英语论文网

s interpersonal model of metadiscourse (Hyland, 2005, 49)' alt='Table 3-1 Hyland’s interpersonal model of metadiscourse (Hyland, 2005, 49)' />

Table 3-1 Hyland’s interpersonal model of metadiscourse (Hyland, 2005, 49)

.....................

CHAPTER THREE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK .............................23

3.1 Interpersonal model of metadiscourse.......................23

3.1.1 Interactive metadiscourse...............................25

3.1.2 Interactional resources .............................26

CHAPTER FOUR RESEARCH METHOD.......................37

4.1 Corpus data...............................37

4.2 Analytical procedures .............................39

CHAPTER FIVE SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES OF METADISCOURSE DISTRIBUTIONIN CCB AND ACB..............42

5.1 Frequencies of metadiscourse in the two corpora ......................42

5.2 Distributions of metadiscourse subcategories in the two corpora .............45

CHAPTER SEVENPOSSIBLE CAUSES OF OBSERVED PATTERNS OF METADISCOURSE USE

7.1 Genre characteristics

The use of metadiscourse varies across different genres. For example, Crismore (1989:70) claims that metadiscourse appears “more frequently in the humanities, literarycriticism, personal narratives, arguments, memoirs, and personal letters” and lessfrequently in “operating instructions, technical manuals, science writing, and laws.” Inthis case, MD&A belongs to the accounting narrative genre. To better examine theinfluence of genre variations upon metadiscourse use, we will compare the observedpatterns of metadiscourse use in this study with that in the CEO’s letter toshareholders.

The findings of this study show that interactive metadiscourse plays a dominantrole in MD&A, whereas interactional metadiscourse appears much less frequently.This result is consistent with the findings of Hyland’s research in 1998, in which hecompared the distribution of metadiscourse resources in the CEO’s letter toshareholders with that in director’s reports (an equivalence of MD&A under the UK company law). He found that CEO’s letter to shareholders contained much moreinteractional metadiscourse in proportion (the ratio of interactive to interactionalmetadiscourse is roughly 2:1) than that in the director’s reports (the ratio is roughly8:1). He then concluded that the CEO’s letter to shareholders made more persuasiveattempts than the director’s reports.

Figure 3-1 Language metaredounding with register and genre(Martin, 1997: 8)

............................

CHAPTER EIGHTCONCLUSION

8.1 Summary of major findings

Based on Hyland’s (2005) interpersonal model of metadisc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。