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.
2010Attitude 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.
2010Interactional metadiscourse in research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 9 (2): 128–139.
1994An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd edition. London: Edward Arnold.
2007Political scientists on the functions of personal pronouns in their writing: An interview-based study of ‘I’ and ‘we’. Text and Talk 271: 27–54.
1998Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic knowledge. Text 181: 349–382.
2001Bringing in the reader: Addressee features in academic articles. Written Communication 18 (4): 549–574.
2002aWhat do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 529–557.
2002bDirectives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics 23 (2): 215–239.
2005aMetadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum.
2005bStance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies 7 (2): 173–191.
2010Constructing 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.) 2012Stance and Voice in Written Academic Genres. London: Palgrave.
Hyland, Ken and Polly Tse.
2004Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156–177.
2009Personal 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.
2010Obligation 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.
1969The basic aims of discourse. College Composition and Communication 20 (5): 297–304.
1999The use of personal pronouns: Role relationships in scientific journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 18 (2): 121–138.
Markkanen, Raija and Hartmut Schröder (
eds.) 1997Hedging and Discourse: Approaches to the Analysis of a Pragmatic Phenomenon in Academic Texts. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
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.
Martin, James R. and Peter R.R. White.
2005The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave/Macmillan.
1993Cultural Differences in Academic Rhetoric. Frankfort: Peter Lang.
1989The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10 (1): 1–35.
2003Discourse studies of scientific popularization: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies 5 (2): 265–279.
1992An Uncommon Tongue. London and New York: Routledge.
Pellechia, Marianne G.
1997Trends in science coverage: A content analysis of three US newspapers. Public Understanding of Science 61: 49–68.
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 431: 3251–3266.
Thompson, Geoff and Puleng Thetela.
1995The sound of one hand clapping: The management of interaction in written discourse. Text 15 (1): 103–127.
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.
Vande Kopple, William J.
1985Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 361: 82–93.
1996Personal Pronouns in Everyday English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2008Intertextual aspects of Chinese newspaper commentaries on the events of 9/11. Discourse Studies 10 (3): 361–381.
White, Peter R.R.
2003Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23 (2): 259–284.
Cited by 34 other publications
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.
Albalat-Mascarell, Ana & María Luisa Carrió-Pastor
Chung, Edsoulla, Peter Robert Crosthwaite & Cynthia Lee
2023. 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 0:0
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.
Cuevas-Alonso, Miguel & Carla Míguez-Álvarez
2021. Metadiscursive Markers and Text Genre: A Metareview. Publications 9:4 ► pp. 56 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.
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.
Ho, Victor & Vincy Zhang
2021. “Together, we fight the virus”. East Asian Pragmatics 6:2
2017. Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going?. Journal of Pragmatics 113 ► pp. 16 ff.
Hyland, Ken, Wenbin Wang & Feng (Kevin) Jiang
2022. Metadiscourse across languages and genres: An overview. Lingua 265 ► pp. 103205 ff.
2021. Discursive constructions of populism in opinion-based journalism: A comparative European study. Discourse, Context & Media 44 ► pp. 100542 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
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.
2016. A multidimensional analysis of metadiscourse markers across written registers. Discourse Studies 18:2 ► pp. 204 ff.
2020. Differentiating Discourse Markers and Metadiscourse. Modern Linguistics 08:03 ► pp. 396 ff.
2022. A Research on Interactional Metadiscourse in Science Short Videos. Modern Linguistics 10:01 ► pp. 75 ff.
2020. The Analysis of Stance Features in Popular Science Articles. Modern Linguistics 08:06 ► pp. 827 ff.
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 18 may 2023. 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.