211 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education Volume 3, Issue 7, 2025 ISSN (E): 2993-2769 A Pragmatic Study of Hedging in Some Selected Iraqi -Arabic Facebook’s Reels Conversations Asst. Prof. Taqwa Rashid Juma'a, Yasameen Mahdi Ali Open Educational College/Center of Najaf taqwaa.1988@gmail.com Abstract: Hedging is a linguistic act aimed at reducing assertion force, conveying politeness, and managing difficult conversationalists in electronic communication, particularly in the Iraqi dialect. The study explores the use of hedging strategies in Iraqi Arabic Facebook Reels, focusing on their pragmatic function and sociocultural implications, and identifies similarities and differences between English and Arabic in expressing this concept. The research will use a pragmatic approach to analyse how the Iraqi dialect of Arabic incorporates hedging into daily comments and interactions on short- video sharing platforms like Facebook Reels. The study utilised Facebook Reels and comments as data sources to examine language devices, including modal verbs, conditional phrases, indirect expressions, and culturally specific phrases, which are typically used in the Iraqi dialect of Arabic. To achieve the aim of the study, the research investigates the validity of three hypotheses: 1) Iraqi people use hedging in daily conversations, 2) it influences speakers' speech on social media, and 3) the speakers' cultural background influences their hedging. The results showed that hedging serves several functions and purposes in the Iraqi dialect, including decreasing certainty, showing respect, avoiding confrontation, and maintaining social order or balance. The study recommends that hedging is a valuable communication tool in Iraqi society, reflecting cultural and social norms. It shows how Iraqi Arabic is changing in the digital world, where culturally significant actions mix with modern language usage, demonstrating how important it is to be careful when communicating. Key words: Pracmatics, Hedging, Digital World, Iraqi -Arabic Facebook’s Conversations. 1. Introduction Hedging is a linguistic concept in academic writing that emphasises caution and indirectness in style. It involves using linguistic expressions to convey uncertainty and indirectness. The concept is wide and interwoven, spanning various language fields. Its devices are discussed from various perspectives in linguistics, and in English, the concept and its expressions are well-known. The study explores the concept of hedging in Arabic, a popular English language. Despite its expressive nature, the concept is not explicitly mentioned or classified as hedges in Standard Arabic grammar and linguistics books. However, Arabic has its own devices for expressing hedging, but they are not classified as hedges. The study aims to compare these hedges in Arabic with their English counterparts. Languages differ in surface forms like phonetic and phonological systems and grammatical patterns, but linguists find universals in concepts and topics. This study aims to show that Arabic, despite not classifying certain structures and words as legal hedges, has its linguistic tools for expressing the idea of hedging. This paper can help scholars study universal similarities across languages and reveal facts about the linguistic production of people of different races and origins. The problem of the study is a linguistic concept that emphasises caution in speech. It conveys a 212 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us speaker's attitude towards others or issues, limiting them to show uncertainty or avoid Hedging commitment. English linguistics classifies hedges differently based on their view and whether they are single words or syntactic structures. Arabic linguistics does not mention hedging, but its expressions are widely used but not formally established. Both English and Arabic linguistics have their classifications of hedging, but they are not formally established forms. thus, this study is restricted to identifying the different types of hedging in some selected Iraqi-Arabic videos from Facebook Reels. 2. Literature Review 2.1. The Concept of Hedging in English Hedging is a linguistic strategy used to express uncertainty, probability, or politeness in communication. It allows speakers or writers to soften their statements, making them less direct or definitive, which can help mitigate risk, maintain politeness, or allow for flexibility in interpretation. Hedging is a concept used in pragmatics and discourse analysis to describe non-committal or evasiveness in expressing precision or qualification. Examples of hedging expressions include sort, roughly, I mean, and approximately. Hedges can also be used in combination, such as 10% or more. Linguists name hedges differently, such as stance markers, weekenders, down toners, densifiers, understatements, and commentary pragmatic markers. The same notion can be found under headings like evidentiality, mitigation, tentativeness, and vagueness, but the underlying concept remains the same (Mey, 2009, p 18). Furthermore, hedging is described as a linguistic strategy used to make statements less assertive or categorical, providing flexibility and politeness in communication. It helps speakers' express uncertainty, probability, or politeness in their utterances (Lakoff, 1972, p.195). Emphasizes that hedging in academic discourse several to protect the author from being overly assertive, allowing room for negotiation with the audience. It is a means to maintain a balance between certainty and caution (Hyland, 1996, pp.251-281). Hedging refers to self-reflective linguistic expressions that reduce the illocutionary force of a statement to express epistemic uncertainty politeness. This can soften claims or signal a writer's stance toward a proposition (Holmes, 1988, p.185). Hedging involves linguistic expressions such as might, suggest and probably to indicate epistemic modality and modify the strength of speech acts. It is used to show uncertainty, withhold commitment, or acknowledge alternative viewpoints (Hyland, 2018, p.49). Additionally, hedging is described as a way of introducing approximations, such as using terms like approximately or likely to handle uncertainty and avoid overstatements in scientific claims. It balances accuracy with caution in academic writing (Meyer, 1994, p.155). Previous Studies mostly defined hedging as a linguistic element that expresses degrees of uncertainty or certainty. It is used to soften claims and convey caution, particularly in academic and scientific writing. It is the practice of using words or phrases to express uncertainty, doubt, or the possibility that a statement may not be entirely accurate. It allows the speaker or writer to distance themselves from a strong assertion, which can help maintain politeness or reduce the risk of making overly definitive claims (Hyland, K.1998, p1). Multiple classifications of hedging style have been mentioned by several researchers. 1. Approximators: used to change the meaning and divided into two parts *Adaptors are used to modify the meaning, for example, (kind of – sort of) *Rounders are used on the numerical approximations. (Prince, E.F, 1982, p. 85). 2. Shields: it is used to change the true value of a statement and reflect the degree of obligation and uncertainty, for example (might-probably-could) (Prince, E., F, J., & Bosk, C,1982, PP.99-109) 3. Bushes: it has been used to reduce content accuracy (Fraser, B, 2010, pp.1,15). 4. Lexical Hedging: It has a group of style that goal to reduce the severity of emphasis or present non-conclusive perceptions, for example (seems, appears). (Hyland, 1996, p.103-199). 213 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 5. Grammatical Hedging: It has been used to introduce a degree of doubt or possibility in scientific and academic writings, for example, can, could, may, might (Hyland, 1996, p. 434-436). 6. Compound Hedges: These are used to express uncertainty or provide the suggestion more securely, for example (it could be suggested that… " or, it might seem likely that) (Hyland,2005, pp. 173-192). 7. Fuzzy Words: These words add a degree of ambiguity or lack of clarity in meaning and allow the speaker to express it less strictly and more flexibly. For example, (very, slightly, more, less) (Lakoff, 1972, pp. 458-508). 8. Hedging Based on Nouns (Nominal Hedging): Hedging through the nouns is based on abstract nouns or model nouns to indicate uncertainty or probability. These nouns make an impression of cautiousness in the speech. For example, possibility, likelihood, suggestion) (Hyland, 1998, p. 177). 9. Adjective-Based Hedging: it is commonly used in academic writing to maintain objectivity making overly strict statements for instance, a researcher might say a possible interpretation instead of asserting that the interpretation is certain to indicate that other explanation is possible. For example (possible, likely, helpful) (Crompten, 1997, pp.273-276). 10. Model Verb: these verbs are used to express necessity, possibility, permission, or ability. They convey uncertainty or possibility, which are central to hedging. Examples: may, might, could, would) (Hyland, 1998, pp.1,26). 11. Adverbs of Probability: These are adverbs that indicate the likelihood or probability of something occurring or being true, helping to hedge that strength of a claim (Crompton, 1997, pp.1-11) 12. Vague Expressions: this expression has been used to leave things unspecified or imprecise, helping to hedge a statement by reducing its assertiveness such as, (I think, I believe, sort of, kind of, I hope) (Vassileva, 2001, pp.83,102) 13. Hedging in Political Discourse: This type of hedging is used by the political to avoid the assertive statement and indicate hesitation (Fraser, B., 2010, pp. 201–214) 2.3. The Concept of Hedging in Arabic Hedging in Arabic often relies on rhetorical and indirect expressions rather than the explicit linguistic markers frequently found in English. Arabic writers tend to use culturally embedded strategies, such as vague language and conditional clauses, to convey caution or uncertainty in academic writing. These methods align with Arabic rhetorical tradition, which emphasizes politeness and indirectness (Taqi, 2021, pp. 604,614). Hedging in Arabic languages, as in other languages, serves to maintain harmonious relationships within family interactions by softening the impact of speech. This is especially evident in expressions that show respect, reduce potential conflict, or acknowledge different perspectives (Nasir, 2018, pp.166,133) In addition, in Arabic, academic texts often use rhetorical devices and indirect expressions as Hedging strategies, reflecting cultural values such as politeness and humility. These strategies help soften arguments and create a less confrontational tone, differing from the explicit markers often used in English (El-seidi, 2000, pp. 111-126). Also, Arabic hedging is used to navigate complex political stances or soften controversial opinions. For example, indirect language and passive constructions allow speakers to present viewpoints diplomatically (Holmes, 2004, p. 298). And, unlike English, Arabic doesn’t have a well-defined lexicon explicitly labeled as hedges. However, linguistic parallels exist that fulfill similar communicative functions, softened by cultural norms of politeness and respect (Taqi, 2021, pp.604,614) Moreover, the Arabic language tends to use hedging in ways that reflect cultural values, such as respecting the reader and avoiding conflict. In contrast, English emphasizes objectivity and neutrality in academic discourse (Gezegin, 2020, pp.50,55). Additionally, Hedging in Arabic is not explicitly categorized, unlike English, which has a systematic classification for hedging devices. Arabic uses 214 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us specific linguistic tools to express caution and uncertainty without a structured framework (Taqi, 2021,604,614). Similarly, in Arabic, the case is quite different. The concept of hedging is not known as a linguistic one in Arabic books of grammar and linguistics. Its devices are not classified as Hedges. There are expressions of the idea of hedging, but they are not stated as in English. Syntactically speaking, the expressions of hedging are verbs, linguistic practicality, and structures (Taqi,2021, p.604,614). Hedging in Iraqi Arabic is used to express uncertainty or politeness or to soften statements. These include Approximators like (taqribeen) (approximately) and Shields such as (hasabeilmi) (as far as I know). It also identifies functions like reducing responsibility or indicating flexibility depending on context (Abdul Raheem AL Salami 2021, pp. 3599-3605). Hedges in Iraqi Arabic are studied in several ways, the bellow table describes some of Iraqi hedging (AL Salami, Abdul Raheem 2021, pp. 3599-3605). Iraqi people use different types of hedges depending on the context and what is required in the situation. Also, Iraqi hedging is explained as the use of the Quranic phrase "Inshallah" in the Iraqi dialect. This phrase serves the context of Iraqis during their everyday conversation and is categorized according to three functions: first, because Iraqis are Muslims; second, because the phrase deals with emotions; and finally, because it displays indirectness. The underlying motive of indirectness seems to be politeness. The relationship between Iraqi hedging, indirectness and politeness can be complicated (Syaichoni, Hidayati, 2024, pp.150,161). Furthermore, hedging in Iraqi Arabic involves expressions that convey uncertainty, politeness, or a reduction in the speaker's commitment to a statement. Hedging in Iraqi Arabic involves daily spontaneous conversations across various contexts, such as interactions between teachers and students or doctors and patients (AL Salami, Abdul Raheem 2021, pp. 3599-3605). Table (1): Types of Iraqi Arabic Hedgings 2.3. The Importance of Hedging Hedging plays a crucial role in pragmatics as it helps to soften the impact of statements, making them more polite or less direct. It allows speakers to express uncertainty, avoid confrontation, and manage interpersonal relationships more effectively. Hedging can be particularly important in academic and 215 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us professional contexts, where it allows individuals to present information cautiously and avoid overgeneralization. Hedging can mitigate the force of a statement, making it more socially acceptable and less likely to provoke disagreement (Thonus, 1996, p.245). Hedging plays a significant role in pragmatics by allowing speakers to soften their statements, express uncertainty, or avoid confrontation, which is important in managing social relationships and maintaining politeness. By using hedging devices such as modal verbs, adverbs, or phrases like "I think" or "perhaps," speakers can create a more tentative tone, thus reducing the impact of their assertions. This is especially relevant in contexts where face-threatening acts (FTAs) are present, as hedging helps in mitigating the potential threat to the listener's social face. Emphasizes that hedging is crucial in the context of politeness strategies, helping speakers to avoid sounding overly authoritative or blunt. This is essential in many social interactions where maintaining harmony is valued (Holmes, 2013, p. 103). On the other hand, Hedging is very important in academic writing. It is focusing on its function in making claims less definitive and more cautious. Hedging is essential for maintaining credibility and preventing overstatements. Hedging reflects an awareness of uncertainty, which is crucial for nuanced and credible academic discourse (Crompton, 1997, pp.271, 287). Hedging helps fuzzy boundaries around meaning in language, thus allowing speakers to express uncertainty and deal with ambiguous concepts (Lakoff, 1973, pp 453, 458). Another use of Hedging is to make directives or commands softer and more polite. This helps in reducing conflicts and managing social relationships (Fraser, 1975, pp.260,261). Furthermore, hedging works in communication, particularly in how it allows speakers to adjust the strength of their claims to make them more acceptable. This flexibility is crucial in contexts requiring (Leech, 1983, pp.8,12). Additionally, the role of Hedging as a rhetorical tool that mitigates the impact of statements, especially when they might threaten social harmony. Hedging helps in moderating directness and facilitating smoother communication. (Dante 1980, pp.42,45). Hedging helps maintain politeness in conversations by softening statements, which prevents threatening others face this indirectness is vital in managing social interactions (Brown and Levinson, 1987, PP.61,62). Consequently, hedging in linguistics is the use of expressions or phrases that indicate caution or uncertainty in a statement, making language more flexible and suitable for different social contexts. It's useful in negotiations, reducing confrontation risks, and is commonly used in academic writing to present findings modestly and non-committedly. 3. Methodology The method used in this research is quantitative. This method is particularly useful in studying hedging strategies in Facebook Reels' Iraqi conversations. We selected this method to present statistics of hedging usage in online conversations. This method approach allows for a better understanding of how hedging impacts discourse through its frequency and pragmatic implications. A sample of Iraqi Facebook interactions includes various hedging terms to examine in order analysis. After looking at many Reel clips on Facebook, a series of chats was gathered that amply demonstrated the use of hedging phrases in the language. Twenty Reel videos were gathered from Facebook, and the hedging phrases used in Iraqi talks were extracted. and subsequently, their frequency in the Reels Facebook helped to classify those terms. The study uses a pragmatic framework to analyze linguistic styles used by Iraqi people on social media platforms, specifically Facebook reels with clear hedging words. Data was collected from various Iraqi reels on Facebook and distributed according to the pragmatic pattern of hedging. The research explores hedging in Iraqi Facebook reel conversations by selecting conversations and analyzing them based on repetition of hedging words. Different types of hedging are identified, and the percentage of hedging in the video is calculated. The aim is to provide a comprehensive understanding of hedging in Iraqi conversations. 4. Result and Discussion 216 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us The collected data are presented in the table below: Table (2): The collected data Videos Types of hedging Transliterat ion English translation Number of hedging Percentage Video 1 Probability Rubuma Maybe 4 30.4% Probability La aietaqid I don’t think so 2 4.35% Vague expressions Hasab eilmi As far as I know 1 2.17% Vague expressions Alaa hadan ma To some extent 1 2.17% Political of discours Atahafaz elaa dhalik I reserve that 1 2.17% Video 2 Probability Rubama Maybe 6 30.43% Probability Aetaqid Think 7 21.74% Video 3 Knowledge Ma adari I don’t know 1 2.17% Knowledge Ma aerif I don’t know 1 2.17% Knowledge Mali ealaqa I don’t know, and I don’t care 1 2.17% Video 4 Vague expression Brayi In my opinion 1 2.17% probability lrubama Maybe 1 2.17% Video 5 Vague expression Aetaqid Think 2 21.74% Vague expression Min wijhat nazari In my opinion 1 2.17% Video 6 Vague of expression yaeni Kind of 1 2.17% Political discourse La bass bih It is acceptable 1 4.35% Political discourse Tufi bialgharad It suffice 1 2.17% Video 7 Probability Mumkin Maybe 2 6.52% Video 8 Political discourse Ma ahchee asmaa The name escapes me 1 2.17% Political discours La bas bih It is acceptable 1 4.35% Video 9 Probability Mumkin Maybe 1 6.52% Vague expression Aetaqid Think 1 2.17% Probability Ahyana sometimes 2 6.52% Video 10 Probability Rubuma maybe 4 30.43% Probability atasawuer I think 1 2.17% Video 11 Vague expressions Insha'Allah I hope 5 38.46% According to the results found in the table above, it is clear that Iraqi people repeatedly use hedging in their conversations on Facebook Reels. The most broadly used hedging 217 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us word is Inshs'Allah, which belongs to the type of vague expressions with a percentage of 38.46%. The second word is Rubama, which falls under the type of probability and is the percentage (30.43%). The third word is Aetaqid, which falls under the type of knowledge and is the percentage (21.74%). Other words were mentioned a little but are still used, such as ma adari, ma aerif, mali ealaqa, and mumkin. All of these words indicate the hedging in the speech. These results show that Iraqi people use Hedging commonly in their conversations on Facebook reels, which supports the validity of the first hypothesis. As a result, Iraqi people use hedging commonly, which makes their discourse more flexible, softer and polite, which provides the second hypothesis. Also, these results demonstrate the Hedging effect of the speaker's culture; for example, the Iraqi people use the term (bidun dhiker isma'a), which translates to "without mentioning names", while other speakers don’t, which supports the third hypothesis. When comparing Arabic and English in expressing hedging, both languages use it to express uncertainty, soften language, maintain politeness, prevent conflict in communication, and keep flexibility in conversation. The ways hedging is applied vary between the two languages. English is dependent on explicit linguistic markers such as might, could, and maybe, and it seems to indicate uncertainty or caution. Arabic communication often uses rhetorical techniques and indirect language, according to cultural expectations. Arabic communication is primarily indirect and polite, while English communication tends towards directness and clarity. The Arabic language doesn't have a specific grammar and language book for hedging and also uses the word (insha'Allah) a lot, while the English language doesn't use it. 5. Conclusions This study emphasizes pragmatic features and illustrates how Iraqis employ hedging in their communication, particularly on Facebook videos. The findings of this research indicate that hedging is not just a linguistic technique but also a method for reducing the intensity of assertions; in addition, it has a significant role in improving social interaction. One of the most important findings of this study is the spread of hedging strategies. Hedging on Facebook reels has shown to be a popular way for Iraqi users to express their opinions or perspectives, especially on controversial topics. This study concludes that: 1. Iraqi people use hedging commonly in their conversations on social media. 2. The purpose of hedging is to soften and politely convey the message. 3. The Iraqi people use special hedging words when discussing a controversial topic. 4. According to the analysis of the test, the first hypothesis that says "Iraqi people use hedging in their daily conversations" is correct. The second hypothesis, which indicates that "hedging influences the speaker's speech on social media," is also correct. The third hypothesis, asserting that the speakers' cultural backgrounds influence hedging, is correct. After carefully testing all hypotheses and confirming their validity, we can conclude that the results strongly support the accuracy of the proposed ideas. According to the present study, the researcher suggests expanding the scope of the research to include other social media platforms such as TikTok, Instagram, and YouTube shorts to investigate if the hedging changes based on the nature of the platform and the target audience and also recommends conducting a detailed study to find out who uses hedging more, men or women. Future studies can emphasize the comparison of hedging in Iraq to other Arab countries. These suggestions help guide new studies toward new dimensions and the practical utility of research in various fields. REFERENCES 1. Al Salami, A. N. R., & Abdul Raheem, S. M. (2021). A socio-pragmatic of hedging in Iraqi Arabic. Psychology and Education, 58(1), 3599–3605. https://www.psychologyandeducation.net 2. Austin, J. L. (1965). How to do things with words. Harvard University Press. 218 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 3. Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1978). Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena. In E. Goody (Ed.), Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction (pp. 56-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4. Crompton, P. (1997). Hedging in academic writing: Some theoretical problems. English for Specific Purposes, 16(4), 271–287 https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-4906(97)00007-0 5. El-seidi, M (2000). Metadiscourse in English and Arabic Argumentative Writing. Diversity in language: Contrastive studies in Arabic and English theoretical and applied linguistics American Univ in Cairo Press 6. Fraser, B. (1975). Hedged performatives. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts (pp. 187– 210). Academic Press. 7. Fraser, B. (2010). Chapter 11. Hedging in political discourse: The Bush 2007 press conferences. In U. Okulska & P. Cap (Eds.), Perspectives in politics and discourse (pp. 201–214). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.36.16fra 8. Gezegin, B. B. (2020). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A comparison of research articles and book reviews. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 6(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.710204 9. Holmes, J. (1988). Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 21–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/9.1.21 10. Holmes, J. (2013). Women, men and politeness. In Routledge eBooks. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845722 11. Horn, L. R., & Ward, G. (Eds.). (2005). Pragmatics. Blackwell. 12. Hyland, K. (1998). Hedging in scientific research articles. John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54 13. 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 14. Hyland, K. (2018). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350063617 15. Lakoff, G. (1972). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. In Papers from the Eighth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (p. 195). Chicago Linguistic Society. 16. Lakoff, G. (1973). Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4). https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00262952 17. Leech, G. N. (1983b). Principles of pragmatics. http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA0026722X 18. Levinson, S. (1983). Pragmatics.https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511813313 19. Mey, J. L. (1995). Meaning interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Blackwell. 20. Nasir, A. (2018). Hedges in Arabic Language that Occurred in Daily Conversation in Family Domain. Journal of English Teaching and Learning Issues, 1(2). https://doi.org/10.21043/jetli.v1i2.5088 21. Prince, E., Frader, J., & Bosk, C. (1982). "Probably true", says the expert: How two types of lexical hedges affect the perceived credibility of medical experts. Journal of Communication, 32(4), 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1982.tb00783.x./ 22. Taqi Jumanah, J. S. (2021). Hedges in English and Arabic: A Contrastive Study. Journal of Language Studies, 7(2), 1-15. 23. Vassileva, I. (2001). Commitment and detachment in English and Bulgarian academic writing. English for Specific Purposes, 20(1), 83-102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889- https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.36.16fra https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/9.1.21 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315845722 https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.54 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00262952 http://ci.nii.ac.jp/ncid/BA0026722X https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1982.tb00783.x./ 219 AMERICAN Journal of Language, Literacy and Learning in STEM Education www. grnjournal.us 4906(99)00029-0. 24. Yule, G. (2010). The Study of Language (4th ed., p. 128). Cambridge University Press