Article published In:
English Text ConstructionVol. 7:1 (2014) ► pp.122–144
Interaction in two journalistic genres
A study of interactional metadiscourse
The study of interactive features of language has been a very productive source of insights into written discourse in recent years, revealing the ways that writers engage with readers to successfully persuade them of a particular viewpoint in a range of different genres and contexts. While a variety of approaches have illuminated our understanding of these features, the concept of interactional metadiscourse has been particularly valuable in revealing how writers project themselves into their discourse to signal their understandings of their material and their audience. In this paper we draw on Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse to explore some of the ways that interaction contributes to the success of two journalistic genres: popular science and opinion articles. Examining 200 popular science and 200 opinion texts, we show that despite the broadly similar audience and sources of these genres, authors structure their interactions very differently, contributing to the rhetorical distinctiveness of these genres. The paper not only offers a detailed account of interactional metadiscourse in these genres, but illustrates how interpersonal connections are accomplished for particular persuasive purposes in everyday public texts.
References (38)
Ädel, Annelie. 2006. Metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 
Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan. 1989. Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text 91: 93–124.
Calsamiglia, Helena. 2003. Popularization discourse. Discourse Studies 51: 139–146.
Chafe, Wallace L. and Johanna Nichols (eds.). 1986. Evidentiality: The Linguistic Coding of Epistemology. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The Semantics of the Modal Auxiliaries. Beckenham: Croom Helm.
Connor, Ulla and Thomas A. Upton (eds.). 2004. Discourse in the Professions: Perspectives from Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Dueñas, Pilar Mur. 2010. Attitude markers in business management research articles: A cross-cultural corpus-driven approach. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 20 (1): 50–72.
Gillaerts, Paul and Freek Van de Velde. 2010. Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2): 128–139.
Halliday, M.A.K. 1994. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edition. London: Edward Arnold.
Harwood, Nigel. 2007. Political scientists on the functions of personal pronouns in their writing: An interview-based study of ‘I’ and ‘we’. Text and Talk 271: 27–54.
Hyland, Ken. 1998. Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 181: 349–382.
2001. Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18 (4): 549–574.
2002a. What do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 529–557.
2002b. Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics 23 (2): 215–239.
2005a. Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
2005b. Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7 (2): 173–191.
2010. Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 91: 116–127.
Hyland, Ken and Carmen Sancho Guinda (eds.). 2012. Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London: Palgrave.
Hyland, Ken and Polly Tse. 2004. Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156–177.
Kim, Chul-Kyu. 2009. Personal pronouns in English and Korean texts: A corpus-based study in terms of textual interaction. Journal of Pragmatics 411: 2086–2099.
Kim, Chul-Kyu and Geoff Thompson. 2010. Obligation and reader involvement in English and Korean science popularizations: A corpus-based cross-cultural text analysis. Text and Talk 30 (1): 53–73.
Kinneavy, James E. 1969. The basic aims of discourse. College Composition and Communication 20 (5): 297–304.
Kuo, Chih-Hua. 1999. The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 18 (2): 121–138.
Markkanen, Raija and Hartmut Schröder (eds.). 1997. Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Martin, James R. 2000. Beyond 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.
Martin, James R. and Peter R.R. White. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave/Macmillan.
Mauranen, Anna. 1993. Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Frankfort: Peter Lang.
Myers, Greg. 1989. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10 (1): 1–35.
2003. Discourse studies of scientific popularization: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies 5 (2): 265–279.
Nash, Walter. 1992. An Uncommon Tongue. London and New York: Routledge.
Pellechia, Marianne G. 1997. Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science 61: 49–68.
Proctor, Katarzyna and Lily I-Wen Su. 2011. The 1st person plural in political discourse – American politicians in interviews and in a debate. Journal of Pragmatics 431: 3251–3266.
Thompson, Geoff and Puleng Thetela. 1995. The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in written discourse. Text 15 (1): 103–127.
Thompson, Geoff and Susan Hunston. 2000. Evaluation: 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.
Vande Kopple, William J. 1985. Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 361: 82–93.
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Everyday English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wang, Wei. 2008. Intertextual aspects of Chinese newspaper commentaries on the events of 9/11. Discourse Studies 10 (3): 361–381.
White, Peter R.R. 2003. Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23 (2): 259–284.
Cited by (43)
Cited by 43 other publications
Chung, Edsoulla, Peter Robert Crosthwaite & Cynthia Lee
2024. The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: insights from a corpus-based study. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 62:2 ► pp. 977 ff. 
Al-Subhi, Aisha Saadi
2023. Interactional meta-discourse and phraseology in newspaper editorials during the Russia-Ukraine War. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies 13:3 ► pp. e202331 ff.
Al-Subhi, Aisha Saadi
2024. Interactional multimodal metadiscourse in public health posters during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pragmatics and Society
Alghazo, Sharif, Khulood Al-Anbar, Marwan Jarrah, Ghaleb Rabab’ah & Mutasim Al-Deaibes
2023. Engagement strategies in English and Arabic newspaper editorials. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications 10:1
Alghazo, Sharif, Khulood Al-Anbar , Abdel Rahman Altakhaineh & Marwan Jarrah
2023. First language and second language English editorialists’ use of interactional metadiscourse. Discourse and Interaction 16:2 ► pp. 5 ff.
Batchelor, Jordan
2023. Scientists say: Patterns of attribution in popular and professional science writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 65 ► pp. 101273 ff.
Chen, Lin & Chun Li
2023. Interactional metadiscourse in news commentaries: A corpus-based study of China Daily and The New York Times. Journal of Pragmatics 212 ► pp. 29 ff.
Chen, Yun Han & Ju Chuan Huang
Chou, Isabelle, Weiyi Li, Kanglong Liu & Dipima Buragohain
2023. Representation of interactional metadiscourse in translated and native English: A corpus-assisted study. PLOS ONE 18:7 ► pp. e0284849 ff.
Kozlova, Natalya Yu.
2023. Imagery in Scientific Discourse. RUDN Journal of Philosophy 27:1 ► pp. 138 ff.
Lehman, Iga Maria & Łukasz Sułkowski
2023. Reader Perceptions of Authorial Voice in Top-Tier Management Journals: The Case of Doctoral Students of Management From Eastern Europe. Journal of Management Education 47:4 ► pp. 349 ff.
Limnios, Olga A.
2023. Female Language in Popular Science. Gender Studies 22:1 ► pp. 168 ff.
Urloi, Maria Cristina & Miguel F. Ruiz-Garrido
2023. Persuasion Through Interactional Metadiscourse of Management Statements of European Renewable Energy Companies. In New Trends on Metadiscourse, ► pp. 191 ff.
Albalat-Mascarell, Ana & María Luisa Carrió-Pastor
2022. Marcadores de implicación en los discursos de campaña para las elecciones generales de 2016 en España. Spanish in Context 19:3 ► pp. 537 ff.
Biri, Ylva
Boginskaya, Olga
2022. Dissenting with conviction: boosting in challenging the majority opinion. International Journal of Legal Discourse 7:2 ► pp. 257 ff.
Hyland, Ken, Wenbin Wang & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2022. Metadiscourse across languages and genres: An overview. Lingua 265 ► pp. 103205 ff.
Jalli, Nuurrianti, Siti Aeisha Joharry & Sabariah Mohamed Salleh
2022. ICERD in Malaysian online news reports: Analysis of rhetoric and public opinion. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 6:1 ► pp. 100318 ff.
Nádraská, Zuzana
2022. The function of square quotes in hard news: Metadiscoursal and generic perspectives. Discourse and Interaction 15:2 ► pp. 101 ff.
Ruonan, Lin & Ghayth Kamel Shaker Al-Shaibani
2022. An investigation into the use of metadiscourse in undergraduates’ abstracts in social sciences. Topics in Linguistics 23:2 ► pp. 36 ff.
Wu, Xinxin & He Yang
2022. Unpacking the Functions of Personal Metadiscourse in Teachers’ Classroom Discourse. Sustainability 14:20 ► pp. 13502 ff.
Wu, Xinxin & He Yang
2022. A comparative analysis of English for academic purposes teachers’ interactive metadiscourse across the British and Chinese contexts. Frontiers in Psychology 13
侯, 颖
2022. A Research on Interactional Metadiscourse in Science Short Videos. Modern Linguistics 10:01 ► pp. 75 ff.
Cuevas-Alonso, Miguel & Carla Míguez-Álvarez
2021. Metadiscursive Markers and Text Genre: A Metareview. Publications 9:4 ► pp. 56 ff.
Ho, Victor & Vincy Zhang
2021. “Together, we fight the virus”. East Asian Pragmatics 6:2
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.
Thornborrow, Joanna, Mats Ekstrom & Marianna Patrona
2021. Discursive constructions of populism in opinion-based journalism: A comparative European study. Discourse, Context & Media 44 ► pp. 100542 ff.
Ye, Yunping
2021. From abstracts to “60-second science” podcasts: Reformulation of scientific discourse. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 53 ► pp. 101025 ff.
Zhang, Dongyun & Diyun Sheng
2021. EFL Lecturers’ Metadiscourse in Chinese University MOOCs Across Course Types. Corpus Pragmatics 5:2 ► pp. 243 ff.
Zhang, Dongyun & Diyun Sheng
2023. A Contrastive Analysis of Metadiscourse by Native and EFL Lecturers in Chinese University MOOCs. In New Trends on Metadiscourse, ► pp. 129 ff.
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.
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.
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.
付, 晓丽
2020. Differentiating Discourse Markers and Metadiscourse. Modern Linguistics 08:03 ► pp. 396 ff.
付, 晓丽
2024. An Exploration of the Educational Function of Science Popularization Texts. Advances in Education 14:01 ► pp. 751 ff.
贾, 雪玲
2020. The Analysis of Stance Features in Popular Science Articles. Modern Linguistics 08:06 ► pp. 827 ff.
Bagheri, Fatemeh & Liming Deng
2019. Personal and Social Voices in Written Discourse Revisited1. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 42:3 ► pp. 345 ff.
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.
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.
Pilkington, Olga A.
2018. The fictionalized reader in popular science: reader engagement with the scientific community. Text & Talk 38:6 ► pp. 753 ff.
Hyland, Ken
2017. Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?. Journal of Pragmatics 113 ► pp. 16 ff.
Zhang, Man
2016. A multidimensional analysis of metadiscourse markers across written registers. Discourse Studies 18:2 ► pp. 204 ff.
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.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 2 july 2024. 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.