1. Introduction

This chapter discusses the role and importance of abstracts in academic writing, emphasizing the need for abstracts to engage readers and present research effectively. It also introduces the concept of engagement markers, frame markers, and metadiscursive nouns as essential elements in abstract writing. The chapter outlines the research objectives, which include analyzing the frequency of these markers in graduate students' abstracts and exploring potential correlations and differences between L1 and L2 writing.

2. Literature Review

This chapter describes a literature review on abstracts in research. It discusses the traditional structure of abstracts and the function of "selling" articles. It also explores the evolution of abstracts over time, both in terms of length and moves. The chapter also touches on comparative studies of abstracts in different languages, focusing on the differences in language and cultural diversities. Additionally, the use of metadiscourse in abstract writing and its various functions is explored. The use of frame markers in abstracts and their impact on text coherence and convincingness are discussed, along with their differing frequencies across disciplines and languages. Lastly, the cross-linguistic differences in the use of frame markers are also examined, suggesting that more research in this area is necessary.

3. Methodology

This chapter describes the methodology used in the study, including the corpus of graduate engineering students' abstracts, the analytical framework, and the data analysis procedure. The study is based on a learner corpus of 1,746 abstracts written by non-native English speakers in English and Serbian. The research follows Hyland’s metadiscourse model and focuses on frame markers and engagement markers. The data analysis procedure involves searching the corpora for these markers using the concordance software AntConc and calculating their frequencies. The results of the analysis are discussed comprehensively in the following sections.

4. Results and Discussion

The students wrote more words in L2 English compared to their mother tongue, L1 Serbian. Metadiscourse features such as nominalizations and engagement markers are more frequent in L2 English abstracts. Frame markers in Serbian abstracts make a larger segment of the corpus than in English abstracts. Sequencers and goal announcers are the most prevalent frame markers in both Serbian and English academic abstracts. Sequencers are commonly used to organize propositional content and facilitate the reader's understanding, while goal announcers indicate the intended goal for a specific move in the abstract. There is a preference for cilj (goal) in Serbian and aim was favored in English as the primary goal announcers. Sequencers u x delu and in the x part emerged as the most frequently utilized markers. The use of adequate frame markers can be attributed to higher education. Lecturers should be aware that the explicit teaching of lists of frame markers without raising the awareness of metadiscourse distinctive features simply does not suffice.

5. Conclusion

The study emphasizes the importance of explicit instruction in the use of metadiscourse markers, frame markers, and engagement markers in writing abstracts. Grad students understand the need to promote their research while framing and managing their arguments, but they struggle with L1 transfer and word selection. Instruction should focus on the strategic use of frame markers, metadiscursive nouns, and engagement markers. Future research could compare L2 English abstract writing with other L1 languages, and contrast graduate student writing with professional research abstracts to guide the development of more effective learning materials.