‘Hedging’ is Not Weakness: Understanding Language Choices Across Cultures

Kaiyu Ma, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia

I remember the very first time I heard about hedging. It was during my master’s degree in the UK. In one particular class, where around 70% of the students were Chinese, our professor spent nearly 40 minutes trying to teach us how to hedge in our English writing.

That moment stayed with me, mainly because of the significance attributed to hedging by our professor. He tried – without much success – to hide his frustration, and we tried to hide our confusion.

In the Chinese education system, we are encouraged to take a clear stance, present our argument directly, and speak with certainty. As a result, phrases like 必须 (must), 肯定 (definitely), or 毫无疑问 (without a doubt) are not only common in everyday conversation but are also seen as important and necessary in Chinese academic writing. These expressions convey certainty, authority, and clarity – values deeply embedded in the Chinese rhetorical tradition.

When I was writing in English, I confidently wrote sentences like “It is definitely true that…” or “We must do this in order to ensure…”.

After my professor introduced the concept of hedging, I struggled to accept it. I worried that using hedging language would weaken my argument and make my ideas less clear and convincing. However, as I read more and noticed these patterns, I gradually accepted that I was not supposed to be as absolute in my English academic writing. I was supposed to acknowledge complexity and uncertainty. I began to reflect more consciously on the reasons behind the different kinds of language choices.

Here are a few examples comparing common Chinese expressions with what I have come to understand their typical English equivalents to be:

Chinese Expression	Common English Equivalent
这个方法一定是最有效的。 (Direct translation: This method must be the most effective. )	This method might be one of the most effective approaches.
这个理论显然很有实际价值。 (Direct translation: This theory obviously has practical value.)	This theory is considered to have practical or potential value.
结果显示两者肯定有关联。 (Direct translation: The results definitely show a connection.)	The results suggest a possible correlation.

While the content of these examples is similar, the logic of their expression differs: the reasoning that a writer needs to stand behind their ideas versus a writer allowing for other possibilities. To illustrate this contrast more clearly, the table below presents commonly used Chinese expressions of certainty, arranged from most assertive to most tentative:

Level of Certainty	Chinese Expressions
Very Strong	毫无疑问 / 一定 / 必须 (Direct translation: Undoubtedly / Definitely / Must)
Clearly Affirmative	显然 / 肯定 / 很有可能 (Direct translation: Obviously / Certainly / Very likely)
Moderate / Tentative	应该 / 可能 / 也许 (Direct translation: Should / Might / Possibly)
Most Tentative	据说 / 听说 / 好像 (Direct translation: It is said / Heard / It seems)

What stands out is that the stronger expressions in the first two categories are commonly used in Chinese, including in academic and formal settings. In contrast, English tends to operate within the middle of the scale, often beginning with hedging terms like might, or likely, and leaning further into tentativeness with phrases such as it seems. This contrast in logic shows different ways of understanding knowledge, authority, and communication.

In Chinese rhetorical tradition, decisiveness and authority are valued. This is rooted in a cultural system that emphasises clarity, order, and respect for established knowledge. In educational contexts, Chinese students are often encouraged to find the ‘correct and only’ answer, presenting their views confidently and with certainty as a sign of competence and intellectual responsibility. Language thus becomes a tool to assert truth and convey authority.

In contrast, uncertainty is commonly made visible in English academic discourse. The ability to question assumptions, acknowledge the limits of one’s knowledge, and consider multiple perspectives is often seen not as a sign of weakness, but as a mark of rigorous thinking.

Thus, in English classrooms, hedging can be used as a lens through which students begin to understand the nuances of what may be for them a different kind of logic, one that favours open dialogue, and intellectual humility.