Article published in:
English Text Construction
Vol. 7:1 (2014) ► pp. 122144
References

References

Ädel, Annelie.
2006Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan.
1989Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 9: 93–124.Google Scholar
Calsamiglia, Helena.
2003Popularization discourse. Discourse Studies 5: 139–146. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. and Johanna Nichols (
eds.) 1986Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer.
1983The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. Beckenham: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Connor, Ulla and Thomas A. Upton (
eds.) 2004Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dueñas, Pilar Mur.
2010Attitude markers in business management research articles: A cross-cultural corpus-driven approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20 (1): 50–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gillaerts, Paul and Freek Van de Velde.
2010Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2): 128–139. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K..
1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edition. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Harwood, Nigel.
2007Political scientists on the functions of personal pronouns in their writing: An interview-based study of ‘I’ and ‘we’. Text and Talk 27: 27–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken.
1998Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 18: 349–382.CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2001Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18 (4): 549–574. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2002aWhat do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 529–557.Google Scholar
2002bDirectives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics 23 (2): 215–239. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2005aMetadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
2005bStance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7 (2): 173–191. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2010Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9: 116–127. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken and Carmen Sancho Guinda (
eds.) 2012Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London: Palgrave. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hyland, Ken and Polly Tse.
2004Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Chul-Kyu.
2009Personal pronouns in English and Korean texts: A corpus-based study in terms of textual interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 41: 2086–2099. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kim, Chul-Kyu and Geoff Thompson.
2010Obligation and reader involvement in English and Korean science popularizations: A corpus-based cross-cultural text analysis. Text and Talk 30 (1): 53–73. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kinneavy, James E..
1969The basic aims of discourse. College Composition and Communication 20 (5): 297–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuo, Chih-Hua.
1999The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 18 (2): 121–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Markkanen, Raija and Hartmut Schröder (
eds.) 1997Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Martin, James R..
2000Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 142–175.Google Scholar
Martin, James R. and Peter R.R. White.
2005The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave/Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mauranen, Anna.
1993Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Frankfort: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Myers, Greg.
1989The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10 (1): 1–35. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2003Discourse studies of scientific popularization: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies 5 (2): 265–279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nash, Walter.
1992An Uncommon Tongue. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pellechia, Marianne G..
1997Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science 6: 49–68. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Proctor, Katarzyna and Lily I-Wen Su.
2011The 1st person plural in political discourse – American politicians in interviews and in a debate. Journal of Pragmatics 43: 3251–3266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff and Puleng Thetela.
1995The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in written discourse. Text 15 (1): 103–127.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff and Susan Hunston.
2000Evaluation: An introduction. In Evaluation in Text: Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson (eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1–27.Google Scholar
Vande Kopple, William J..
1985Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36: 82–93. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wales, Katie.
1996Personal Pronouns in Everyday English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, Wei.
2008Intertextual aspects of Chinese newspaper commentaries on the events of 9/11. Discourse Studies 10 (3): 361–381. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
White, Peter R.R..
2003Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23 (2): 259–284.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 14 other publications

Bagheri, Fatemeh & Liming Deng
2019. Personal and Social Voices in Written Discourse Revisited1. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 42:3  pp. 345 ff. Crossref logo
Colussi, Juliana & Paula Melani Rocha
2020. Examining the journalistic genres hybridisation in content published by newspapers on Facebook Live. The Journal of International Communication 26:1  pp. 20 ff. Crossref logo
Farnia, Maryam & Nahid Mohammadi
2018. CROSS-CULTURAL ANALYSIS OF INTERPERSONAL METADISCOURSE MARKERS IN PERSUASIVE LOCAL NEWSPAPER ARTICLES. Discourse and Interaction 11:2  pp. 27 ff. Crossref logo
Farouq, Sahar
2019. Investigating discourse markers in the annexes of the International Civil Aviation Organization. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 37:1  pp. 77 ff. Crossref logo
Hyland, Ken
2017. Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?. Journal of Pragmatics 113  pp. 16 ff. Crossref logo
Lee, William Wai Lam
2020. Impression management through hedging and boosting: A cross-cultural investigation of the messages of U.S. and Chinese corporate leaders. Lingua 242  pp. 102872 ff. Crossref logo
Pilkington, Olga A.
2018. The fictionalized reader in popular science: reader engagement with the scientific community. Text & Talk 38:6  pp. 753 ff. Crossref logo
Saidi, Mavadat & Masoomeh Saiedi
2020. How Do Scientists Reach Their Target Audience? Academic and Popular Science Articles in Nutrition. Nutrition and Food Sciences Research 7:4  pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Shen, Qian, Yating Tao & Natalia Grabar
2021. Stance markers in English medical research articles and newspaper opinion columns: A comparative corpus-based study. PLOS ONE 16:3  pp. e0247981 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Dongyun & Diyun Sheng
2021. EFL Lecturers’ Metadiscourse in Chinese University MOOCs Across Course Types. Corpus Pragmatics 5:2  pp. 243 ff. Crossref logo
Zhang, Man
2016. A multidimensional analysis of metadiscourse markers across written registers. Discourse Studies 18:2  pp. 204 ff. Crossref logo
付, 晓丽
2020. Differentiating Discourse Markers and Metadiscourse. Modern Linguistics 08:03  pp. 396 ff. Crossref logo
贾, 雪玲
2020. The Analysis of Stance Features in Popular Science Articles. Modern Linguistics 08:06  pp. 827 ff. Crossref logo
백주현
2016. The Dialogic Features of L1 and L2 Argumentative Writing: The Functions of Questions in Newspaper Editorials. Studies in English Language & Literature 42:4  pp. 189 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 june 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.