discourse as using languaguage in the world of academy,

in the other hand he emphasizes academic discourse as the way of “enabling university to

go about teaching students and doing research” Hyland (2004:11 cited in Martha, 2012)

points out his view of academic discourse which comprises of not only strict forms but also pragmatic purposes

While all academic discourse is distinguished by certain common practices, such as acknowledging sources, rigorous testing, intellectual honesty, and so on, there are differences which are likely to be more significant than such broad similarities The ways that writers chose to represent themselves, their readers and their world, how they seek to advance knowledge, how they maintain the authority of their discipline and the processes whereby they establish what is to be accepted as substantiated truth, a useful contribution

and a valid argument are all culturally-influenced practical actions and matters for communication

In conclusion, hedging is a rhetorical means of gaining reader acceptance of claims, allowing writers to convey their attitude to the truth of their statements and to anticipate possible objections

2 Hedging in academic discourses

2.1 Definitions of hedging

The concept, hedging, is a linguistic strategy originally coming from the view of Lakoff

(1972:195) He defines hedges as words which are able to make meaning “fuzzier or less

fuzzy” Instead of stating: people love her, we add some quantifiers to this sentence: many people love her, a few of people love her It’s obvious that by adding quantifiers, the form

of the original sentence becomes softer as well as fuzzier about the sentence meaning and awareness of quantities

In Oxford Dictionary, hedge is defined as “a word or phrase used to avoid overprecise

commitment.” When mentioning to the commitment or promise, it requires people make

sure the certainty of the subject matter Hedging devices minimize the level of commitment

as a way to protect the writers’ face from readers’ disagreement

In Macmillan Dictionary, using hedge is “to avoid answering a question or making a

decision in a definite or direct way.” In other words, it makes sense of carefulness with

what you say because the things you say directly may threaten to your stance or lead to negative reaction from readers

Hyland (1998) cited in Hinkel (2004:313) states that “the purpose of hedging is to reduce

the writer‟s commitment to the truthfulness of a statement.” It shows that hedging is used

for the purpose of lowering the strong belief in something because the writers may not make sure absolutely what they write or they do not want to cause arguments among readers or more simply they express their cautiousness with what they state

Brown & Levinson (1987) cited in Aloson (2010) mentions hedging in academic writing as

a politeness strategy to both avoid conflict and being proved wrong

Generally, in order to understand exactly what hedging is in this study, some features of hedging will be listed as follows:

 A device to support the writers in giving precise information as well as to show writers’ responsibility to the truth of subject matter

 A device to tone down their commitment level in order for readers to accept or agree more easily

 A device to get readers’ acceptance without enough evidence

 A device to save face-threats and express politeness

In this study I distinguish the two concepts: hedging and hedges As far as I’m concerned, hedging is an act as a barrier, defense to protect ones from possible conflict while hedges are devices which are used to carry out hedging

 Protecting the author from the possible attacks of the target group

 Hiding who is responsible for the truth-value of what is being said

 Appearing modest

Rufaidah Kamal Abdul Majeed (2005) in the “Analysis of Grammatical Forms and

Semantic Functions of Hedging in Political discourse” analyzed hedging based on the

It is supposed that in the research papers there are no hedges because they are stating facts

or evidences However, this study proves that like other types of writing people still use hedges in theses A these includes at least four mains parts, namely, introduction, method, results and discussion Tony Duly-Evans (1998:92) discussed functions of hedging and hedging form as the two independent terms and they had to base on context which the claims were made He considered the realization of hedging in moves and persuaded that such hedging realizations were done for many purposes such as avoid responsibility or reduce commitment to the truth Thesis is one of the academic writtings which requires

every given statement to be proved by evidence but not subjective opinions In Tony’s book, he introduced the moves in Introduction and Discussion

With Introduction, the moves consist of the followings:

 Claiming relevance of field,

 Establishing the gap which the present research fills in,

 Previewing the author’s contribution

With Discussion, the moves are

 Reporting accomplishment,

 Evaluating the congruence of their findings with regard to other criteria,

 Offering an interpretation for their findings,

 Warding off counterclaims,

 Stating implications for researches, theories, or social practices

2.2 Overview of hedging in second language writings

Hedging in second language writings

Second language writings are referred to the writings made by non-native writers Therefore, to write an essay or a research in academic style requires much effort and practice Especially, students writing in a second language have to deal with many challenges related to language acquisition John (1997) found that many non-native speakers (NNS) such as graduate and under-graduate students, after years of ESL training, often fail to recognize and appropriately use the conventions and features of academic written prose It is explained that these students produce academic papers and essays that faculty perceive to be vague and confusing, rhetorically unstructured, and overly personal

In the view of many faculty John interviewed, NNS students’ writing lacks sentence-level features considered to be basic-for example, appropriate uses of hedging, balanced generalizations ( Hinkel, 2004, p4)

Second language writers need to acquire language proficiency, writing strategies, or technique Moreover, they not only need to obtain proficiency in the use of language but also be aware of the influences of social cultural experiences in their native language on the second language writing Hedging is an appropriate technique in academic writing because it has a lot of benefits to make the writings become better In academic writing, it

is not only necessary to show ability in writing but the writers’ stance or their points of views

Language used in hedging

In fact, there are many types of hedging as cited in “Hedging in academic writings” of

University of London And quantifier as hedge is one type of them that is mentioned in Hinkel’s book (2004)

Modal auxiliary verbs may, might, can, could, would,

should

„Such a measure might be more sensitive to changes in health after specialist treatment.‟

Modal lexical verbs

doubting and

evaluating rather than

merely describing

to seem, to appear (epistemic

verbs), to believe, to assume,

to suggest, to estimate, to tend, to think, to argue, to indicate, to propose, to

apparently

„There is, perhaps, a good reason why she chose to write in the first person.‟

Approximators of

degree, quantity,

frequency and time

approximately, roughly, about, often, occasionally, generally, usually, somewhat,

somehow, a lot of

„Fever is present in about a third

of cases.‟

Introductory phrases believe, to our knowledge, it is

our view that, we feel that „We believe that there is no simple explanation.‟

“If” clauses if true, if anything „If true, our study contradicts the

myth that men make better managers than women.‟

Compound hedges seems reasonable, looks

probable

it may suggest that; it seems

likely that; it would indicate

that; this probably indicates) Table 1: Language used in hedging

3 Quantifiers

3.1 Definitions of Quantifiers

From grammar perspective, most of people think that quantifiers are function words but not content words such as noun, verb, adjective, adverb so they have not seen its important role in the context In fact, quantifiers which precede nouns can make difference in

meanings For instance, the difference is clear between “having no friends” or “ having a

lot of friends”

In the view of Quirk (1973:62), quantifier is one of the three classes (predeterminer, ordinal, and quantifier) which can occur before the head of the noun phrase

In the book “Grammar finder” of Oxford learner’s grammar (2005:220) quantifier is

defined very simply that “A quantifier say how many or how much.” It shows that

quantifier expresses a number or the amount of something

“Quantifier is a type of determiner which denotes imprecise quantity They differ from numbers or numerals which indicate precise quantity” (Quantifiers in English, 2013) This

definiton distinguishes between numbers/numerals (số từ) and quantifiers (lượng từ) In

contrast to numeral which gives the exact amount of something or describles specific individuals, quantifier makes the sentence meaning become more general or vague For examples:

Tôi làm được ba bài tập về nhà (ba is a specific number)- I have done three exercises Tôi làm được mấy bài tập về nhà ( mấy is a quantifier)- I have done some exercises

Sometimes numeral can be used as quantifier:

Ăn ba miếng lót dạ - it doesn’t mean he eats exactly three pieces but refer to the

unimportant eating

About three students make a group - the number of students to stay in a group is around

three but not obligatory number)

Sometimes it can be exaggerated:

All students study hard- it makes an arbitrary assertion

Overall, quantifier is one which makes the meaning of the sentence become more vague The writers can make use of it when they do not intend to give exact number or information without absolute evidence to protect themselves from readers’ disagreements

It may help mitigate or increase statement in conveying the author’s message

In the book “Fuzzy Quantifiers: A computational Theory” of Ingo Glocker (2006:2), he gave examples of quantification to prove that quantifiers are used in many areas of everyday life such as economics, literature, politics and studies

Finance and Economics:

Many firms have stopped making markets (p.75)

Business:

Most bosses assume they can change prices of ten and with little effort (p.63)

Few bussiness schools teach pricing as a discipline (p.63)

Politics:

Many Indians admit that they have misgoverned their only Muslim-majority state (p.25) Several seperatist leaders seem even more winning to co-operatate with India (p.26)

Literature and Arts:

Few living novelists write better than Mr.Winton about the sea (p.89)

Studies of Feminisim:

Some radical women preached free love while most emphasised sexual purity (p.89)

Table 2: Examples of NL quantification in various areas of everyday life Source: The economist 25-31/5/2002

3.2 Classification of quantifiers

There is no clear-cut quantifier scope because it is one type of determiners Sometimes numbers or indefinite pronouns also can function as quantifiers However, the scope of quantifiers in this study is based primarily on the classification of Quirk (1973:11) He classified quantifiers into three types

a Multual quantifiers: many and much

b Paucal quantifiers: few and little

c Several and enough

Multual quantifiers refers to large quantities and paucal refers to small quantities

Quirk divided quantifiers into two types, closed-system quantifiers and a large open class

of phrasal quantifiers Because this is a minor thesis, the scope of the research only goes deeply analysis of the first type Close –system quantifiers is cut into two small groups as bellows,

 Many, (a) few, several precede with plural count nouns

 Much, (a) little precede with non-count nouns

3.3 Functions of Quantifiers

Most of the quantifiers precede noun and they have the role of showing amount or quantity In discourse, they help to determine the exact amount that people have in mind for the purpose of improving risk communication

3.4 Quantifiers in terms of pragmatics

Hedging in pragmatics

Hedges play an important in indicating what people are saying or writing may not be absolutely precise Most of the researchers studied hedges in conversational discourse to get to know its roles as a means of showing politeness, facilitating turn-taking or

mitigating face-threats This paper pays much attention to the role of hedging in academic writing, more specifically; it is the use of quantifiers as hedges in theses Hyland (1996:1) concerned with hedging in writing and saw that in case of needing to give unproven information, hedging devices are very necessary in academic writing Milan Milanovie (2010:124) mentioned some reasons for using hedges, one of which is to “reducing levels

of certainty of the truth of propositions” With debating topics, it should be safer for writers not to give the true or false answers totally In this situation, hedging becomes a means of conveying vagueness purposely to show the writers’ caution and also to reduce the riskiness of what they say

Quantifiers as hedges in term of Pragmatics

Quantifiers were clearly defined in the book “Focus on Grammar” by Jay Maurer:

Quantifiers sate precisely or suggest generally the amount or number of something English has many expressions to quantify nouns and pronouns These are comprised of phrases or single words that come before the noun or pronoun (Maurer, 1997)

It is the above definition that shows two purposes of using quantifiers One is to say exact numbers or amounts; the other is to make something more general Obviously, quantifiers

are used as hedges with the second purpose in order to reduce the scope of a claim

The using of quantifiers for the first purpose without adequate evidence may lead to exaggerations, hyperboles, or overstatements According to Hinkel (2004:328), the writer can overstate or exaggerate a proposition in informal and conversational discourse in English but they require not using it in formal academic writing Using quantifiers are considered as a good way to present something without overstating it

Grice’s Maxims

Grice’s cooperative principle

The cooperative principle of Grice (1975) cited clearly in Yule (1996:36) as follows:

The cooperative principle: Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged

The maxims

Quantity

+ Make your contribution as informative as is required (for the current purposes of the exchange)

+ Do not make your contribution more informative than is required

Quality: Try to make your contribution one that is true

+ Do not say what you believe to be false

+ Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence

intentionally or by accident According to Yule (1996:37), “there are certain kinds of

expressions speakers use to mark that they may be in danger of not fully perspicuous”,

which is called hedges To some extent, what we give may flout the cooperative principle but we still need to be cooperative in conversation Hedging seems to be a good way to solve this problem For instance, with maxim of manner, not all the time we can give the absolute answer to every problem; therefore, vague language becomes a safe way to convey meanings

CHAPTER 2: THE STUDY

The chapter covers four main parts, namely, corpus, procedure, and methodology and data analysis and discussions It gives the research methodology more clearly and discusses the findings of the research

2.1 Corpus

The corpus of this study is a collection of 10 English theses written by MA Vietnamese students at English Department of Postgraduates Studies of ULIS There are not many differences in choosing samples between English linguistic field and English teaching methodology field To ensure all the samples are up-to-date, the scope of the research focuses on 10 papers published during the last five years (2009-2013)

The method to choose samples is simple random sampling The population is all of the MA students’ English theses in the English Department of Postgraduates at ULIS Since this paper studies the way MA Vietnamese students use quantifiers as hedges, international students’ theses are not counted and Ph.D theses are also removed The lists of theses each year are formed in excel and then chosen randomly by following these steps:

Step 1: Copy name list of the writers according to year on the other Excel page

Step 2: Drag the mouse to select all the contents of the column

Step 3: Click on any blank cell and type in the following function:

=INDEX(A1:A85, RANDBETWEEN(1, 85))

Step 4: Press enter button and a random name in the name list will be selected out

Press enter continuously to have enough 10 theses The backgrounds of the writers were not interested in the research

2.2 Procedure

Since all samples were theses, at least they were written according to the main parts, namely introduction, methodology, data analysis, result & discussion, and conclusion To have frequency of using quantifiers in the whole of the theses, Nvivo software are used to support for exactly counting It also helps the researcher count the frequencies of quantifiers used separately in the Introductions and Discussions The frequency is based on the average number of occurrence which is the most frequent on 1000 words

2.3 Methodology

Research methodology includes quantitative and qualitative

This study use quantitative method to find out which quantifier is the most popular and which one is the least popular within the quantifier classification Because the study focuses on Introduction and Discussion sections of theses, a comparison of quantifier frequency between these two parts will be done

Then qualitative method will be applied to analyze pragmatic meanings of using quantifiers as hedges

Data analysis method is document analysis Document analysis is valuable for collecting qualitative data Firstly, it is used to count the frequency of quantifiers used in the corpus

to identify which one is the most popular (word frequency) Then, in-depth studies are

conducted in the real context of the text to identify the purpose in using quantifiers as

hedges (pragmatic analysis)

2.4 Data analysis and Discussions

The pie chart illustrates the frequency of using quantifiers in MA theses at ULIS to see whether they are often used or not in the theses and to identify which quantifier is the most popular and which one is the least popular in the MA theses

Firstly, the biggest percentage is many It means that the majority of MA students considered the use of quantifier many with over 40% of the total Meanwhile, the least percentage, only 5.6 %, belongs to enough It shows that enough as quantifier is not

popular in students’ writings In comparison with the using of little and few, there is no

significant difference among them with deviation of 1% Furthermore, quantifier much is

used three times as many as little although they both co-occur with non-count nouns while several and few which only co-occur plural count nouns have not considerable distance, 10.6% and 6.6% respectively

Overall, it can be seen that there is a slight difference in all types of given quantifiers

However, many is still the first priority in most of the MA theses

Frequency of using quantifiers in Introduction sections of English theses of MA students

at ULIS

Text 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total % Multal

The chart illustrates the frequency of using quantifiers in Introduction sections in chosen theses

As described in the chart, there are significant differences between the use of many and

little in the Introduction parts It is clear that most of MA students use quantifier many with

approximately 41 percent while there is no use of little in their theses The next position in this level belongs to quantifier much with almost 30 percent of using Another quantifier is also used in introduction section is several with approximately 19% while the rest few and

enough merely take small proportion (each only under 10 percent) with nearly 8% and 4%,

The bar chart above shows the percentage of using quantifiers in Discussion sections Generally, all of the chosen quantifiers have been used in Discussion parts of MA students

One of the most striking features of the chart is the percentage of using many to discuss with 36.2% Much is used less than many but still be the favourit one in their theses with nearly 30% Noticeably, over 10 % of using little in the discussion sections it is chosen more than several and few.The rests remain nearly the same percentage with each under 10% Specially, several and few have the same percentage of using.it may mean that they

are used with the same purpose

Overall, it can be seen that there is a slight difference in most of the using quantifiers

However, students still prefer the large quantities (many/much) to express their ideas

Chart 4: Frequency of using Quantifiers in Introduction & Discussion sections

This chart gives comparison between the frequency of using quantifiers in Introduction sections and that in Discussion sections

It can be seen from the chart that many and much still get the largest percentages and they have no change in the two sections because many is still a little more used than much in the two parts However, with quantifiers several, although its frequency is more in the

Introduction than in the Discussion, the deviation between two kinds is considerable, 18,5% and 7,7%, respectively The significant deviation also has to mention to frequency

of using quantifier enough but it is used in the Introduction less than in Discussion parts While the use of few remains nearly the same in both sections around 7%-8% Noticeably,

while little is rarely used or even has no use in Introduction, it is paid attention to in the Discussion with 12%

Overall, many and much are the most two popular quantifiers in both two sections

2.4.2 Functions of quantifiers as hedges

Functions of quantifiers as hedges in MA theses at ULIS

A thesis often includes four main parts, namely, Introduction, Methodology, Result and Discussion, Conclusion However, with Result and Discussion sections, not all of the authors name it exactly the same although they have the same meanings Different names

of Discussion sections are not interested in this study Chosen discussion sections refer to sections which apply theoritical backgrounds into analysis

According to Lewin (1994) and Lewin and Fine (1996) cited in Tony Duly-Evans (1998), hedging is realized in moves in terms of discourse stratum They provided specific moves

in the Introductions and Discussions

This study will base on those moves to analyze step by step Realization of hedging in each move will be classified according to semantic functions which were picked up from

“Analysis of Grammatical Forms and Semantic Functions of Hedging in Political discourse” by Instructor Rufaidah Kamal Abdul Majeed Then an analysis of using quantifiers will be carried out to determine whether the uses of quantifiers have the same functions as hedges or not

Titles of 10 theses used in the study

Text 1: Incorporating English cultural elements into English training with the contrasting approach: a case of tourism students at Haiphong community college

comparing-Text 2: An English-Vietnamese cross-cultural study of idioms with colors and its implications to ELT

Text 3: The meaning and structure of a fairy tale: a systemic functional analysis

Text 4: Problems and solutions in teaching and learning medical vocabulary at Thanhhoa

medical college

Text 5: Nominalization in legal discourse: a systemic functional analysis

Text 6: Improving students’ reading comprehension through predicting strategy instruction: an action research at Cao Ba Quat upper secondary school

Text 7: The translation of environmental terminology from English into Vietnamese

Text 8: A survey on the first-year students’s English language learning style preferences at Hanoi University of Business and Technology

Text 9: A study on projection and its realization in President Barack Obama’s speech at a campaign event in Las Vegas

Text 10: An evaluation of appropriateness of applying “learn to speak English” software in teaching speaking skills for non-English major 1st year students at Hanoi University of Business and Technology

MOVES OF INTRODUCTION Move 1: Claiming relevance of field

In this part, writers justify the reason for choosing their topic To give the research topic, the writers must find the way to hit the point persuasively:

Strengtheners

Medical vocabulary has long been considered a difficult and boring subject by many ESP

students at the college It takes much time and energy to make progress in this field.(text 4)

Quantifier many is used to refer to the large number of ESP students whose do not like learning vocabulary and find it difficult to study Quantifier many in this sentence has the

role as an emphatic hedge It makes the statement stronger to express the importance of teaching and learning medical vocabulary in the college or it functions as the weightiness

of the given information

Quantifier much is also used to emphasize that it is not easy for students and teachers to

solve the given problems It requires a lot of time as well as much effort to make students better at learning ESP vocabulary

Broadeners/looseners

For many people in Vietnam, English is seen as one of very necessary means to get a good job.(text 1)

In the text 1, many is used as a way of broadener to the large number of people in the

author’s mind as well as cause effect on audience to see their pupose of learning English before relating them to teaching English corporated with culture From generalization, it functions as the weightiness of the given information

There are many types of software that teachers can use to develop their own teaching software (text 10)