A Comparative Study of Metadiscourse Markers in English and Persian News Reports about the September 11 Event

زبانشناسی و گویش های خراسان

Article 2, Volume 8, Issue 15, January 2017, Pages 27-51   

Document Type: علمی - پژ‍وهشی

DOI: 10.22067/lj.v8i15.36262

Authors

Sara Yazdani^{* 1}; Shahla Sharifi²; Mahmoud Elyasi²

¹Ferdowsi University of Mashhad

²Ferdowsi

Abstract

1. Introduction
Hyland (2005) defines metadiscourse as a “cover term for the self-reflective expression used to negotiate interactional meanings in a text, assisting the writer (or speaker) to express a viewpoint and engage with reader as members of a particular community” (p. 37). Hyland has admitted that these rhetorical features convey the relation between the writer, text and reader which is more than a pure exchange of information. In this vein, newspapers are important means of information exchange. Readers of any social level in communities have access to it and on the other hand, unlike TV and radio, it would not oblige its users to confine themselves to a specific time or place. Therefore, the role of newspapers in reflecting the news is really significant. In spite of the importance of newspaper discourse, it has not been successful in absorbing researchers’ attention to study on language devices like metadiscourse markers in this type of texts.
2. Theoretical Framework
In analyzing the data of this study, Hyland’s (2005, p. 49) framework was utilized since it is a more elaborated and convincing model for metadiscourse categorization and it has been used in most of the recent studies. Hyland (2005) divided the metadiscourse markers into two broad categories: interactive and interactional, each of which is divided into five sub-categories. The interactive metadiscourse group contains: (1) Transition: expresses relations between main clauses, e.g. in addition, thus, and, (2) Frame marker: refers to discourse acts, sequences or stages, e.g. finally, my purpose is, (3) Endophoric markers: refers to information in the parts of the text, e.g. noted above, see figure, (4) Evidential: refers to information from other text, e.g. according to X, Z states, (5) Code gloss: elaborates propositional meanings, e.g. e.g. such as. The second group of metadiscourse markers includes: (1) Hedge: expresses writer’s uncertainty, e.g. might, perhaps, (2) Booster: expresses writer’s certainty, e.g. in fact, definitely, (3) Attitude marker: expresses writer’s attitude, e.g. unfortunately, surprisingly, (4) Self-mention: Explicit reference to author(s), e.g. I, we, (5) Engagement marker: explicitly build relation with a reader, e.g. consider, note.
3. Methodology
The data of the present study were collected from the leading and most widely read newspapers in the U.S. and Iran by means of random sampling. Random sampling is a contributing factor to overcome the diversity of writers’ styles. The English news articles were retrieved from an online newspaper archive, while the Persian ones were collected from Astan-e-Qods- Razavi library archive. The data sampling was based on easy accessibility, popularity and mass circulation of news articles. To normalize the present study to a common basis to compare the frequency of occurrence, this research employed 100 words approach. In fact, all of these articles were published on 12 September in 2001. All news articles were examined to determine and classify metadiscourse markers manually. Furthermore, to analyze the data statistically, SPSS 18 software was applied. To find out whether there is any difference between the metadiscourse distribution in both English and Persian news and to explore the meaning beyond this difference, the chi-square test was employed.
4. Results and Discussion
The findings revealed that all types of metadiscourse markers were present in both sets of data, but that there were similarities and differences between the two groups regarding their distribution and frequency. In general, interactive metadiscourse markers were employed the most in news reports, in comparison to interactional metadiscourse markers, according to chi- square test results. As for the subcategories of interactive metadiscourse, transitions and evidentials were meaningfully the most frequent markers in English and Persian news reports. Regarding the subtypes of interactional metadiscourse, hedges, attitude markers and boosters were statistically employed the most in both sets of data in terms of frequency of occurrence. Moreover, attitude markers, hedges, boosters and evidentials were used in both groups of news articles to display the hidden ideology for achieving power, but engagement markers and self-mentions were only present in English news reports to show the totalitarian ideology.
5. Conclusion
This study tried to investigate the role of metadiscourse markers about 9/11 news articles published in 2001 in the U.S. and Iran. This comparative study might provide pedagogical implications. It would be practical to train journalism students about using metadiscourse markers appropriately in order to achieve more success in reporting the world’s events. Hence, journalists by exerting metadiscourse markers not only would be able to deepen their readers’ understanding, but also might ensure to conduct them to grasp the content completely and ideally.

Keywords

: Metadiscourse; Ideology; Hyland model; 9/11 event; English newspapers; Persian newspapers

References

«امدادرسانی». (1380). روزنامة ایران، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور، ص. حوادث، ص. 14

«آمریکا پرواز بر فراز اقیانوس آرام را ممنوع کرد». (1380). روزنامة اعتماد، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور،ص. سیاست، ص. 2

«بوش: این حمله، اعلام جنگ بود». (1380). روزنامة آفتاب، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور، ص. خبر، ص. 2.

«فرودگاه‌های آمریکا فعلاً بسته است». (1380). روزنامة آفتاب، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور، ص. سیاسی، ص. 8 .

«یک مقام اروپایی: انتساب حوادث آمریکا به جهان اسلام ناپختگی است». (1380). روزنامة همشهری، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور، ص. جهان، ص. 11.

سرویس خبری قدس . (1380). « دستپاچگی پلیس نیویورک». روزنامة قدس، چهارشنبه 21 شهریور، ص. اخبار، ص.15

Abdollahzade, E. (2007).‌»Writer’s presence in Persian and English newspaper Editorial«. Paper presented at the International Conference on Systemic Functional Linguistics in Odense, Denmark.

Apple, R.W. (2001). »Awaiting the aftershocks«. The New York Times,12 September 2001.

ChicagoTribune, 12 September 2001.

Crary, D. &J, Schwarts. (2001). »Thousands die in a day of terror«. The Gazette,12 September 2001.

Crismore, A. (1983). »Metadiscourse: what it is and how it is used in school and non-school social science texts (Technical report No. 273)«. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.

Crustinger, M. (2001).»Nation won’t run out of cash«. Journal & Courier, 12 September 2001.

Dyer, B. (2001). »Who did this?«. Akron Beacon Journal, 12 September 2001.

Hashemi, M.R. and E, Golparvar. (2012). »Exploring metadiscourse markers in Persian news reports«. International Journal of Social Science Tomorrow, Vol.1, No.2, pp. 1-6.

Hyland, K. (2005).Metadiscourse: Exploring Interaction in Writing. London: Continuum Discourse Series.

Hyland, K. and P, Tse. (2004). »Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal«. Applied linguistics,Vol.25, No.2, pp.156-177.

Journalism: A Study of Texts by American & Iranian EFL Columnist«. Journal of Modern Languages, Vol.20, pp.64-79.

Masterson, K. (2001). »Bush expresses nation’s grief«. Houston Chronicle, 12 September 2001 .

Merzer, M. (2001). »Bush offers Solace on U.S mourns«. The News &Observer, 12 September 2001.

Meyer, B.J.F. (1975). The Organization of Prose and its Effects on Memory.Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Noorian, M. &R,Biria. (2010). »Interpersonal Metadiscourse in Persuasive

Reardon, P. T. (2001). »Feeling of invincibility suddenly shattered«.

Schiffrin, D. (1980). »Meta talk: organizational and evaluation brackets in discourse«. Sociological Inquiry Language and Social Interaction, Vol. 50, No.3-4, pp.199- 236.

Seattle Times news service & staff.(2001). »Terror«.The Seattle Times, 12 September 2001. < http:// www. newseum. org/ todaysfrontpages /default_archive.asp ?Fparchive= 091201>

Staff Writer.(2001). »Mystery of terror "insider dealer"«.The Independent, 14 September 2001.

Vande Kopple, W. J. (1985). »Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse«. College Composition and Communication, Vol. 36, pp. 82-93.

Vande Kopple, W.J. (2002). »Metadiscourse, Discourse and Issues in Compositionand Rhetoric«.In F. Barton and C. Stygal (Eds.). Discourse Studies in Composition.Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press. 91-113

Williams, S. (1981).Styles: Ten Lessons In Clarity and Grace. Boston: Scott Foresman and Co.

پیوست الف:

آدرس سایت‌های اینترنتی عبارت‌اند از:

http://www.newseum.org/todaysfrontpages/default_archive.asp?page=3

http:// voices. Washington post .com/ blogpost/ 2010/09/911_ on_ newspapers_ front _pages .html

http://www.jconline.com/hosted/onlinepubs/2013/JCnews09-12-2001.pdf

http:// www. latimes. com/ news/ nationworld/ nation/september11 /l a911pages ,0,862645 .htmlstory