The pragmatic role of textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers in the construction and attainment of persuasion: A cross-linguistic study of newspaper discourse

Abstract This paper seeks to explore the role that metadiscourse markers play in the construction and attainment of persuasion. In a cross-linguistic perspective, two elite newspapers, the British The Times and the Spanish El Pais have been chosen, both because of their status and because of the political and rhetorical influence they exert in their respective national cultures. Based on the analysis of the textual and interpersonal markers found in a corpus of 40 opinion columns, 20 written in English and 20 in Spanish, this study aims to identify which metadiscourse categories predominate in this type of newspaper discourse and how they are distributed according to cross-cultural or cross-linguistic preferences. In addition, using a group of informants, this research has attempted to discover how metadiscourse operates as a persuasive mechanism in texts. Findings suggest that both textual and interpersonal metadiscourse markers are present in English and Spanish newspaper columns, but that there are variations as to the distribution and composition of such markers, specifically in the case of certain textual categories (i.e. logical markers and code glosses). Regarding the persuasive effect of metadiscourse, informants were in agreement that a balanced number of both textual and interpersonal markers was necessary to render the text persuasive and reader-oriented.

[1]  Carmen Valero-Garcés.  Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English economics texts , 1996 .

[2]  T. V. Dijk.  News as Discourse , 1990 .

[3]  Avon Crismore,et al.  Metadiscourse in Popular and Professional Science Discourse , 1990 .

[4]  Sylviane Granger,et al.  Extending the Scope of Corpus-based Research: New Applications, New Challenges , 2003 .

[5]  Avon Crismore.  The Rhetoric of Textbooks: Metadiscourse , 1984 .

[6]  Trine Dahl,et al.  Textual metadiscourse in research articles: a marker of national culture or of academic discipline? , 2004 .

[7]  L. Mao.  I CONCLUDE NOT: TOWARD A PRAGMATIC ACCOUNT OF METADISCOURSE , 1993 .

[8]  William E. Rivers,et al.  Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[9]  Eric P. Kumpf.  Visual metadiscourse: Designing the considerate text , 2000 .

[10]  Ana Moreno,et al.  Genre Constraints Across Languages: Causal Metatext in Spanish and English RAs. , 1997 .

[11]  Françoise Salager-Meyer,et al.  Hedges and textual communicative function in medical English written discourse , 1994 .

[12]  K. Hyland,et al.  HUMBLE SERVANTS OF THE DISCIPLINE? SELF-MENTION IN RESEARCH ARTICLES , 2001 .

[13]  Melvin R. Andrade.  Writing Across Languages: Analysis of L2 Text. Ulla Connor and Robert B. Kaplan (Eds.) , 1990 .

[14]  A. Moreno.  The explicit signaling of premise-conclusion sequences in research articles: A contrastive framework , 1998 .

[15]  K. Hyland,et al.  Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal , 2004 .

[16]  Danuta Reah,et al.  The language of newspapers , 1998 .

[17]  P. Beauvais.  A Speech Act Theory of Metadiscourse , 1989 .

[18]  Greg Myers,et al.  The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles , 1989 .

[19]  Jo Anne Neff van Aertselaer,et al.  Developing contrastive pragmatics : interlanguage and cross-cultural perspectives , 2008 .

[20]  K. Hyland,et al.  Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing , 2001 .

[21]  M. Victoria,et al.  El español en los medios de comunicación , 1993 .

[22]  G. Thompson.  Interaction in Academic Writing: Learning To Argue with the Reader. , 2001 .

[23]  Sylviane Granger,et al.  Extending the Scope of Corpus-based Research: New Applications, New Challenges , 2003 .

[24]  Avon Crismore.  Talking With Readers: Metadiscourse As Rhetorical Act , 1989 .

[25]  A. Bell.  The language of news media , 1991 .

[26]  R. Kaplan.  CULTURAL THOUGHT PATTERNS IN INTER‐CULTURAL EDUCATION , 1966 .

[27]  Avon Crismore,et al.  Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing , 1993 .

[28]  W. J. V. Kopple,et al.  Some Exploratory Discourse on Metadiscourse , 1985, College Composition & Communication.

[29]  K. Hyland,et al.  PERSUASION AND CONTEXT: THE PRAGMATICS OF ACADEMIC METADISCOURSE , 1998 .

[30]  Ken Hyland,et al.  Talking to Students: Metadiscourse in IntroductoryCoursebooks , 1999 .

[31]  K. Hyland,et al.  Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing , 2005 .

[32]  Anna Mauranen,et al.  Cultural differences in academic rhetoric , 1993 .

[33]  Ulla Connor,et al.  Contrastive Rhetoric: Cross-Cultural Aspects of Second Language Writing , 1998 .

[34]  Élisabeth Le.  Active participation within written argumentation: metadiscourse and editorialist's authority , 2004 .

[35]  E. Milne.  Metadiscourse revisited: a contrastive study of persuasive writing in professional discourse. Regreso al metadiscurso: estudio contrastivo de la persuasión en el discurso profesional , 2003 .

[36]  Pedro A. Fuertes-Olivera,et al.  Persuasion and advertising English: Metadiscourse in slogans and headlines , 2001 .