Show Less

Corpus-based studies on language varieties


Edited By Francisco Alonso Almeida, Laura Cruz García and Víctor González-Ruiz

This volume brings together a number of corpus-based studies dealing with language varieties. These contributions focus on contemporary lines of research interests, and include language teaching and learning, translation, domain-specific grammatical and textual phenomena, linguistic variation and gender, among others. Corpora used in these studies range from highly specialized texts, including earlier scientific texts, to regional varieties. Under the umbrella of corpus linguistics, scholars also apply other distinct methodological approaches to their data in order to offer new insights into old and new topics in linguistics and applied linguistics. Another important contribution of this book lies in the obvious didactic implications of the results obtained in the individual chapters for domain-based language teaching.


Show Summary Details
Restricted access

A contrastive study of interactive metadiscourse in academic papers written in English and in Spanish (María Luisa Carrió Pastor)


María Luisa Carrió Pastor A contrastive study of interactive metadiscourse in academic papers written in English and in Spanish 1. Introduction This paper is a corpus-based study examining the use of interactive metadiscourse in research papers written in different languages by English speakers (from now on English writers) and Spanish speakers (from now on Spanish writers). The importance of metadiscourse to academic communication has been highlighted in Hyland (1998, 2005), Mauranen (1993), Hyland and Tse (2004), Dahl (2004), Ädel (2006), Mur Dueñas (2011), and MacGrath and Kuteeva (2012), among others. In most of these studies, metadiscourse is divided into two different cat- egories. For example, Hyland (1998) divided metadiscourse, using the Hallidayan distinction, into two categories: textual and interpersonal. In this paper, I will follow the more recent trend of denominating the two categories as interactive and interactional, respectively, for, as noted by Hyland and Tse (2004: 161): “[…] all metadiscourse is interpersonal in that it takes account of the reader’s knowledge, textual experiences and processing needs”. The role of the reader is very important in academic writing, and scholars need to take this into account. The reason for dividing metadiscourse into these two categories has been explained by Mur Dueñas (2011: 3069) as follows: Thus, both interactive metadiscourse features (intended to organise and shape the material in the light of the readers’ likely needs and expectations) and inter- actional metadiscourse features (aimed at portraying the scholars as authors and at binding writer and reader together) are a...

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

This site requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals.

Do you have any questions? Contact us.

Or login to access all content.