Cross-cultural study of stance and engagement markers in motivational speeches

Publish Year: 1402
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: Persian
View: 52

This Paper With 12 Page And PDF Format Ready To Download

  • Certificate
  • من نویسنده این مقاله هستم

استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:

لینک ثابت به این Paper:

شناسه ملی سند علمی:

JR_JRLU-15-2_004

تاریخ نمایه سازی: 15 آذر 1402

Abstract:

This cross-cultural study aims to examine how Iranian and American motivational speakers employ metadiscourse devices as a convincing tool to interact with their audience. To this end, eight motivational speeches in English and Persian were randomly selected from ۲۰۱۵ to ۲۰۲۱, and analyzed for the use of stance (i.e., hedges, boosters, attitude markers, and self-mentions) and engagement (i.e., reader-pronouns, directives, questions, shared knowledge, and personal asides) expressions. The findings showed that self-mention and attitude markers were the most frequently used stance markers in English and Persian corpus, respectively. Moreover, hedges found to be the least frequently used stance markers in the two corpora. With regard to the use of engagement markers, results showed that reader pronoun is the most frequently used engagement markers, and shared knowledge and personal asides were the least frequently used engagement markers in both languages. Finally, the results of chi-square test showed statistically significant differences in the use of stance and engagement expressions in the two languages, confirming cultural septicity nature of metadiscourse markers, and that speakers of different languages employ interactional devices according to their context.

Authors

Maryam Farnia

Assistant Professor of Applied Linguistics, Department of English Language and Literature, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

Zahra Shirzadkhani

MA in English Language Teaching, Department of English Language and Literature, Payame Noor University, Tehran, Iran

مراجع و منابع این Paper:

لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این Paper را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود Paper لینک شده اند :
  • Abdi, R. (۲۰۰۹). Projecting cultural identity through metadiscourse marking: A ...
  • Abdi, R., Tavangar Rizi, M. & Tavakoli, M. (۲۰۱۰). The ...
  • Albalat-Mascarell, A., & Carrio-Pastor, M. L. (۲۰۱۹). Self-representation in political ...
  • Alghazo, S., Al Salem, M. N., & Alrashdan, I. (۲۰۲۱). ...
  • Farnia, M., & Gerami, S. (۲۰۲۱). Comparative study of interactional ...
  • Farnia, M., & Mohammadi, N. (۲۰۱۸). Cross-cultural analysis of interpersonal ...
  • Fu, X. (۲۰۱۲). The use of interactional metadiscourse in job ...
  • Carter-Thomas, S., & Rowley-Jolivet, E. (۲۰۲۰). Three-minute thesis presentations: Recontextualisation ...
  • Gillaerts, P., & Van de Velde, F. (۲۰۱۰). Interactional metadiscourse in ...
  • Hyland, K. (۱۹۹۸). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic ...
  • Hyland, K. (۲۰۰۵a). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction ...
  • Hyland, K. (۲۰۰۵b). Metadiscourse: Exploring interaction in writing. MPG books ...
  • Hyland, K. (۲۰۰۸). Persuasion, interaction and the construction of knowledge: ...
  • Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. K. (۲۰۱۹). Academic discourse and ...
  • Hunston S., & Thompson G. (Eds.). (۲۰۰۰). Evaluation in text. Oxford, ...
  • Izadi, A., Ebrahimi, S. F., & Kashiha, H. (۲۰۲۳). Understanding ...
  • Izadi, A. (۲۰۱۳). Disagreements in Iranian dissertation defences. Lods Papers ...
  • Kahkesh, M., & Alipour, M. (۲۰۱۷). A comparative study of ...
  • Kashiha, H. (۲۰۲۲). Academic lectures versus political speeches: Metadiscourse functions ...
  • Liu, S. L., & Liu, Y. L. (۲۰۲۰). A comparative ...
  • Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. (۲۰۰۵). The language ...
  • Moafi, E., Abadikhah, S. & Khonamri, F. (۲۰۲۱). Exploring metadiscourse ...
  • Moghadam, F. D. (۲۰۱۷). Persuasion in journalism: A study of ...
  • Qiu, X., & Jiang, F. (۲۰۲۱). Stance and engagement in ...
  • Rowley-Jolivet, E., & Carter-Thomas, S. (۲۰۰۵). The rhetoric of conference ...
  • Salager-Meyer, F. (۱۹۹۷). I think that perhaps you should: A ...
  • Scotto di Carlo, G. (۲۰۱۴). The role of proximity in ...
  • Thompson, G. (۲۰۰۱) Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue ...
  • نمایش کامل مراجع