应用语言学领域研究文章摘要的修辞分析和元话语标记的实用主义方法

Q2 Arts and Humanities
E. Hasan, Alsout Ergaya
{"title":"应用语言学领域研究文章摘要的修辞分析和元话语标记的实用主义方法","authors":"E. Hasan, Alsout Ergaya","doi":"10.5817/di2023-2-51","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using Hyland’s (2000) model as a research tool and drawing on Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse, this article presents a pragmatic two-level rhetorical analysis of the constituent moves within research article abstracts. It specifically zeroes in on the identification and mapping of the most frequently used metadiscourse markers signifying these moves. The findings highlight that Libyan authors employ interactive markers more often than interactional ones. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis of metadiscourse indicate that transitions, endophoric markers, and frame markers emerge as the dominant interactive categories. In contrast, interactional metadiscourse is predominantly represented by attitude markers, hedges, and boosters. Based on the findings, Move 1 features the highest frequency of metadiscourse markers, followed by Move 2. Notably, transitions stand out as the most prevalent category across all moves. This study carries pedagogical implications for academic writing practices among Libyan academic writers and students alike. Moreover, it enhances the existing body of research on the genre of research articles.","PeriodicalId":38177,"journal":{"name":"Discourse and Interaction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A pragmatic approach to the rhetorical analysis and the metadiscourse markers of research article abstracts in the field of applied linguistics\",\"authors\":\"E. Hasan, Alsout Ergaya\",\"doi\":\"10.5817/di2023-2-51\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using Hyland’s (2000) model as a research tool and drawing on Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse, this article presents a pragmatic two-level rhetorical analysis of the constituent moves within research article abstracts. It specifically zeroes in on the identification and mapping of the most frequently used metadiscourse markers signifying these moves. The findings highlight that Libyan authors employ interactive markers more often than interactional ones. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis of metadiscourse indicate that transitions, endophoric markers, and frame markers emerge as the dominant interactive categories. In contrast, interactional metadiscourse is predominantly represented by attitude markers, hedges, and boosters. Based on the findings, Move 1 features the highest frequency of metadiscourse markers, followed by Move 2. Notably, transitions stand out as the most prevalent category across all moves. This study carries pedagogical implications for academic writing practices among Libyan academic writers and students alike. Moreover, it enhances the existing body of research on the genre of research articles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Discourse and Interaction\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Discourse and Interaction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5817/di2023-2-51\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Discourse and Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5817/di2023-2-51","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以 Hyland 的模型(2000 年)为研究工具,并借鉴了 Hyland 的元话语模型(2005a),对研究文章摘要中的组成动作进行了务实的两级修辞分析。文章特别关注了最常用的元话语标记的识别和映射,这些标记标志着这些动作。研究结果表明,利比亚作者使用交互式标记的频率高于交互式标记。对元话语的定量和定性分析都表明,转折、尾音标记和框架标记是最主要的互动类别。相比之下,交互式元话语则主要体现为态度标记、对冲和助长。根据研究结果,"动作 1 "使用元话语标记的频率最高,其次是 "动作 2"。值得注意的是,在所有动作中,过渡语是最常见的类别。这项研究对利比亚学术写作者和学生的学术写作实践具有教学意义。此外,它还加强了对研究文章体裁的现有研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A pragmatic approach to the rhetorical analysis and the metadiscourse markers of research article abstracts in the field of applied linguistics
Using Hyland’s (2000) model as a research tool and drawing on Hyland’s (2005a) model of metadiscourse, this article presents a pragmatic two-level rhetorical analysis of the constituent moves within research article abstracts. It specifically zeroes in on the identification and mapping of the most frequently used metadiscourse markers signifying these moves. The findings highlight that Libyan authors employ interactive markers more often than interactional ones. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis of metadiscourse indicate that transitions, endophoric markers, and frame markers emerge as the dominant interactive categories. In contrast, interactional metadiscourse is predominantly represented by attitude markers, hedges, and boosters. Based on the findings, Move 1 features the highest frequency of metadiscourse markers, followed by Move 2. Notably, transitions stand out as the most prevalent category across all moves. This study carries pedagogical implications for academic writing practices among Libyan academic writers and students alike. Moreover, it enhances the existing body of research on the genre of research articles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Discourse and Interaction
Discourse and Interaction Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信