本論文旨在探討中美兩國(guó)關(guān)于中美貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端的新聞評(píng)論文章在元話語(yǔ)資源使用方面的異同,以及元話語(yǔ)標(biāo)記在建構(gòu)和實(shí)現(xiàn)說(shuō)服中的作用。為此,本研究基于Hyland（2005）的人際元話語(yǔ)模型,隨機(jī)搜集并檢驗(yàn)了2018年1月至2019年3月期間在《中國(guó)日?qǐng)?bào)》和《華盛頓郵報(bào)》上發(fā)表的60篇關(guān)于中美貿(mào)易爭(zhēng)端的新聞評(píng)論文章（其中30篇由美國(guó)作家撰寫,30篇由以英語(yǔ)作為外語(yǔ)的中國(guó)作者撰寫）,運(yùn)用AntConc專業(yè)統(tǒng)計(jì)軟件考察庫(kù)中各類元話語(yǔ)資源的頻數(shù)差異,并采用卡方檢驗(yàn)進(jìn)一步證實(shí)這些差異是否顯著。本研究采用定量與定性相結(jié)合的研究方法�；贖yland（2005）的人際元話語(yǔ)模型,本研究考察了兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中每一類元話語(yǔ)的頻率和分布情況。定量結(jié)果揭示了兩庫(kù)中元話語(yǔ)的使用的相似性和差異性。一方面,在中美語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中人際互動(dòng)型元話語(yǔ)資源都遠(yuǎn)多于文本交互型元話語(yǔ)資源。此外,在文本交互型元話語(yǔ)中,過(guò)渡標(biāo)記的使用頻率在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中都是最高的,而框架標(biāo)記和回指標(biāo)記則在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中使用頻率最低。在人際互動(dòng)型元話語(yǔ)中,模糊語(yǔ)在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中使用頻率均最高,而自稱語(yǔ)在兩個(gè)語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中使用頻率均最低。另一方面,在中美語(yǔ)料庫(kù)中某些元話語(yǔ)子類以及子類... 

【文章來(lái)源】：廣東外語(yǔ)外貿(mào)大學(xué)廣東省

【文章頁(yè)數(shù)】：89 頁(yè)

【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士

【文章目錄】：
Acknowledgements
Abstract
摘要
Chapter One General Introduction
    1.1 Research topic
    1.2 Definition of opinion articles
    1.3 Rationale
    1.4 Organization of the thesis
Chapter Two Literature Review
    2.1 Definitions and classifications of metadiscourse
        2.1.1 Definition of metadiscourse
        2.1.2 Classification of metadiscourse
    2.2 Previous studies on metadiscourse
        2.2.1 Previous studies on metadiscourse in academic texts
        2.2.2 Previous studies on metadiscourse in advertisements and business communications
        2.2.3 Previous studies on metadiscourse in newspaper discourse
    2.3 Summary
Chapter Three Theoretical Framework
    3.1 Hyland’s interpersonal model of metadiscourse
    3.2 Rhetorical means of persuasion
    3.3 Analytical framework of the present study
Chapter four Research Method
    4.1 Research questions
    4.2 Corpus data
    4.3 Analytical procedures
Chapter five Results and Analysis
    5.1 Frequency of metadiscourse in the two corpora and its causes
        5.1.1 Interactive metadiscourse in the two corpora
        5.1.2 Interactional metadiscourse in the two corpora
    5.2 Metadiscourse and three means of persuasion
        5.2.1 Logos:the rational appeal achieved by interactive metadiscourse
        5.2.2 Ethos:the credible appeal achieved by interactive and interactional metadiscourse
        5.2.3 Pathos:the affective appeal achieved by interactional metadiscourse
        5.2.4 Summary
    5.3 Factors influencing the choice of metadiscourse
        5.3.1 National culture
        5.3.2 Organizational culture
        5.3.3 Personal influence
Chapter six Conclusion
    6.1 Summary of major findings
    6.2 Implications
    6.3 Limitations of this study and suggestions for future research
References
Appendices
    Appendix A
    Appendix B
    Appendix C



本文編號(hào)：3060185