A Comparative Analysis of Interactive Metadiscourse across Popular Science Commentaries: Magazine Articles and Newspaper Articles
Salah Ahmadi
1
(
دپارتمان زبان انگلیسی، واحد مراغه، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی
)
Davud Kuhi
2
(
عضو هیئت علمی دانشگاه آزاد مراغه
)
Sorayya Behroozizad
3
(
Islamic Azad University
)
Keywords: Corpus analysis, ESP/EAP resources, Interactive metadiscourse, Popular science commentaries, Rhetorical strategies,
Abstract :
Adhering to Hyland’s (2019) Interpersonal Model of Metadiscourse, this paper examines the distribution of interactive metadiscourse markers across various topics in popular science commentaries. The corpus comprises 300 popular science commentaries, including 150 magazine articles and 150 newspaper articles, spanning nine years from 2015 to 2024. This period saw increased public debates due to significant scientific discoveries, making the analysis of such engaging content particularly relevant. A corpus of 346,825 running words was analyzed using Antconc software, identifying 24,492 instances of interactive markers. The study shows that subcategories of interactive metadiscourse are frequently used in both popular science magazine and newspaper articles. However, interactive markers appear more frequently in magazine articles than in newspaper articles, indicating that the former has more structured content. Chi-square test results for subcategories of interactive metadiscourse reveal significant differences in the distribution of transition markers, endophoric markers, evidentials, and code glosses between the two corpora. This suggests that ESP and EAP material developers should create more explicit learning resources. Such resources could help language instructors and novice researchers, especially those whose first language is not English, understand how the rhetorical functions of interactive markers influence writing styles across different genres and facilitate successful reader interaction.
References
Alghazo, S., Al-Anbar, K., Altakhaineh, A. R. M., & Jarrah, M. (2023). Interactive metadiscourse in L1 and L2 English: Evidence from editorials. Topics in Linguistics, 24(1), 55-66.https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2023-0004
Alharbi, S. H. (2021). An investigation of metadiscourse features in applied linguistics academic research articles and master’s dissertations. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 12(1), 46-54.https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.12n.1.p.46
Alqahtani, S. N., & Abdelhalim, S. M. (2020). Gender-based study of interactive metadiscourse markers in EFL academic writing. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 10(10),1315-1325.http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1010.20
Anthony, L. (2019). AntConc (Version 3.5.8). [Computer Software]. Waseda University. Retrieved from http://www.antlab.sci.waseda.ac.jp/
Bellés-Fortuño, B. (2016). Popular science articles vs scientific articles: A tool for medical education. In P. Ordoñez-Lopez & N. Edo-Marza (Eds.), Medical discourse in Professional, Academic and Popular Settings, (pp.55-75).Multilingual Matters.
Chen, L., & Li, C. (2023). Interactional metadiscourse in news commentaries: A corpus-based study of China Daily and The New York Times. Journal of Pragmatics, 212(4),29-40.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2023.04.018
Chung, E., Crosthwaite, P. R., & Lee, C. (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, 62(2),1-32. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0155
Egorova, L. A. (2018). Popular science discourse development in the cyberspace. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 9(5), 79-83. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.9n.5p.79
Firdaus, A., & Shartika, M. (2021). Interpersonal metadiscourse markers and appraisal portrayed in BBC’s corona virus news report. Advances in Social Science, Education and HumanitiesResearch,529(Iconetos2020),794-802. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210421.115
Fu, X., & Hyland, K. (2014). Interaction in two journalistic genres: A study of interactional metadiscourse English Text Construction, 7(1), 122–144.https://doi.org/10.1075/etc.7.1.05fu
Herriman, J. (2022). Metadiscourse in English instruction manuals. English for Specific Purposes, 65(2),120–132.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.10.003
Huang, J., Xiao, W., & Wang, Y. (2023). Use of metadiscourse for identity construction in tourist city publicity：A comparative study of Chinese and Australian social media discourse. Heliyon, 9(12).https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e23122
Hudoshnyk, О., & Krupskyi, O. P. (2022). Science and comics: from popularization to the discipline of comics studies. History of science and technology, 12(2),210-230.https://doi.org/10.32703/2415-7422-2022-12-2-210-230
Hyland, K. (2009). Academic discourse: English in a global context. Continuum
Hyland, K. (2010). Constructing proximity: Relating to readers in popular and professional science. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(2), 116–127.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2010.02.003
Hyland, K. (2019). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2020). Text-organizing metadiscourse. Journal of Historical Pragmatics, 21(1), 137–164.https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00039.hyl
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2022). Metadiscourse: the evolution of an approach to texts. Text & Talk, 44(3), 1-23.https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0156
Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: a reappraisal. Applied Linguists, 25 (2), 156-177.https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156
Kashiha, H., & Marandi, S. (2019). Rhetoric-specific features of interactive metadiscourse in introduction moves: A case of discipline awareness. Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies, 37(1), 1-14.https://doi.org/10.2989/16073614.2018.1548294
Khedri, M., & Basirat, E. (2022). Interactive metadiscourse in dentistry research articles: Iranian vs non-Iranian academic writers. Discourse and Interaction, 15(2),77-100.https://doi.org/10.5817/di2022-2-77
Kopple, W. J. V. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication, 36(1), 82-93.https://doi.org/10.2307/357609
Kopple, W. J. V. (2012). The importance of studying metadiscourse. Applied Research in English, 1(2), 37-44.https://doi.org/10.2307/357609
Kuhi, D. (2017). Hybridity of scientific discourses: An intertextual perspective and implications for ESP pedagogy. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, 5(2), 61-180.https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2018.26150.1048
Kuhi, D., & Babapour, M. (2019). Metadiscourse use in popular and professional science: the case of hedges and boosters. The Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, 7(2), 99-120.https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2019.26654.1144
Kuhi, D., & Mojood, M. (2014). Metadiscourse in newspaper Genre: A Cross-linguistic study of English and Persian editorials. Procedia: Social & Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1046–1055.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.515
Lee, S., & Park, H. I. (2023). Changing patterns of interactive metadiscourse in English Teaching articles. English Teaching, 78(2), 83-102.https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.78.2.202206.83
Memon, M. A., Pathan, H. & Memon, S. (2021). An intercultural investigation of interactive metadiscourse markers in research articles by Pakistani and British engineers. Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 3(2), 51-72.https://doi.org/10.52131/pjhss.2021.0903.0156
Nugrahani, V. E., & Bram, B. (2020). Metadiscourse markers in scientific journal articles. Journal of the Association for Arabic and English, 6(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.31332/lkw.v6i1.1528
Orellana, M. Á. L. (2012). Popularising scientific discourse. Estudis lingüístics, 17(17), 83-96.https://doi.org/10.7203/qfilologia.17.3379
Pilkington, O. A. (2016). Popular science versus lab lit: Differently depicting scientific apparatus. Science as Culture, 26(3), 285–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2016.1255722
Pilkington, O. A. (2018). The fictionalized reader in popular science: Reader engagement with the scientific community. Text & Talk, 38(6), 753-773. https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2018-0022
Pilkington, O. A. (2019). Definitions of scientific terminology in popular science books: An examination of definitional chains. Science Communication, 41(5), 580-601. https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547019861397
Ruonan, L., & Al-Shaibani, G. K. S. (2022). An investigation into the use of metadiscourse in undergraduates’ abstracts in social sciences. Topics in Linguistics, 23(2),36-49. https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2022-0010
Tessuto, G. (2021). Managing discipline and culture-specific knowledge for digitalised, open-access academic discourse: Interactive metadiscourse in economics and law research articles. European Journal of English Studies, 25 (3), 278-296. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825577.2021.1988255
Turney, J. (2007). Boom and bust in popular science. Journal of Science Communication, 6(1), 1-3.https://doi.org/10.22323/2.06010302
Wei, J., & Duan, J. (2019). A comparative study of metadiscoursal features in English research article abstracts in hard disciplines. Arab Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 1-37.https://doi.org/10.22108/are.2019.110099.1264
Wu, G., & Qiu, H. (2012). Popular science publishing in contemporary China. Public Understanding of Science, 22(5) 521–529.https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662512445013
Yin, M. (2022). A study on interactive metadiscourse in China-related reports from the New York Times during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Social Science and Humanities, 4(11),193-197.https://doi.org/10.53469/jssh.2022
Zhou, R., & Li, S. (2023). A study on the persuasive function of metadiscourse in hotel responses to negative reviews on trip advisor. English Language Teaching, 16(6), 55-67.https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v16n6p55