英语论文网

Chapter One Introduction

1.1 Background
Academic discourse has been considered as a means to present the writers‘findings in an impersonal and objective style. However, this view of academic writinghas been challenged by several researchers (e.g. Harwood, 2005; Swales, 1990; Tang& John, 1999; Vassileva, 2001) whose studies have found that there is a series ofsocial interactions between writers and readers when writers demonstrate their noveltyof their findings. A large number of studies have shown some features have beeninvestigated to achieve successful interaction with readers (Hyland, 2001b). Forexample, reporting verbs has been discussed in the analysis of realization of theinteraction between the writer and the reader by Thomas and Hawes (1994).Successful academic writing involves the writer‘s concern with readers and contextsby claiming solidarity with readers, evaluating their material and acknowledgingalternative views. Therefore, this view has shown that there is a lot of interactionbetween writers and readers when academic writing is considered as social andcommunicative engagement. Metadiscourse is a concept to help us understand theinteraction between writer and reader, as metadiscourse resources provide us withaccess to the ways that the understanding of context and readers are realized in texts.Hyland (2005:5) consider metadiscourse a major feature of the way we communicatein a range of genres.作为一种手段提出writers'findings，在一个客观的和客观的风格，一直被认为是学术话语。然而，这种观点的学术writinghas的被质疑的几个研究人员（例如，哈伍德，2005洼地，1990;唐＆约翰，1999; Vassileva，2001）的研究已经发现，那里是一个系列ofsocial相互作用作家和读者之间展示出作家时，他们noveltyof他们的研究结果。大量研究表明，一些的功能已beeninvestigated成功实现与读者互动（海兰，2001B）。例如，报告动词已经讨论在托马斯和霍伊斯（1994）的作家和读者之间的的实现theinteraction分析。涉及作家与读者的关注和声援读者contextsby声称，评估他们的物质和成功的学术写作意见acknowledgingalternative。因此，这种观点是有大量的学术写作时被视为社会andcommunicative参与的interactionbetween作家和读者。元话语资源提供上下文的理解和读者的方式，实现在texts.Hyland（2005:5）认为元话语的一大特色的方式，我们我们withaccess的元话语是一个概念，以帮助我们了解作者和读者之间的theinteraction communicatein一系列的类型。
Research article (RA) Abstracts as an independent discourse perform animportant function of arousing readers‘ interest in the accompanying articles, whichinvolves writers‘ interaction with potential readers. Thus, in presenting their novelty,RA abstract writers accommodate their work to members in the same disciplinarycommunity by anticipating the needs of readers and taking into account what readershave known about the topic. For example, abstract writers may provide additionalinformation about linguistic terms in linguistic abstracts, or mention other researchers‘contributions to display their solidarity with the disciplinary community. Use of thesehelps both to provide important contents of the abstracts and engage with readers andestablish a credible writer identity. It is clear that RA abstract writers present theirabstracts by using these linguistic devices through which metadiscourse can provide aframework for understanding the interaction between writers and readers.A large number of research on academic discourse about the interaction havearoused great interest among researchers who focus on how writers employ variousmetadiscourse resources to present their positions and findings to other members ofthe same disciplinary community. The use of metadiscourse in different genres hasbeen examined, including textbooks (Crismore, 1984; Hyland, 1999b, 2004a), studentwriting (Crismore et al., 1993), science popularizations (Crismore and Farn本论文由英语论文网提供整理，提供论文代写，英语论文代写，代写论文，代写英语论文，代写留学生论文，代写英文论文，留学生论文代写相关核心关键词搜索。