خلاصه ماشینی:
"A Contrastive Study of Metadiscourse in English and Persian Editorials Davud Kuhi1 Manijheh Mojood English Language Department, Islamic Azad University, Maragheh Branch, Mara gheh, Iran The original impetus for this cross-linguistic study came from a need to explore the effect of cultural factors and generic conventions on the use and distribution of metadiscourse within a single genre.
Referring to the fact that the means of doing persuasion differ across genres, Hyland (2005) points out that editorials use metadiscourse in their own ways to persuade the readers through argument.
The study intended to investigate this prospect and determine predominantly used metadiscourse categories and sub-categories in English and Persian newspaper editorials and to examine the probable differences and/or similarities in the distribution and use of metadiscourse resources in these texts.
g. ; such as; in meanings other words Interactional Involve the reader in the text Resources Hedges withhold commitment and might; perhaps; possible; open dialogue about Boosters emphasize certainty or close in fact; definitely; it is dialogue clear that Attitude markers express writer’s attitude to unfortunately; I agree; proposition surprisingly Self-mentions explicit references to author(s) I; we; my; me; our Engagement markers explicitly build relationship with reader consider; note; you can see that Hyland’s (2005) model comprises two general types of metadiscourse: interactive and interactional metadiscourse.
Thus, contrastive analysis of metadiscourse- a linguistic phenomenon which provides a framework for understanding communication as social engagement (Hyland, 2005) - in different genres across different cultures and languages would be of a prime importance."