'So what is the problem this book addresses?': Interactions in academic book reviews

Text and Talk

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 767-790

  Tse, Polly ^a,b   Hyland, Ken ^c,d  

^a HONG KONG INSTITUTE OF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION   (Hong Kong)

^b HONG KONG BAPTIST UNIVERSITY   (Hong Kong)

^c Department of Education ^*

^d UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Academic texts; Book reviews; Metadiscourse; Text interactions

Indexed keywords

EID: 34247335910     PISSN: 18607330     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/TEXT.2006.031     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., and Finegan, E. (1999). Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.
2. Bunton, D. (1999). The use of higher level metatext in PhD thesis. English for Specific Purposes 18: S41-S56.
3. Cheng, X. and Steffensen, M. (1996). Metadiscourse: A technique for improving student writing. Research in the Teaching of English 30 (2): 149-181.
4. Coffin, C., Curry, M., Goodman, S., Hewings, A., Lillis, T., and Swann, J. (eds.). (2003). Teaching Academic Writing. London/New York: Routledge.
5. Crismore, A. and Farnsworth, R. (1990). Metadiscourse in popular and professional science discourse. In The Writing Scholar: Studies in Academic Discourse, W. Nash (ed.), 118-136. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
6. Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., and Steffensen, M. (1993). Metadiscourse in persuasive writing. Written Communication 10 (1): 39-71.
7. Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London/New York: Longman.
8. Hyland, K. (1998a). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 437-455.
9. -(1998b). Exploring corporate rhetoric: Metadiscourse in the Chairman's letter. Journal of Business Communication 35 (2): 437-455.
10. -(2000). Disciplinary Discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. London: Longman.
11. -(2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes 20 (3): 207-226.
12. -(2002a). What do they mean? Questions in academic writing. Text 22 (4): 529-557.
13. -(2002b). Directives: Argument and engagement in academic writing. Applied Linguistics 23 (2): 215-239.
14. -(2004). Disciplinary interactions: Metadiscourse in L2 postgraduate writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 13: 133-151.
15. -(2005). Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.
16. Hyland, K. and Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics 25 (2): 156-177.
17. Intraprawat, P. and Steffensen, M. (1995). The use of metadiscourse in good and poor ESL essays. Journal of Second Language Writing 4 (3): 253-272.
18. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y. (1998). Scholarly Book Reviewing in the Social Sciences and Humanities. London: Greenwood Press.
19. Martin, J. (1992). English in Text: System and Structure. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
20. Mauranen, A. (1993). Contrastive ESP rhetoric: Metatext in Finnish-English economics texts. English for Specific Purposes 12: 3-22.
21. Motta-Roth, D. (1996). Same genre, different discipline: A genre-based study of book reviews in academe. The ESP 17 (2): 99-131.
22. Nash, W. (1992). An Uncommon Tongue. London: Routledge.
23. Parry, S. (1998). Disciplinary discourse in doctoral theses. Higher Education 36: 273-299.
24. Thompson, G. (2001). Interaction in academic writing: Learning to argue with the reader. Applied Linguistics 22 (1): 58-78.
25. Vande Kopple, W. (1985). Some exploratory discourse on metadiscourse. College Composition and Communication 36: 82-93.