An Analysis of Interactive Metadiscourse Markers in the Original Novel "The Scarlet Letter": تحليل ادوات الخطاب الشارح التوجيهي في الرواية الاصلية "الحرف القرمزي"

زيد حاكم حمد المالكي; أ.م.د. رائد داخل كريم الخزاعي

doi:10.31185/eduj.Vol51.Iss2.3359

Authors

زيد حاكم حمد المالكي المديرية العامة لتربية النجف الاشرف
رائد داخل كريم الخزاعي جامعة الكوفة – كلية التربية للبنات

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31185/eduj.Vol51.Iss2.3359

Keywords:

: metadiscourse, original novel, interactive metadiscourse, The Scarlet Letter

Abstract

Academic writers employs the term "metadiscourse" in their writings to convince their audience by leading and engaging them in the text through both levels of metadiscourse, that is, interactive and interactional levels. The current study strives to investigate the interactive level of metadiscourse markers in the original novel "The Scarlet Letter". Furthermore, ten samples are selected as data to be analysed. The study aims to investigate the frequencies and function of each marker in interactive metadiscourse. To achieve the aims, three hypotheses are utilized: First, the interactive metadiscourse markers have an essential impact on audience guide through the text. Second, the writer guides his/her readers in the text, using a higher frequency of transition markers. Third, endophoric and evidential markers are not significantly used in literary genres. To prove the hypotheses, the study includes the following procedure: A literature review is presented, and the first level of Hyland's (2019) metadiscourse model is adopted. Data are selected and analysed using qualitative and quantitative approaches, and finally the study reveals and discusses the findings. Ultimately, the results reveal that interactive metadiscourse markers are significant in forming cohesive and coherence text, especially transition markers which are dominantly employed. In addition, endophoric markers and evidential markers are not employed since these markers are not used in the literary genre. Nevertheless, they are used frequently in academic and scientific disciplines.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdelmoneim, A. (2009). Interpersonal Metadiscourse Categories in Two Egyptian Newspapers Concerning the 2007 “constitutional amendments” (pp. 1–105).

Ahmad, Sharique, Saeeda Wasim, Sumaiya Irfan, Sudarshana Gogoi, Anshika Srivastava, and Zarina Farheen. 2019. “Qualitative V/S. Quantitative Research- a Summarized Review.” Journal of Evidence Based Medicine and Healthcare 6 (43): 2828–32. https://doi.org/10.18410/jebmh/2019/587. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18410/jebmh/2019/587

Alyousef, H. S. (2015). An Investigation of Metadiscourse Features in International Postgraduate Business Students’ Texts. SAGE Open, 5(4), 215824401561079. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015610796 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244015610796

Azijah, D. P., & Gulö, I. (2020). Interpersonal Metadiscourse Markers in Jacinda Ardern Speech at Christchurch Memorial. Linguistics and Literature Journal, 1(2), 70–77. https://doi.org/10.33365/llj.v1i2.594 DOI: https://doi.org/10.33365/llj.v1i2.594

Bogdanović, V. (2015). Endophoric Markers in ESP Textbooks. Hacnehe, 65–79. https://doi.org/https://www.researchgate.net/publication/329911533_ENDOPHORIC_MARKERS_IN_ESP_TEXTBOOKS

Crismore, A. (1984). The Rhetoric of Textbooks: Metadiscourse. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 16(3), 279–296. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027840160306 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/0022027840160306

Crismore, A., Markkanen, R., & Steffensen, M. S. (1993). Metadiscourse in Persuasive Writing. Written Communication, 10(1), 39–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088393010001002

Hawthorne, Nathaniel, and Brian Harding. 2007. The Scarlet Letter. Oxford Oxford Univ. Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/owc/9780199537808.001.0001

Hyland, K. (2005). Metadiscourse : exploring interaction in writing. Continuum.

Hyland, K. (2007). Applying a Gloss: Exemplifying and Reformulating in Academic Discourse. Applied Linguistics, 28(2), 266–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm011 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm011

Hyland, K. (2013). Discourse Studies Reader : Essential Excerpts. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc.

Hyland, K. (2019). Metadiscourse : exploring interaction in writing. Bloomsbury.

Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in Academic Writing: A Reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156–177. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.2.156

Keshavarz, M. H., & Kheirieh, Z. (2011). Metadiscourse Elements in English Research Articles Written by Native English and Non-native Iranian Writers in Applied Linguistics and Civil Engineering. JOURNAL of ENGLISH STUDIES, 3–15. https://doi.org/https://journals.srbiau.ac.ir/article_5602_3405df545c74a5dbe3d33dbe2d5fb4ac.pdf

Khalili, A., & Sattarpour, S. (2020). The Impact of Editing on Metadiscourse in Dentistry Research Articles Written by Non-Native English Speakers. ESP Today, 8(1), 25–46. https://doi.org/10.18485/esptoday.2020.8.1.2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18485/esptoday.2020.8.1.2

Mat Zali, M., Mohamad, R., Setia, R., Raja Baniamin, R. M., & Mohd Razlan, R. (2021). Comparisons of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse among Undergraduates. Asian Journal of University Education, 16(4), 21. https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v16i4.11946 DOI: https://doi.org/10.24191/ajue.v16i4.11946

Mazidah, E. N. (2019). A Comparison of the Interactive Metadiscourse in the Abstracts of Articles Written by Indonesian and Nes Scholars. ETNOLINGUAL, 3(1). https://doi.org/10.20473/etno.v3i1.12995 DOI: https://doi.org/10.20473/etno.v3i1.12995

Mutawally, A., Citraresmana, E., & Heriyanto. (2019). Interactive Metadiscourse in Abstract of English Linguistics Research Articles. UHAMKA International Conference on ELT and CALL (UICELL), 278–283. https://journal.uhamka.ac.id/index.php/uicell/article/download/5362/1903/

Qin, W., & Uccelli, P. (2019). Metadiscourse: Variation across communicative contexts. Journal of Pragmatics, 139, 22–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.10.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.10.004

Sadeghi, K., & Esmaili, S. (2012). Frequency of Textual Metadiscourse Resources (MTRs) in Two Original and Simplified Novels. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.647-652 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.647-652

Suhono, S., & Haikal, H. (2018). Interactive Metadiscourse and Interactional Metadiscourse Categories of Students. IJEE (Indonesian Journal of English Education), 5(1). https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v5i1.5505 DOI: https://doi.org/10.15408/ijee.v5i1.5505

Vasheghani Farahani, M. (2020). Metadiscourse in Academic Written and Spoken English: A Comparative Corpus-Based Inquiry. Research in Language, 18(3), 319–341. https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.18.3.05 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18778/1731-7533.18.3.05

Williams, J. (1985). Style: Ten lessons in clarity and grace (2nd ed.). Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

Zadeh, Z. R., Baharlooei, R., & Simin, S. (2015). Gender-Based Study of Interactive and Interactional Metadiscourse Markers in Conclusion Sections of English Master Theses. International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, 47, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ilshs.47.195 DOI: https://doi.org/10.18052/www.scipress.com/ILSHS.47.195