Edited By Ciler Hatipoglu, Erdem Akbas and Yasemin Bayyurt
Taking metadiscourse as their starting point, the contributions to this edited volume focus both on the interactive and cross-cultural aspects of written texts from varying genres. Using rich and innovative data collection and analysis methods, comparing and contrasting patterns in frequently studied (English, Japanese) with understudied (Turkish, Russian/Ukrainian) languages, and relating empirical data to a web of theoretical frameworks, the articles in this book clearly display the variety, complexity and multiplicity of metadiscoursal analysis of written texts. The volume aims to substantially advance our understanding of the communicative nature of written texts and contributes to the advancement and expansion of researchers’ interests in this field.
Introduction (Çiler Hatipoğlu / Erdem Akbaş / Yasemin Bayyurt)
| 13 →
Çiler Hatipoğlu, Erdem Akbaş and Yasemin Bayyurt
Although there is an argument on how something is said is more important than what is said or vice versa, we believe that the content (what you say) and the way we deliver (how you say/write) it are equally crucial in communication. In line with this, in spoken or written communication, we not only share the propositional content of what we are conveying but we also use language to package our ideas for the sake of helping our audience comprehend things in the way we wish. With the evolution of genre and genre studies, the research into Metadiscourse has attracted a great deal of attention as it was clear that each genre and the producers of these genres followed relatively different conventions, as a part of how something is presented, to guide their audience in perceiving their texts. Coined by Zelling Harris in 1959, the term metadiscourse was used to explain various ways that the speakers/writers package their content to convey what they mean to their audience as they intend to. Metadiscourse can, therefore, be considered as quite important to develop a discourse competence both for the sender and the receiver of the text, which eventually promotes a better communication among participants.
The definition of Metadiscourse by Hyland (2005a) as “the self-reflective expressions used to negotiate interactional meanings in a text, assisting the writer (or speaker) to express a viewpoint and engage...
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.