سیویلیکا را در شبکه های اجتماعی دنبال نمایید.

An Investigation of Stance Metadiscourse Markers in English Book Reviews of Soft Disciplines

Publish Year: 1394
Type: Conference paper
Language: English
View: 662

This Paper With 20 Page And PDF and WORD Format Ready To Download

Export:

Link to this Paper:

Document National Code:

ICMRS01_080

Index date: 29 October 2016

An Investigation of Stance Metadiscourse Markers in English Book Reviews of Soft Disciplines abstract

The present study intended to investigate the use of stance metadiscourse markers in academic book reviews. To this end a sample of 51 book reviews from three soft disciplines including linguistics, Psychology, Sociology was compiled. All the book reviews were published in Scopus. For classification and analysis of the stance metadiscourse markers used, Hyland's (2005) model of stance was employed. It was found that boosters were the most frequently used stance markers with 42.21%. The result indicated the important role of stance markers in book reviews of soft discipline. The results of a Chi-Square test showed that there is a significant difference among English book reviews of soft disciplines in the use of stance discourse markers. The field of linguistics (39.33%) was found to make use of the stance markers more than Psychology and Sociology.

An Investigation of Stance Metadiscourse Markers in English Book Reviews of Soft Disciplines Keywords:

An Investigation of Stance Metadiscourse Markers in English Book Reviews of Soft Disciplines authors

Neda Zal

MA student of TEFL, University of Kashan

Mohammad Raouf Moini

Associate Professor, University of Kashan

Faeze Shahdostfard

phD chemistry student, Ilam University

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. (2011). Metadiscours strategies in research articles: A study ...
Dahl, T. (2004). Textual metadiscours in research articles: a marker ...
Faghih, E., & Rahimpour, S. (2009). Contrastive rhetoric of English ...
Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in ...
Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., and Steensen, M. (1993). Metadiscours in ...
Diani G. (2009). Reporting and evaluation in English book review ...
Giannoni, D.S. (2006). Expressing praise and criticism in economic discourse: ...
Hyland, K. (1998). Boosting, hedging and the negotiation of academic ...
Hyland, K. (1999). Disciplinary discourse: Writer stance in research article. ...
Hyland, K. (2000). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. ...
Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in ...
Hyland, K. (2002). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT ...
Hyland, K. (2004b). Disciplinary discourse: Social interactions in academic writing. ...
Hyland, K. (2005). Stance and engagement: A model of interaction ...
Hyland, K. (2007). Different strokes for different folks Disciplinary variation ...
Hyland, K. (2008). _ can be seen": Lexical bundles and ...
Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic ...
Hyland, K., & Bondi, M. (2006). Academic discourse across disciplines. ...
Moreno, A. I. & Suarez, L. (2009). Academic book reviews ...
Swales, J.M. (1990). Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research ...
Junqueira, L. (2013). A genre-based investigation of applied linguistics book ...
L indho lm- Romantshuck, Y. (1998). Scholarly book reviewing in ...
Martin, J. (2000). Beyond Exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In ...
Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction ...
Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in F innish-English ...
Swales, I. M., & Feak, C. B. (1994). Acadenic writing ...
نمایش کامل مراجع