METADISCOURSE ANALYSIS OF AN ONLINE ENTERTAINMENT ARTICLE

Authors

  • Afiqah Humaira Anuarsham Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia
  • Noor Hanim Rahmat Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia
  • Muhammad Adib Nazhan Khamsah Akademi Pengajian Bahasa, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46827/ejals.v3i1.187

Keywords:

metadiscourse, interactional resources, online article, writing style

Abstract

In language structure, discourse is generally used by writers in their text to get readers to understand and comprehend the content of the written text. Metadiscourse is a specific class of language device used by writers to organize their text as well as manage the interactions or relations in some way with the reader of the text. By taking Hyland (2005) and Lakoff’s (1975) interactional metadiscourse model, this paper employs the data analysis driven method called document analysis to analyse the presence of interactional metadiscourse elements in an online entertainment article. Coding and frequency counting method are adopted to find out the sub-categories of respective four elements: Intensifiers, Hedges, Boosters, and Engagement Markers. The elements are interpreted as representing writers’ strategies to define the relationship between themselves, the reader and the topic. Consequently, it is found that the four elements of interactional metadiscourse are all deployed in the article text. The result of this study identifies that engagement markers is the most frequent interactional metadiscourse used by the author. This research may suggest entertainment online article employ the integration of interactional metadiscourse as effectively as other genre of online articles. It may be of value in understanding entertainment online genre for the development of the metadiscourse framework academically.

 

References

Amiryousefi, M., & Eslami Rasekh, A. (2010). Metadiscourse: Definitions, Issues and Its Implications for English Teachers. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 159–167. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47807497_Metadiscourse_Definitions_Issues_and_Its_Implications_for_English_Teachers. doi:10.5539/elt.v3n4p159.

Armstrong, D., Gosling, A., Weinman, J., & Martaeu, T. (1997). The Place of Inter-Rater Reliability in Qualitative Research: An Empirical Study. Sociology, 31(3), 597-606. Retrieved from https://https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0038038597031003015. doi: 10.1177/0038038597031003015.

Biri, Y. (2017). Metadiscourse in Online Opinion Texts-Exploring Variation within a genre. MA Thesis, Department of Modern Languages, University of Helsinki. Retrieved from https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/132491131.pdf.

Hyland, K. (2005). Representing readers in writing: Student and expert practices, Linguistics and Education, 16(4), 363–377. Retrieved from https://https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0898589806000404?via%3Dihub. doi: 10.1016/j.linged.2006.05.002.

Hyland, K. (2017). Metadiscourse: What is it and where is it going? Journal of

Pragmatics, 113, 16-29. Retrieved from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378216616306245?via%3 Dihub. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2017.03.007.

Lakoff, T. R. (1975). Language and Woman’s Place. Language in Society, 2(1), 45-80. Retrieved from https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Lakoff_1973.pdf.

Major, C. H., & Savin-Baden, M. (2010). An introduction to qualitative research synthesis: Managing the information explosion in social science research. New York: Routledge.

Mohamed, A. F. B., & Rashid, R. B. A. (2017). The Metadiscourse Markers in Good Undergraduate Writers’ Essays Corpus. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(6), 213–220. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320351583_The_Metadiscourse_Markers_in_Good_Undergraduate_Writers'_Essays_Corpus. doi: 10.5539/ijel.v7n6p213

Nordquist, R. (2018, February 17). Definition and Examples of Online Writing. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-online-writing-1691358.

O'Connor, H. & Gibson, N. (2003). A Step-By-Step Guide to Qualitative Data

Analysis. Pimatiziwin A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community

Health,1(1), 63-90. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/292432218_A_Step-By-Step_Guide_To_Qualitative_Data_Analysis.

Olsson, L. (2000). A study of gender-related differences in introductory letters. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Lulea Tekniska Universitet. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/d73f/f3c620d0c49f943606f97610d9643a4f64e2.pdf.

Pascual, D. (2018). Analysing digital communication: Discursive features, rhetorical

structure and the use of English as a lingua franca in travel blog posts. Journal of English Studies, 6, 255-279. Retrieved from https://zaguan.unizar.es/record/77140/files/texto_completo.pdf. doi: 16. 10.18172/jes.3556.

Sardabi, N., & Afghari, A. (2015). Gender differences in the use of intensifiers. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Language Research, 2(7), 203-213. Retrieved from http://jallr.com/index.php/JALLR/article/view/174.

Tajeddin, Z. & Alemi, M. (2012). L2 Learners’ Use of Metadiscourse Markers in

Online Discussion Forums. Issues in Language Teaching (ILT), 1(1), 93-121.

Retrieved from http://ilt.atu.ac.ir/pdf_116_99d46e550f0e24fd572de0f41b563079.html.

Tariq, H., & Zia, M. W. (2014). Use of Electronic Information Resources by Students of Faculty of Science, University of Karachi. International Journal of Digital Library Services, 4(3), 80–91. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/266376609_use_of_electronic_information_resources_by_students_of_faculty_of_science_university_of_karachi.

Zujic, B. (2020, January). Advantages and Disadvantages of Netflix. Retrieved from https://www.technobezz.com/advantages-disadvantages-netflix/.

Downloads

Published

2020-06-20

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2020)

Section

Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).