Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse

Journal of Pragmatics

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 437-455

  Hyland, Ken ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032186985     PISSN: 03782166     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/s0378-2166(98)00009-5     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Barton, Ellen, 1995. Contrastive and non-contrastive connectives. Written Communication 12(2): 219-239.
2. Bazerman, Charles, 1985. Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written Communication 2(1): 3-23.
3. Beauvais, Paul, 1989. A speech-act theory of metadiscourse. Written Communication 61: 11-30.
4. Becher, Tony, 1989. Academic tribes and territories: Intellectual inquiry and the cultures of disciplines. Milton Keynes: SRHE/Open University Press.
5. Berkenkotter, Carol and Tom Huckin, 1993. Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written Communication 10(4): 475-509.
6. Bhatia, Vijay, 1993. Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. London: Longman.
7. Bhatia, Vijay, in press. The power and politics of genre. To appear in World Englishes 17(3).
8. Biglan, Anthony, 1973. The characteristics of subject matter in different scientific areas. Journal of Applied Psychology 57(3): 204-213.
9. Bruffee, Kenneth, 1986. Social construction: Language and the authority of knowledge. A bibliographical essay. College English 48: 773-779.
10. Campbell, Paul, 1975. The personae of scientific discourse. Quarterly Journal of Speech 61: 391-405.
11. Cheng, Xiaoguang and Margaret Steffensen, 1996. Metadiscourse: A technique for improving student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 30(2): 149-181.
12. Crismore, Avon, 1989. Talking with readers: Metadiscourse as rhetorical act. New York: Lang.
13. Crismore, Avon and Rodney Farnsworth, 1989. Mr. Darwin and his readers: Exploring interpersonal metadiscourse as a dimension of ethos. Rhetoric Review 8(1): 91-112.
14. Crismore, Avon and Rodney Farnsworth, 1990. Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse. In: W. Nash, ed., The writing scholar: Studies in academic discourse, 118-136. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15. Crismore, Avon and William Vande Kopple, 1988. Readers' learning from prose: The effects of hedges. Written Communication 5(2): 184-202.
16. Crismore, Avon, Raija Markkanen and Margaret Steffensen, 1993. Metadiscourse in persuasive writing: A study of texts written by American and Finnish university students. Written Communication 10(1): 39-71.
17. Halliday, Michael, 1973. Explorations in the functions of language. London: Arnold.
18. Harris, R. Allen, 1991. Rhetoric of science. College English 53(3): 282-307.
19. Holmes, Janet, 1988. Doubt and certainty in ESL textbooks. Applied Linguistics 91: 20-44.
20. Hyland, Ken, 1996a. Talking to the academy: Forms of hedging in science research articles. Written Communication 13(2): 251-281.
21. Hyland, Ken, 1996b. Writing without conviction? Hedging in science research articles. Applied Linguistics 17(4): 433-454.
22. Hyland, Ken, 1997. Scientific claims and community values: Articulating an academic culture. Language and Communication 16(1): 19-32.
23. Hyland, Ken, in press a. Exploring corporate rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the Chairman's letter. To appear in Journal of Business Communication.
24. Hyland, Ken, in press b. Talking to students: Metadiscourse in introductory textbooks. To appear in English for Specific Purposes.
25. Intaraprawat, Puangpen and Margaret Steffensen, 1995. The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing 4(3): 253-272.
26. Kolb, David A., 1981. Learning styles and disciplinary differences. In: A. Chickering, ed., The modern American College, 232-255. San Fransisco, CA: Bass.
27. Mauranen, Anna, 1993. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes 12: 3-22.
28. Myers, Greg, 1989. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics 10: 1-35.
29. Myers, Greg, 1995. Disciplines, departments and differences. In: B.-L. Gunnarson and I. Backlund, eds., Writing in academic contexts, 3-11. Uppsala: Uppsala Universitet.
30. Nash, Walter, 1992. An uncommon tongue. London: Routledge.
31. Rorty, Richard, 1979. Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
32. Schiffrin, Deborah, 1980. Metatalk: Organisational and evaluative brackets in discourse. Sociological Inquiry 50: 199-236.
33. Swales, John, 1990. Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34. Swales, John, 1993. Genre and engagement. Revue Belge de Philologie et Histoire 71(3): 689-698.
35. Swales, John, 1996. Toward a textography of an academic site. Paper presented at the 11th AILA World Congress of Applied Linguistics, Jyvaskyla, Finland.
36. Tadros, Angele, 1994. Predictive categories in expository text. In: M. Coulthard, ed., Advances in written text analysis, 69-72. London: Routledge.
37. Thomas, Sarah and Thomas P. Hawes, 1994. Reporting verbs in medical journal articles. English for Specific Purposes 13(2): 129-148.
38. Valero-Garces, Carmen, 1996. Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Spanish-English Economics texts. English for Specific Purposes 15(4): 279-294.
39. Vande Kopple, William, 1985. Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36: 82-93.