Whites and Browns: A Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse in English Newspaper Editorials

IF 0.4 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH REGISTER Journal Pub Date : 2021-05-05 DOI:10.18326/RGT.V14I1.25-42
Muhammad Imtiaz Shahid, H. Qasim, Muhammad Hasnain
{"title":"Whites and Browns: A Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse in English Newspaper Editorials","authors":"Muhammad Imtiaz Shahid, H. Qasim, Muhammad Hasnain","doi":"10.18326/RGT.V14I1.25-42","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Metadiscourse is an interesting field of inquiry that is believed to play a vital role in organizing and producing persuasive writing. It is a set of linguistic devices used to communicate attitudes and mark the structural properties of a text. The study aimed to investigate whether native and non-native varieties of English varieties are similar or different from each other from the perspective of interactional meta-discourse markers. The study as contrastive rhetoric research scrutinized a corpus of 900 newspaper editorials (450 written in native English newspapers and 450 written in non-native English newspapers). Editorials were culled from 15 native English newspapers belonging to three native English countries, England, America, and New Zealand, and 15 non-native English newspapers belonging to three non-native English countries, Pakistan, India, and Sri Lanka. Based on the model of metadiscourse given by Hyland (2005), interactional metadiscourse resources were analyzed. The frequencies of interactional metadiscourse markers in both native and non-native varieties were counted and compared with each other. The results disclosed that there were worth-pointing differences between the native and non-native English editorialists in the use of interactional metadiscourse markers. Two different varieties of English editorials showed variations particularly in the use of hedging and self-mention markers. On the whole, findings suggested that the use of interactional metadiscourse markers in native English editorials were more frequent than those in non-native English editorials which made their writings more appealing and convincing context. Keywords: metadiscourse; native; non-native; newspaper; editorials","PeriodicalId":40585,"journal":{"name":"REGISTER Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"REGISTER Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18326/RGT.V14I1.25-42","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Metadiscourse is an interesting field of inquiry that is believed to play a vital role in organizing and producing persuasive writing. It is a set of linguistic devices used to communicate attitudes and mark the structural properties of a text. The study aimed to investigate whether native and non-native varieties of English varieties are similar or different from each other from the perspective of interactional meta-discourse markers. The study as contrastive rhetoric research scrutinized a corpus of 900 newspaper editorials (450 written in native English newspapers and 450 written in non-native English newspapers). Editorials were culled from 15 native English newspapers belonging to three native English countries, England, America, and New Zealand, and 15 non-native English newspapers belonging to three non-native English countries, Pakistan, India, and Sri Lanka. Based on the model of metadiscourse given by Hyland (2005), interactional metadiscourse resources were analyzed. The frequencies of interactional metadiscourse markers in both native and non-native varieties were counted and compared with each other. The results disclosed that there were worth-pointing differences between the native and non-native English editorialists in the use of interactional metadiscourse markers. Two different varieties of English editorials showed variations particularly in the use of hedging and self-mention markers. On the whole, findings suggested that the use of interactional metadiscourse markers in native English editorials were more frequent than those in non-native English editorials which made their writings more appealing and convincing context. Keywords: metadiscourse; native; non-native; newspaper; editorials
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
白人与棕色:英语报纸社论元话语的对比研究
元话语是一个有趣的研究领域,被认为在组织和产生有说服力的写作中发挥着至关重要的作用。它是一组语言手段,用于交流态度和标记文本的结构属性。本研究旨在从互动元话语标记的角度考察英语变体的母语变体和非母语变体是否相似或不同。作为对比修辞研究,这项研究仔细审查了900篇报纸社论的语料库(450篇在英语本土报纸上发表,450篇在非英语母语报纸上发表)。社论选自英国、美国和新西兰三个英语国家的15份英语报纸,以及巴基斯坦、印度和斯里兰卡三个英语非国家的15家非英语报纸。以Hyland(2005)提出的元话语模型为基础,对互动元话语资源进行了分析。统计和比较了母语和非母语变体中交互元话语标记的频率。研究结果表明,母语和非母语英语编辑在互动元话语标记的使用上存在差异。两种不同类型的英语社论显示出差异,特别是在套期保值和自我提及标记的使用方面。总体而言,研究结果表明,母语英语社论中交互元话语标记的使用比非母语英语社论更频繁,这使得他们的写作更有吸引力和说服力。关键词:元话语;出生地的非本土;报纸社论
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
REGISTER Journal
REGISTER Journal Multiple-
自引率
4.80%
发文量
2
审稿时长
28 weeks
期刊最新文献
Unraveling Gender-related differences in Compliment exchanges: the case of Hijazi Speakers Attitude and Political Ideology of 2024 Indonesian Presidential Candidates Reported in Jakartapost.com A Corpus-Based Lexical Coverage of Coursebooks in Nigeria: A Case Study A Qualitative Analysis of WhatsApp Integration on Speaking Vocabulary Development Unveiling the Lecturers’ and Students' Needs in English for Public Administration Program: Essential Vocabulary Topics, Instructional Methods, and Learning Challenges
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1