[
Aijmer, Karin. 2002. English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus. John Benjamins.10.1075/scl.10
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Appel, Randy & Andrzej Szeib. 2018. Linking adverbials in L2 English academic writing: L1-related differences. System 78. 115–129. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.08.00810.1016/j.system.2018.08.008
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Babanoğlu, M. Pınar. 2014. A corpus-based study on the use of pragmatic markers as speech-like features in Turkish EFL learners’ argumentative essays. Procedia. Social and Behavioral Sciences 136. 186–193. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.31210.1016/j.sbspro.2014.05.312
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Bax, Stephen, Fumiyo Nakatsuhara & Daniel Waller. 2019. Researching L2 writers’ use of metadiscourse markers at intermediate and advanced levels. System 83. 79–95. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2019.02.01010.1016/j.system.2019.02.010
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Brusa, Maria Fernanda Poveda de & Liliya Harutyunyan. 2019. Peer review: A tool to enhance the quality of academic written productions. English Language Teaching 12(5). 30–39. DOI: 10.5539/elt.v12n5p3010.5539/elt.v12n5p30
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Chen, Cheryl Wei-yu. 2006. The use of conjunctive adverbials in the academic papers of advanced Taiwanese EFL learners. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 11(1). 113–130. DOI: 10.1075/ijcl.11.1.05che10.1075/ijcl.11.1.05che
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Connor, Ulla & Anna Mauranen. 1999. Linguistic analysis of grant proposals: European Union research grants. English for Specific Purposes 18(1). 47–62. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-4906(97)00026-410.1016/S0889-4906(97)00026-4
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Conrad, Cheryl D., Liisa A. M. Galea, Yasukazu Kuroda & Bruce S. McEwen. 1996. Chronic stress impairs rat spatial memory on the Y maze, and this effect is blocked by tianeptine treatment. Behavioral neuroscience 110(6). 1321–1334. DOI: 10.1037//0735-7044.110.6.132110.1037//0735-7044.110.6.1321
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Council of Europe. 2011. Common European Framework of Reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Language versions. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/cadreen.asp
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Crawford, William J., Kim McDonough & Nicole Brun-Mercer. 2019. Identifying linguistic markers of collaboration in second language peer Interaction: A lexico-grammatical approach. TESOL Quarterly 53(1). 180–207. DOI: 10.1002/tesq.47710.1002/tesq.477
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Drew, Ion & Bjørn Sørheim. 2016. English teaching strategies: Methods for English teachers of 10 to 16–year olds. Det Norske Samlaget.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fish, Stanley. 2011. How to write a sentence: And how to read one. HarperCollins.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fraser, Bruce. 1999. What are discourse markers? Journal of Pragmatics 31(7). 931–952. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-2166(98)00101-510.1016/S0378-2166(98)00101-5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Fraser, Bruce. 2015. The combining of Discourse Markers – A beginning. Journal of Pragmatics 86. 48–53. DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.00710.1016/j.pragma.2015.06.007
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Gil, Noelia Navarro. 2018. Reflexive metadiscourse in a corpus of Spanish bachelor dissertations in EFL. Research in Corpus Linguistics 6. 29–49. DOI: 10.32714/ricl.06.0410.32714/ricl.06.04
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hayisama, Faridah, Mohamed Ismail Ahamad Shah & Wan Nur Asyura Wan Adnan. 2019. Rhetorical style across cultures: An analysis of metadiscourse markers in academic writing of Thai and Malaysian students. LSP International Journal 6(1). 19–37. DOI: 10.11113/lspi.v6n1.7610.11113/lspi.v6n1.76
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hryniuk, Katarzyna. 2018. Expressing authorial self in research articles written by Polish and English native-speaker writers: A corpus-based study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 8(3). 621–642. DOI: 10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.3.510.14746/ssllt.2018.8.3.5
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hu, Guangwei & Sandra Tsui Eu Lam. 2010. Issues of cultural appropriateness and pedagogical efficacy: Exploring peer review in a second language writing class. Instructional Science 38. 371–394. DOI: 10.1007/s11251-008-9086-110.1007/s11251-008-9086-1
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Hyland, Ken. 2008. Genre and academic writing in the disciplines. Language Teaching 41(4). 543–562. DOI: 10.1017/S026144480800523510.1017/S0261444808005235
]Search in Google Scholar
[
IBM. 2016. SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 24.0. IBM Corp.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jančaříková, Renata, Renata Povolná, Olga Dontcheva-Navratilová, Světlana Hanušová & Martin Němec. 2020. An academic writing needs analysis of Czech university graduate students. Discourse and Interaction 13(1). 42-66. DOI: 10.5817/DI2020-1-4210.5817/DI2020-1-42
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Jiang, Feng (Kevin) & Ken Hyland. 2020. “There are significant differences…”: The secret life of existential there in academic writing. Lingua 233. 102758. DOI: 10.1016/j.lingua.2019.10275810.1016/j.lingua.2019.102758
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Joachim, Christian, Jim K. Gimzewski & Arieh Aviram. 2000. Electronics using hybrid-molecular and mono-molecular devices. Nature 408. 541–548. DOI: 10.1038/3504600010.1038/35046000
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Johansen, Stine Hulleberg. 2020. A contrastive approach to the types of hedging strategies used in Norwegian and English informal spoken conversations. Contrastive Pragmatics 2(1). 81–105. DOI: 10.1163/26660393-1234000610.1163/26660393-12340006
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kapranov, Oleksandr. 2017. Discourse markers in academic writing in EFL by Swedish pre-service secondary school teachers of English. Logos & Littera 4(1). 21–39.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kim, Sugene. 2019. Japanese student writers’ perspectives on anonymous peer review. ELT Journal 73(3). 296–305. DOI: 10.1093/elt/ccy06110.1093/elt/ccy061
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Kwon, Eunsook & Shinhye Kim. 2019. Korean EFL college students’ identity negotiation through peer review and revision in their writing. Studies in English Language and Literature 45(2). 237–263.10.21559/aellk.2019.45.2.012
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Lotfi, Seyyed Abdolmajid Tabatabaee, Seyyed Amir Hossein Sarkeshikian & Elaheh Saleh. 2019. A cross-cultural study of the use of metadiscourse markers in argumentative essays by Iranian and Chinese EFL students. Cogent Arts & Humanities 6(1). 1601540. DOI: 10.1080/23311983.2019.160154010.1080/23311983.2019.1601540
]Search in Google Scholar
[
McDonough, Kim, Jindarat De Vleeschauwer & William Crawford. 2018. Comparing the quality of collaborative writing, collaborative prewriting, and individual texts in a Thai EFL context. System 74. 109–120. DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2018.02.01010.1016/j.system.2018.02.010
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Mulligan, Adrian, Louise Hall & Ellen Raphael. 2013. Peer review in a changing world: An international study measuring the attitudes of researchers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64(1). 132–161. DOI: 10.1002/asi.2279810.1002/asi.22798
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Paltridge, Brian. 2017. The discourse of peer review: Revieving submissions to academic journals. Palgrave Macmillan.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Povolná, Renata. 2013. On some variation in the use of discourse markers by Czech and German students of English. Discourse and Interaction 6(2). 41–60. DOI: 10.5817/DI2013-2-4110.5817/DI2013-2-41
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ramos, Kathleen Ann. 2015. Using genre pedagogy to teach adolescent English learners to write academic persuasive essays. Journal of Education 195(2). 19–35. DOI: 10.1177/00220574151950020510.1177/002205741519500205
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Sato, Shie. 2019. A corpus-based analysis of so in written discourse: A comparison between L1 English speakers and Japanese EFL learners. Applied Pragmatics 1(1). 26–45. DOI: 10.1075/ap.00002.sat10.1075/ap.00002.sat
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scott, Mike. 2001. Comparing corpora and identifying key words, collocations, and frequency distributions through the Word Smith Tools suite of computer programs. In Mohsen Ghadessy, Alex Henry & Robert L. Roseberry (eds.), Small corpus studies and ELT: Theory and practice, John Benjamins. 47–67. DOI: 10.1075/scl.5.07sco10.1075/scl.5.07sco
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Scott, Mike. 2008. Wordsmith Tools: version 4.0: single-user licence.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Šimčikaitė, Alė. 2012. Spoken discourse markers in learner academic writing. Kalbų Studijos 20. 27–34. DOI: 10.5755/j01.sal.0.20.119610.5755/j01.sal.0.20.1196
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Swales, John. 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge University Press.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Unaldi, Ihsan. 2013. Overuse of discourse markers in Turkish English as a foreign language (EFL) learners’ writing: The case of ‘I think’ and ‘in my opinion’. The Anthropologist 16(3). 575–584. DOI: 10.1080/09720073.2013.1189138310.1080/09720073.2013.11891383
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Vorobel, Oksana & Deoksoon Kim. 2014. Focusing on content: Discourse in L2 peer review groups. TESOL Journal 5(4). 698–720. DOI: 10.1002/tesj.12610.1002/tesj.126
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Westergaard, Marit, Natalia Mitrofanova, Roksolana Mykhaylyk & Yulia Rodina. 2017. Crosslinguistic influence in the acquisition of a third language: The Linguistic Proximity Model. International Journal of Bilingualism 21(6). 666–682. DOI: 10.1177/136700691664885910.1177/1367006916648859
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Wolk, Christoph, Sandra Götz & Katja Jäschke. 2021. Possibilities and drawbacks of using an online application for semi-automatic corpus analysis to investigate discourse markers and alternative fluency variables. Corpus Pragmatics 5. 7–36. DOI: 10.1007/s41701-019-00072-x10.1007/s41701-019-00072-x
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Yallop, Roger Michael Alan & Djuddah A. J. Leijen. 2018. The perceived effectiveness of written peer feedback comments within L2 English academic writing courses. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat 14. 247–271. DOI: 10.5128/ERYa14.1510.5128/ERYa14.15
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Zhao, Huahiu. 2018. New insights into the process of peer review for EFL writing: A process-oriented socio-cultural perspective. Learning and Instruction 58. 263–273. DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.01010.1016/j.learninstruc.2018.07.010
]Search in Google Scholar
[
Ziyagham, Faezeh & Shahla Simin. 2018. Speech-like pragmatic markers in argumentative essays written by Iranian EFL students and native English-speaking students. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research 6(21). 133–145.
]Search in Google Scholar
